$1000: new lens or back-up body?

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom Nikkor 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED

12/06/2004 01:50:52 PM · #1

Today's quandry:

With $1000 am I better off buying a good L lens or a back-up body? I need both.

I have meetings with some high-profile clients potentially wanting me to work on a continual basis for them. The dilemma remains that I don't have a good lens for demanding jobs (the stuff I've shot thus far, like weddings, haven't required really high quality images) and at the same time, I don't have a back-up camera either.

What to do what to do......

As a P.S. I used a 17-40L lens this weekend and it BLEW me away...

joebok

Fujifilm X100F

12/06/2004 01:55:23 PM · #2

I'd buy a new lens and hope the current body lasts. Eventually you will want a new body and then your current one will become the backup. But then I don't depend on any income from photography so for me the downside of a busted body has little risk.

jmsetzler

Sony Alpha a6000

Sony 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 E-mount

12/06/2004 01:55:52 PM · #3

A backup body is a must in most professional's minds, but a Canon 24-70 f/2.8L would serve you well also.

agwright

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

12/06/2004 01:56:59 PM · #4

question is have you ever felt you needed a second body ? - Me I would go with the lens - hoping to get the 17-40L next year...

SDW

Canon EOS-60D

Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical IF for Canon

12/06/2004 01:58:12 PM · #5

If you still have your EOS-D60 and it works great then I would say the lens. But if you have NO back up camera and you have people asking you to shoot for them, I would go for a backup camera. I know its hard making that decision after working with the lens over the weekend.

12/06/2004 02:02:48 PM · #6

I have no back-up. The D60 died a few weeks ago...dunno if it'll get fixed (it's not mine but I share equipment with another photographer, she had to use my 10D as back-up that day - in the middle of a shoot).

The only lens I have is the 28-105 USM which, although a nice (and cheap) lens, people can contest to the fact it's not a great lens. Especially for potentially high paying jobs. (ie thousands of dollars).

I've had battery issues with the 10D, but thus far no actual camera problems.

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

12/06/2004 02:06:22 PM · #7

Originally posted by agwright:

question is have you ever felt you needed a second body ? - Me I would go with the lens - hoping to get the 17-40L next year...

For the jobs I'm talking about, a second body would be critical, but so is a good lens. The question is, which to get first? I"m leaning towards the lens. I'm talking about top designer firms and larger bands than I've been working with up to this point. My big break potentially. (without getting my hopes TOO far up there just yet).

But for my wedding jobs, a back-up body is important.

I'm so torn...

(P.S. I'm only shooting weddings in 2004-2005 .. it's not what I really want to do ...but I feel I owe the clients I have booked to at least have a back-up).

OY!

Spork99

OM System OM-1

12/06/2004 02:26:44 PM · #8

Originally posted by GoldBerry:

Originally posted by agwright:
question is have you ever felt you needed a second body ? - Me I would go with the lens - hoping to get the 17-40L next year...

For the jobs I'm talking about, a second body would be critical, but so is a good lens. The question is, which to get first? I"m leaning towards the lens. I'm talking about top designer firms and larger bands than I've been working with up to this point. My big break potentially. (without getting my hopes TOO far up there just yet).

But for my wedding jobs, a back-up body is important.

I'm so torn...

(P.S. I'm only shooting weddings in 2004-2005 .. it's not what I really want to do ...but I feel I owe the clients I have booked to at least have a back-up).

OY!

Since your plans for shooting weddings are limited, you might consider a used film body as a backup. You should be able to get one for ~$250 US. Spend the rest on a good lens. If you are serious about photography as a career, you should definitely consider financing some good, fast L glass as well as a backup body.

If you set up a business, remember, equipment can be depreciated. Not sure how that works north of the border, but I suggest you look into it by consulting with an accountant experienced in working with small businesses.

Sony 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 E-mount

12/06/2004 02:31:11 PM · #9

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

...consulting with an accountant experienced in working with small businesses.

yip yip, I concur. I'm a licensed business, but with very little revenue right now. I made quite a bit of cash over the past 6 months, but it went towards other backed-up expenses waiting to be paid - and not equipment. Unfortunately.

I posted on another thread last week about getting a film body, I'd love to, the issue is my knowledge of metering ... or lack of. I'm getting better, but don't know if i could trust myself to use film at this point.

jmsetzler

Sony Alpha a6000

12/06/2004 02:50:38 PM · #10

Originally posted by GoldBerry:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:
...consulting with an accountant experienced in working with small businesses.

yip yip, I concur. I'm a licensed business, but with very little revenue right now. I made quite a bit of cash over the past 6 months, but it went towards other backed-up expenses waiting to be paid - and not equipment. Unfortunately.

I posted on another thread last week about getting a film body, I'd love to, the issue is my knowledge of metering ... or lack of. I'm getting better, but don't know if i could trust myself to use film at this point.

There is no difference between film and digital when it comes to metering. If you are comfortable with metering on the 10D, you can get the same results on film with something like the Elan 7.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

12/06/2004 03:01:32 PM · #11

Originally posted by jmsetzler:

Originally posted by GoldBerry:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:
...consulting with an accountant experienced in working with small businesses.

yip yip, I concur. I'm a licensed business, but with very little revenue right now. I made quite a bit of cash over the past 6 months, but it went towards other backed-up expenses waiting to be paid - and not equipment. Unfortunately.

I posted on another thread last week about getting a film body, I'd love to, the issue is my knowledge of metering ... or lack of. I'm getting better, but don't know if i could trust myself to use film at this point.

There is no difference between film and digital when it comes to metering. If you are comfortable with metering on the 10D, you can get the same results on film with something like the Elan 7.

Yeah, but you can't switch to ISO 1600 at the drop of a hat...

Still, the PRO color neg films like portra 160 have a wide dynamic range, are quite forgiving and produce great results. So, in some sense, with those films, exposure is not as critical as it is with digital.

hopper

Canon EOS-80D

Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM

12/06/2004 03:07:31 PM · #12

digital rebel after rebate - 679.00
tamron 28-75mm 2.8 after rebate - 339.00
total - 1018.00

get both

JEM

Sony DSC-F707

12/06/2004 03:13:16 PM · #13

Lori, if your forthcoming large, profitable work is on a sound footing you should be able to get a short term [less than one year] loan of $2,000 or so from a local bank or credit union if you are a member. If you have some collateral it will help.

12/06/2004 03:15:17 PM · #14

Originally posted by hopper:

digital rebel after rebate - 679.00
tamron 28-75mm 2.8 after rebate - 339.00
total - 1018.00

get both

That's US right? I'm talking CND funds.

Back to what I was saying about metering, right now I'm LCD dependent, I'm weening off of it and am getting much better (the lighting course I'm taking has helped, too). You're probably right, though. In a pinch, I could make do. But I've never (not even once) used a manual film camera. Never even held one before. See the dilemma? lol

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

12/06/2004 03:16:31 PM · #15

Originally posted by JEM:

Not sure how sound the business is yet. And I have loans coming out the ying-yang. That's why I want to make sure I'm using this potential bit of money the best way possible. It'll probably be the last they'll ever give me.....

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

12/06/2004 03:17:35 PM · #16

I'd go with Hopper's advice. That Tamron is significantly sharper and faster than the Canon 28-105.

Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical IF for Canon

12/06/2004 03:19:05 PM · #17

Originally posted by scalvert:

I'd go with Hopper's advice. That Tamron is significantly sharper and faster than the Canon 28-105.

For shooting bands and possibly architecture, I'd need a bit wider angle..that's why the 17-40 seemed like a good choice. And the L just because these clients would be expecting high quality images.

Photobabble

Canon EOS-10D

12/06/2004 03:25:58 PM · #18

Telling us goldberry what kind of dreamy job is it you will partake in that will being require for you to taking photos of only musical band members and architecture, it is a dreamy job most sure, many congratulations!!

crabappl3

12/06/2004 03:32:20 PM · #19

Originally posted by GoldBerry:

Today's quandry:

...(the stuff I've shot thus far, like weddings, haven't required really high quality images) and at the same time, I don't have a back-up camera either.

I'm sorry, but this comment boggles my mind. You've been shooting the most important day in a lot of peoples life without a backup camera or sharp / fast lens AND you don't feel that weddings have required high quality images? I dunno, when I decided to shoot weddings a second body was purchased as well as fast / sharp lenses. You have one shot at getting their photos and if something fails you need a backup. If you're in a dark church and can't use a flash you need a fast lens. Weddings are all about high quality images aren't they? Seems to me you should invest in both if you're going to continue weddings (which as I recall in a previous post, you're not), but if you're ever going to do work that gets in print, then you will need quality glass and a backup body just in case. You'd hate to have your potential high profile client have to reschedule due to your equipment failure.

-danny

SDW

Canon EOS-60D

12/06/2004 03:32:26 PM · #20

.

Message edited by author 2004-12-06 15:37:51.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

12/06/2004 03:32:36 PM · #21

Originally posted by Photobabble:

Hard to tell if that's sarcasm or not! lol.

I'm an aspiring band photographer (the architecture is accidental). The first band I worked for invited me to a private gala held by their design/engineering team this weekend. Their designers liked my work and told me to come in for a meeting. Also, a large local art/music mag is being good enough to let me come in for an interview.

(I don't do any other genre anymore. I've booked weddings for next year but that's it. I don't do family portraits or stuff like that anymore)

jimmythefish

Canon EOS-10D

12/06/2004 03:35:49 PM · #22

$1000 isn't going to get you what you need. Personally I'd feel totally vulnerable going to a job with only my 28-105 on a 10D. It's nowhere near wide enough for tight group shots, and certainly inadequate for low light, no flash situations. It is, however, quite a sharp lens compared to the cheapie zooms. I have one and it takes a bit of contrast adjustment to get up to my 17-40, 50 or 70-200 standard but it's highly usable. I keep wanting to sell it and then end up keeping it because it's very versatile for general use. With a film body it's very, very useful.

It's not hard to get a second hand EOS film body for dirt cheap these days, and if your main body fails in the middle of a $1000 shoot even the cheapest Rebel possible will be gold compared to having nothing at all. A backup is mandatory if you're doing professional work.

If I were you, I'd get a cheap Rebel, a 50 1.8 for indoor work and a 17-40 F4L. My 17-40 F4L is on my 10D 95% of the time. You could probably get that for not much more than $1000 if you shop around. Put the 50 and/or the film body on your Xmas list and you're gold.

When going to a job I take all my lenses, but the 17-40, 50 and 70-200 are bare minimum for covering jobs.

SDW

Canon EOS-60D

Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical IF for Canon

12/06/2004 03:38:00 PM · #23

.

Message edited by author 2004-12-06 16:14:29.