# What if you started from scratch again? Total Loss...



## RLPhoto (May 28, 2012)

If you started from scratch again, lets say theft or storm, all your equipment was lost. 

What lenses and cameras would you re-purchase first and others later? Would you take this opportunity to switch to nikon? 

Im positive when we started in photography, we were ignorant on some topics, but now with experience how would you react to a total loss and re-build you system from scratch? 

I'd probably start again with this basic setup.

Canon 5D Classic 

100mm f/2

50mm F/1.4

28mm F/1.8

Under 2000$ and I could do 90% of all my work with that system.


----------



## bdunbar79 (May 28, 2012)

That's a GREAT hypothetical question! Man oh man what would I do. I still think I'd go with a 5D Mark II for the body. Then, I'd only buy 3 lenses, like you. I'd get the camera with the 24-105L kit. Lens 1. Then I'd buy a 50 f/1.4, and a 135 f/2L. I'd shoot with that for a few years until I recovered financially.

2999+369+1099 = OUCH

It'd cost over $4k just to start over. 

No 4k, then I'd get the 7D with 28-135mm kit lens, 50 f/1.4, 100 f/2. That's still over 2k.


----------



## PhilDrinkwater (May 28, 2012)

Pretty much what I have now except 2 x 5d3 instead of 1x 5d2 and 1x5d3...

(15mm fisheye, 16-35, 24-70, 70-200 2.8 is, 35l, 50l, 135l, 3x580ex2)


----------



## hectorjr (May 28, 2012)

We should make it a bit more interesting. No insurance + you only have 2 grand to spend.


----------



## FunPhotons (May 28, 2012)

Exact same as I've done except the 5DMKIII to update the 5DMKII. I've gone very slowly and cautiously, only buying a lens after its been recently updated. Or flashes for example, I held off buying a handful of 580exII's and PW's or whatever for a Canon solution. Now the 600's came out and I LOVE them, so I bought three and a EX3. Couldn't be happier.


----------



## michi (May 28, 2012)

I think I could survive with a 5DII, a 24-105 and a 50 1.4.


----------



## Quasimodo (May 28, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> That's a GREAT hypothetical question! Man oh man what would I do. I still think I'd go with a 5D Mark II for the body. Then, I'd only buy 3 lenses, like you. I'd get the camera with the 24-105L kit. Lens 1. Then I'd buy a 50 f/1.4, and a 135 f/2L. I'd shoot with that for a few years until I recovered financially.
> 
> +1
> 
> ...


----------



## unfocused (May 28, 2012)

hectorjr said:


> We should make it a bit more interesting. No insurance + you only have 2 grand to spend.



7D and 15-85, both refurbished, should come close to meeting that budget and would cover most of my shooting. Then I'd set about replacing the rest of my lenses. There are none that I regret owning, so I'd just start rebuilding the kit I already have.


----------



## Dylan777 (May 28, 2012)

Rumor 7DII + 17-55mm f2.8 IS

*WISH LIST:*
1. 10-22mm
2. 70-200 f2.8 IS II


----------



## CowGummy (May 29, 2012)

michi said:


> I think I could survive with a 5DII, a 24-105 and a 50 1.4.


+1


----------



## wickidwombat (May 29, 2012)

since hassleblad just dropped their prices i would probably get one of them
maybe another 5Dmk3 and sigma 85mm f1.4 and canon 16-35 f2.8L II aswell
I dont think i would go back to noink


----------



## DB (May 29, 2012)

Honestly, I would have to say the Canon Digital Ixus 115 HS 12.1 MP camera cos' I've no insurance whatsoever.


----------



## Ricku (May 29, 2012)

D800 of course.


----------



## RC (May 29, 2012)

Fun question

With insurance I would replace all of my lens I have now (listed beolow), but I would not replace my 7D yet because of the 7D II rumors. Instead I would get a 5D3. Once the 7D2 is anlnounced, I would make a decision on APS-C body. 
- 16-35 II
- 24-105
- 70-200 f4 IS
- 100L




hectorjr said:


> We should make it a bit more interesting. No insurance + you only have 2 grand to spend.



Tuff one :. Maybe a used 7D and a 17-55 or maybe nothing until I could save up.


----------



## bfmawhinney (May 29, 2012)

hectorjr said:


> We should make it a bit more interesting. No insurance + you only have 2 grand to spend.



5DmII refurbished, 50 1.4 refurbished. Probably would help me improve as a photographer more than anything else I could put together, and force me to see as I learned with the AE-1 back in middle school.


----------



## dr croubie (May 29, 2012)

If I got a total insurance payout for everything i've got, here's how I'd go:

7D - Probably add a bit of cash and get the 5D3. Definitely KatzEye.
EOS 3 - Why didn't I buy one of these sooner? Definitely replace.
EFs 15-85 - put the money towards 5D3, I rarely use the zoom anyway, primes are fine.
Samyang 35/1.4 - Definitely get again (new not 2nd-hand next time)
FL 55/1.2 - Maybe get again, or another variant like FD55 or SSC (whatever EdMika has a kit for at the time)
85/1.8 and 100/2.0 - Probably stick to one or the other, money saved towards 5D3
70-300L - Definitely get another
430EX mk1 - Try get a 430EXII, otherwise no complaints.
Lensbaby gear - replace the whole lot (except DG Muse, got a Control Freak so don't need it).
Kenko Tubes - Definitely get again
Kenko 1.4 t/c - try to get the Pro300 DGX next time.
Takumar 50/1.4 - Probably don't need to replace, FL55/1.2 does the job
Helios 28/2.8 and Ozeck 28/2.8 OM mount - only cost $10 each
OM bellows - probably try to get EF-mount bellows next time.
Paragon 300/5.6 - only $10, why did i buy this in the first place?

MF Gear:
30/3.5 Zodiak fisheye - get another
2x 50/4 Flektogon - get one MC version
MIR 65/3.5 - replace with Zeiss MC Flektogon 65/2.8 instead
Biometar 80/2.8 - get MC version next time
Volna 90/2.8 - too similar focal length to Biometar, ditch.
MC Biometar 120/2.8 - definitely replace
Sonnar 180/2.8 - THE 6x6 portrait lens, definitely replace, MC if possible
Jupiter 250/3.5 - probably don't need this, try replace with Ziess MC Sonnar 300/4 or get a Pentacon 500/5.6
2x Arsenal 2x T/C - Probably don't need 2 teleconverters, but they were damn useful shooting the moon, so maybe.

Filters and Tripod Stuff:
Probably get the whole lot again, except for the Tiffen 72mm and 58mm CPLs and UVs, they sit in a box and their resale value is approximately nothing so haven't even bothered selling 2nd hand.
Definitely B+W MRC UV 67mm for the 70-300L, other lenses are cheap enough so don't need protecting.
I like my Heliopan 72mm CPL and Kaesemann 67mm, the Hoya HRT 77mm is too colour-casty, won't get that next time.
Tripod and ballhead and arca-swiss plates and nodal-ninja, get the whole lot again, no complaints.


----------



## Hillsilly (May 29, 2012)

If I only had around $2k to spend, I think I'd move to Olympus. Maybe an OM-D with a 12mm and a 45mm.

If I received an insurance payout, and was starting afresh, I'd go with a 5Diii with and a 24mm, 50mm (or 85mm), 135mm, and 400mm and a Mamiya 6 with a 50mm, 75mm and 150mm.


----------



## Forceflow (May 29, 2012)

Well, since this is *not* a hypothetical question for me, here is what I got after everything was stolen from me:

I repurchased following equipment:
*Canon 7D*
*Canon 50mm 1.8*
*SIGMA 150mm 2.8 OS Macro* (well sort of, I had the non-OS version but this was no longer available when I had to replace it)
*2x SIGMA Converter* (only because I found a cheap used one)
*SIGMA 610 DG Super*
*LowePro Pro Trekker 300 AW*

This is what I changed:
*SIGMA 17-70mm 2.8 - 4* --> *Canon 24-70 2.8*
*SIGMA 70-200mm 2.8* --> *Canon 100-400mm 4.5-5.6 L*

And i also added the *SIGMA 85mm 1.4*

So all in all I was fairly happy with what I had. But the two exchanges really were worth their money. Now all that I am missing is a good wide angle, but I am really not sure what to do there.


----------



## Sith Zombie (May 29, 2012)

I would have to wait until the 7dmkii came out......... no, the 70d............ no, the rumored entry level FF....... no, maybe I should wait for the 5dmk4?? ;D


----------



## vbi (May 29, 2012)

@Forceflow - look at the EF-S 10-22. Lovely IQ, 10mm is really, really wide on your 7D, and it is just plain fun to use.


----------



## Jason Beiko (May 29, 2012)

Nikon D800e with 14-24mm lens to start.


----------



## Actionpix (May 29, 2012)

I used my 400mm 2.8 for years with almost all action shots I took. The 400mm provides saver distance and more rest in composing. (But is hard to handle.) These days I am more into the action itself and I would rather buy a gyrostabilizer instead. (With 70-200mm.)


----------



## Ellen Schmidtee (May 29, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> If you started from scratch again, lets say theft or storm, all your equipment was lost.
> 
> What lenses and cameras would you re-purchase first and others later? Would you take this opportunity to switch to nikon?



I prefer & use wide lenses to teles, so I find the Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8 very attractive.

In that situation I would certainly become familiar with Nikon lenses, and consider buying it over Canon.


----------



## crasher8 (May 29, 2012)

*easy*

5D3, 16-35, 50 1.2, 135 2.0 , 200 2.8


----------



## lola (May 29, 2012)

Since I do commercial work, I have to ignore the "No insurance + $2000 budget" part and answer the question's "start from scratch" part.

Yes, I'd probably see it as an opportunity to switch to Nikon. I'd go with a D800 body, Nikkor AF-S 105mm f/2.8G ED-IF VR and Nikkor AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II lenses.

They would sum up around $6250 and allow me to do 99% of my work.

I feel, I'd probably miss Canon's ergonomics but be happier with image quality and overall.


----------



## darrellrhodesmiller (May 29, 2012)

had this happen to me a few years ago. thank goodness i had insurance to cover it. 

if i had to do it now.

i'd probably get a t3i, 50mm f1.4, 85mm f1.8, and tamron 28-75mm f2.8


----------



## RC (May 29, 2012)

For those of you who have insurance, what are you paying per $1000 worth of gear and with what company? I've been looking into in myself but haven't bought any yet. 

AAA as an example is requesting copies of my receipts. Don't really care to do that, does that seem to be the norm?

Thx.


----------



## Axilrod (May 29, 2012)

5DIII
ZE 15 f/2.8
ZE 21 f/2.8
ZE 35 f/2
ZE 50 f/2
ZE 85 f/1.4
ZE 100MM f/2
+ 24-70 II for stills

As much as I love my L glass I should have gotten Zeiss stuff in the first place.


----------



## Forceflow (May 29, 2012)

vbi said:


> @Forceflow - look at the EF-S 10-22. Lovely IQ, 10mm is really, really wide on your 7D, and it is just plain fun to use.



Mhm... yes that is one of the lenses I am looking at, but I don't really like the EF*-S* part. While I doubt I#ll be going FF anytime soon I would like to keep my lenses all EF. (Though I might have to really reconsider this for the wide angle I guess)


----------



## xthebillx (May 29, 2012)

hectorjr said:


> We should make it a bit more interesting. No insurance + you only have 2 grand to spend.



..._AND_ you have no arms or legs...


----------



## darrellrhodesmiller (May 29, 2012)

i'm going through USAA. i have 5k of coverage. for 60.00 a year. it covers my canon 7d, and lenses.


----------



## preppyak (May 29, 2012)

RC said:


> AAA as an example is requesting copies of my receipts. Don't really care to do that, does that seem to be the norm?





darrellrhodesmiller said:


> i'm going through USAA. i have 5k of coverage. for 60.00 a year. it covers my canon 7d, and lenses.


I'm going through State Farm (personal property insurance), and I think I have about $4k of stuff insured for about $50/yr. So probably pretty close in price to USAA, though I imagine USAA would generally be cheaper. It will vary by state. What's nice is it covers every circumstance...so even if I drop my camera bag off a cliff and its completely my fault, they'll replace it.

The caveat is that you cant be making any money off of your equipment or you'd be required to go the business route. Didn't need copies of my receipts at all...just gave them the camera/lens name and my serial # and the processed it pretty quickly.


----------



## 7enderbender (May 29, 2012)

hectorjr said:


> We should make it a bit more interesting. No insurance + you only have 2 grand to spend.



Canon F1n with a fast FD 50mm and FD 135mm, a decent enlarger and a bag full of chemicals


----------



## odie (May 29, 2012)

I'd probably die cos that means losing both systems with a lot of lenses. 

Maybe Just the Nikon with the D600 (when it comes out) and a 35.4G and a 430EX II for manual flash.


----------



## cliffwang (May 29, 2012)

If the Nikon D600 is really under 2K, I might switch to Nikon. However, I don't know Nikon's lenses much.
Otherwise:
Refurbished 5D2, 35mm F/1.4, 70-200mm F/2.8 MK2.


----------



## BobSanderson (May 29, 2012)

I would buy used equipment but would recommit to Canon.

Body 40D $300
50 f 1.4 $200
70-200 f/4L IS $1000
17- 40 f/4.0 L $400


----------



## dryanparker (May 29, 2012)

preppyak said:


> RC said:
> 
> 
> > AAA as an example is requesting copies of my receipts. Don't really care to do that, does that seem to be the norm?
> ...



I use State Farm as well here in Florida. It's a personal articles policy (non-business, currently) with replacement value, zero-deductible coverage. I was required to give them pictures of all items on the policy, including pictures of all available serial numbers (perhaps not entirely required, but does make underwriting much smoother), replacement cost of each item (not necessarily receipts, although I did provide those as well).

I was quoted $1.12 per $100 insured, which comes to just over $80 per year for me. I put everything into a multi-page PDF and emailed it to them prior to meeting with my agent in-office.


----------



## KyleSTL (May 29, 2012)

This weekend I actually did an inventory and added up the total, depreciated, used value of all my equipment, and came up with $1850. Quite amazing, considering I have only paid out-of-pocket about $650 for all of it. Seeing the total value of my kit makes me think insuring it would be a good idea.

I would probably get a 40D or 5D Mark I and other used items and start building up a similar kit to what I have now (except update to a 70-200 f4L or f4L IS). A Nikon D600 (or the Canon equivalent surely to follow shortly thereafter) would be very tempting.


----------



## criza (May 29, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> As much as I love my L glass I should have gotten Zeiss stuff in the first place.


Why? What about autofocus? I can guess the answer, because the Zeiss is sharper!?

I am experimenting at the moment with a A-1, and logically, manual focus lenses. I have to admit, I like to manual focus very much, and I will convert my 55mm FD lens to EF!

Until I got the A-1, manual focus was no choice, 'cause as lazy as I am, I am not using the manual focus ring with my L lenses. But now I try to discover, at least the FTM, so this week there was some insect flying in front of my 100mm Macro lens, and it was too small to put it on a AF point, and also quickly moving to follow it with a AF point (60D), so I tried to catch it sharp focusing with the focus ring. 8) Did I succeed? Well kinda, see yourself. Probably the aperture was still to wide open (f/5.6) to get the whole thing sharp.






Still I would say for half of my pictures I need the AF, otherwise I would miss the moment..


----------



## Daniel Flather (May 29, 2012)

750sq/ft apartment near the beach in México.


----------



## criza (May 29, 2012)

Daniel Flather said:


> 750sq/ft apartment near the beach in México.


How much is that? And why Mexico?


----------



## dickgrafixstop (May 29, 2012)

I should be so lucky! I think I'd restart with a Fuji X pro and the 35 and 60mm lenses. Rumors say a 
longer telephoto is in the plans, so that would be my next purchase. If I had to stick with Canon, I'd
buy the cheapest Rebel body, the 70-200 f4 is and the 50mm f1.8.


----------



## preppyak (May 29, 2012)

dryanparker said:


> I was quoted $1.12 per $100 insured, which comes to just over $80 per year for me. I put everything into a multi-page PDF and emailed it to them prior to meeting with my agent in-office.


Interesting, I must have just gotten a lazier agent who didn't want to put the work in. I think my value for VA was like 1.25 per $100 insured.



KyleSTL said:


> This weekend I actually did an inventory and added up the total, depreciated, used value of all my equipment, and came up with $1850. Quite amazing, considering I have only paid out-of-pocket about $650 for all of it. Seeing the total value of my kit makes me think insuring it would be a good idea.


Yeah, and I think the minimum value for a policy was $25, so you'd probably end up with about that as a premium. That said, I put in the replacement costs for my equipment, not their actual worth at that moment...since that is really what is important if I lose everything.


----------



## Neeneko (May 29, 2012)

Personally I would use the opportunity to switch to Nikon.

Not because I am on the '5D3 sucks!' bandwagon or thinking ill of Canon, just when I first started I had no idea where I was going to go with photography and the direction I ended up going Canon sensors and lenses are not all that great for and have ended up being very limiting.


----------



## Tayvin (May 29, 2012)

If you've been shooting a long time, then starting from scratch isn't as expensive as you might think. I currently own a few Canon bodies and 14 L lenses. Professionally - I use two lenses. So when Nikon came out with a camera without an anti-aliasing filter and better DR - I jumped ship. Two bodies and two lenses will run me around $11,000. It sounds like a lot but I'll have those payed off in less than a year. Another thing to consider is renting out some of your equipment when you're not working(only to those you know and trust). I'm still keeping my Canon gear in case they make a camera I like.

You never want to change brands, but it happens


----------



## bhavikk (May 29, 2012)

I'd stick with Canon as I know their system already.

Canon 5D Mark III
50 F1.2L
24-70 F2.8L II
600EX-RT
Gitzo GT2531 + Manfrotto 468MGRC2

I'd would not purchase the 16-35 F2.8 II again as I don't shoot super wide all the time, but it was very useful on my crop sensor at the time. I'd start with the above then either get some studio lights or 70-200 F2.8L II.


----------



## tron (May 29, 2012)

I would get the following:

5DmkIII kit (w 24-105 f/4L)
TS-E 24mm II
EF70-200 f/4L IS
EF135mm f/2.0 L
EF300mm f/4L (non-IS if I could find one as mine is phenomenal) with EF1.4X III, EF2X III


----------



## Tcapp (May 30, 2012)

I think I would have to go back to my Crayola 110 film camera... 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/danipalmer/5347170720/#
NOTE- Not my photo but that was my camera.


----------



## Axilrod (May 31, 2012)

criza said:


> Axilrod said:
> 
> 
> > As much as I love my L glass I should have gotten Zeiss stuff in the first place.
> ...



Yes they are damn sharp, but not much sharper than L stuff (in the center anyways) but the edge sharpness is definitely superior. Now on the wide end they are definitely sharper than Canon glass, the ZE 21 is far sharper than the 16-35 II and the 14LII (which is no slouch). I love the color rendition, when I shoot with them I end up doing up 75% less color correction than I have to when shooting with Canon glass. More than anything they are optimized for video (and that's what I'm doing 90% of the time) so I really don't need AF. The throw on the focus ring is just smooth as butter and doesn't throw the subject out of focus if you move it a fraction of an inch (can't say the same for Canon). Also, having hard stops at infinity and macro is wonderful, no more accidentally spinning past and losing focus marks. Also they breathe much less than Canon lenses. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love my L glass (I still haven't gotten rid of any of it despite picking up 3 ZE lenses already) but Zeiss is just a better option for me.


----------



## tron (Jun 1, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> Now on the wide end they are definitely sharper than Canon glass, the ZE 21 is far sharper than the 16-35 II and the 14LII (which is no slouch).



I agree I have the Zeiss 21mm ZE and the Canon 16-35mm f/2.8 (version I). The difference at the edges is shocking!



Axilrod said:


> Also, having hard stops at infinity and macro is wonderful, no more accidentally spinning past and losing focus marks.



This is indeed perfect for tasks like astrophotography. No more focusing attempts at bright stars, move to manual and hoping that the lens barrel won't move at all...


----------



## Dylan777 (Jun 1, 2012)

bhavikk said:


> I'd stick with Canon as I know their system already.
> 
> Canon 5D Mark III
> 50 F1.2L
> ...



I slowly getting into landscape and this lens got used most with my 5D III.


----------

