# [General Topic]: Two bodies vs One



## JohanCruyff (Jan 12, 2017)

Hi,
to cut a long story short: 
- after having started to use DSLRs five years ago with a used 5D classic, 
- I switched to a much more modern 70D, but then
- I missed the full frame sensor, and since
- the 6D Mark II was not available
- I bought a used 6D. 


For my recent trip to Australia, I planned to take my 70D as a mere backup body, but then ended to use both cameras: my neck was able to sustain a 70D with 70-200 F4 AND a 6D with 17-40 F/4 or 24-105 F/4. And the combo worked well! I didn't need to switch from a wide-angle lens to a tele in (sometimes) bad conditions.
[Before I eliminate the duplicates and missed shots, I have about 800 70D pictures and 1,600 6D pictures]. 



Originally I thought that, if the 6D Mark II had a (reasonably) good autofocus + DPAF + articulated screen, I could buy it and replace BOTH the 6D and the 70D, but now I start to have doubts: maybe two is better than one (as long as my neck resist). 
BTW: I wonder if my neck could hold a heavier combo (i.e. 70D + 100-400mm AND 6D + ...).




What do you think, fellow friends from CanonRumors? If you expect to take pictures of (for example) wildlife + landscapes, do you take one camera with you (and switch lenses) or two cameras (keeping the second one in the backpack or not)?


----------



## Maximilian (Jan 12, 2017)

Hi! 

Once again it depends on individual preferences.

To make it short: I'd recommend you to keep the 70D when you're going to replace your 6D.
The type of usage then depends on the situation.

I do have two bodies, too. 
My personal preference is to only have one body with me, but I never did a "once in a lifetime" trip. 
I have FF for best IQ and a 100D/SL1 for travelling light. 
If I'd go to Australia I suppose I'd take both with me, but still just using the FF and having the other as backup.
On a dusty safari trip I suppose I'd use both to avoid switching the lenses. But then I'd use something faster than the 100D.

Sometimes my better half uses one body while I shoot with the other at the same time.
etc. 

So keep the 70D if you can afford it.


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 12, 2017)

You have experience of going on a trip with two bodies so you are best placed to answer the question. 
It doesn't sound to me like you have to sell the 70D to fund the 6D2 (as and when it appears) so why not keep the 70D for a while and experiment with leaving the 70D at home a couple of times. 
If you think you will regularly be out in adverse conditions then having a second body makes sense.


----------



## Snzkgb (Jan 12, 2017)

Though I hadn't used two canon bodies at the same time, I did use X-T1+55-200 and X-T10+18-55 at the same time. This option was really light and caused no problems.

I personally want to buy second canon bodie, but I'm tight on the budget, so maybe I'll end up buying used 7D to compliment my 5Dm2 after I'll buy used 100-400L.


----------



## Hillsilly (Jan 12, 2017)

I travel with a combination of different types of cameras - mirrorless, DSLR, medium format, leaf-shutter based, infrared, film...

But they all have different things that they excel in. Unless I had a particular professional need or was travelling to an inhospitable location, I don't really see much benefit in carrying two "similar" cameras. So if the 6D2 is as good as hoped, what does your 70D bring additionally to the table? In what circumstances would you opt to use it?

Of course, if carrying two cameras means that you aren't carrying a camera bag, then that's a good reason. But take it from someone with a history of back issues - minimising the amount of unnecessary gear that you carry is a good long term strategy.


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 12, 2017)

Hillsilly said:


> Unless I had a particular professional need or was travelling to an inhospitable location, I don't really see much benefit in carrying two "similar" cameras. So if the 6D2 is as good as hoped, what does your 70D bring additionally to the table? In what circumstances would you opt to use it?



I take 2 cameras to avoid having to change lenses and to have 2 cameras at the ready: for example in a city it will be 6D with 24-105, 7D with 70-200. Wildlife it may be 7D2 with 400mm DO plus the 6D with 100-400. Or if I want to go a bit lighter, I may take the 7D2 with telephoto and MFT camera for wide angle (typically for landscape) and'or macro - even with both lenses it is barely bigger than my 24-105.

If I were doing purely landscape (which is rare for me) then I can see it no problem taking the time to change lenses.


----------



## pwp (Jan 12, 2017)

JohanCruyff said:


> ...What do you think, fellow friends from CanonRumors? If you expect to take pictures of (for example) wildlife + landscapes, do you take one camera with you (and switch lenses) or two cameras (keeping the second one in the backpack or not)?



Nobody can really answer that question other than yourself. It's up to you. For travel, weight is an enormous consideration and generally you'll have to make compromises. Sometimes for travel I've taken just one FF body and a 24-105 f/4is zoom. It's been fun and it forced new creative choices and approaches compared to having the usual extensive kit available for commercial and personal projects while not traveling. 

Personally I routinely use two bodies, typically one with 16-35 f4is or 24-70 f/2.8II and the 70-200 f/2.8isII on the other. That gives a great focal length range that is instantly available. Changing lenses does mean missed shots as that "magic moment" is often fleeting, plus it's not always wise to change lenses outdoors if the conditions are too wet, windy, dusty or sandy. 

You mention weight on your neck. I now never hang cameras around my neck, it almost guarantees fatigue. Two Peak Design sling straps, one each side work perfectly, no neck pain and a _much _longer fatigue-free period. I can go all day on my feet with this setup.

Enjoy your trip. It's often more enjoyable if you're traveling light.

-pw


----------



## dak723 (Jan 12, 2017)

It sounds like your experience answers your own question. You thought the second camera would be the backup and you ended up using it quite a bit. If you are happy with these two camera, then there is no reason to change your set up. If you are happy with the results of your 6D, then there will really be no reason to upgrade to a 6D II. You will probably notice no difference in IQ.

When I bought a FF camera I was pretty disappointed when I realized that I needed a crop to get some of the same type of shots that I was used to getting. So having a FF and a crop is a good combo in my opinion.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 12, 2017)

I carry the DSLR and a waterproof P/S camera. The P/S takes decent pictures in good light, and when out in the rain, the salt spray is flying, or it gets awkward (kayak in waves for example) it is a far better choice than the big heavy camera.

I figure if you are going to carry two bodies, expand your possibilities instead of overlapping....

That said, for a big trip and worries about space, the M5 gives a great combo of quality and compactness. A 6D and an M5 could be the ultimate low cost combo for versatility.....


----------



## reef58 (Jan 12, 2017)

Keep both when you upgrade to the 6d2. 70d for wildlife and possibly macro. The original 6d slap a nifty fifty on it permanently or another low cost prime to work on creativity, and use the new camera as your main body.

If a camera goes down you will be glad you have a backup


----------



## bluenoser1993 (Jan 12, 2017)

I gave this a lot of thought when considering adding a 6D to my 7DII set up. No matter how I spun it, it was additional investment that my hobby could not justify. I was able to sell an unused tripod head, tomorrow the 7DII and 17-55 will be out he door, and a sale for the EFS 60 macro is pending. Over the weekend I'll be picking up a used 5Ds for a couple hundred in the difference. This solution is not for everyone, but I can cover all the focal lengths I used to without buying a general zoom for now, and I'm really excited about the 100-400 + 1.4x at the lake this summer having the crop and FF framing all built into one body and never taking the camera away from the eye.

The once in a life time trip comment is very valid though, but in that case my wife has the original M that will be fine as a back up if that scenario were to come up.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 12, 2017)

I've owned two ILCs for a few years, but I only use one at a time. I had a 7D, and added a 5DII for better IQ...but continued using the 7D for birds/wildlife. Then I got the 1D X, which combined the FF IQ and excellent AF in one camera, and I sold both the 5DII and 7D. I now have an EOS M2, and although I do take both on some trips, they are used independantly (e.g. the M2 for daytime walkaround with family and as a failure backup for the 1D X, the 1D X for blue hour shooting).


----------



## old-pr-pix (Jan 12, 2017)

Only OP can decide for himself, yet I'm surprised no one has mentioned weather sealing. That's a big concern for me (may have to do with my luck with sunny weather?!). I'd for sure want two bodies if neither was well sealed. Of course there are no guarantees with any bodies other than waterproof action cameras, but clearly some bodies/lenses are better than others. I'd take a 7DII over a 70D. No first hand experience with the 6D, but have never heard of it being particularly well sealed. Likely 6DII will be better though.


----------



## takesome1 (Jan 12, 2017)

This is the exact reason I take the wife with me on vacation.
She thinks she has a camera to take pictures but really she is just carrying my backup camera.

But you are experiencing the old dilemma at the local national park. Landscape or wildlife or both. I found I get better shots if I only have one camera in my hand and focus one shot at a time.


----------



## GammyKnee (Jan 12, 2017)

Obviously I take two bodies when I'm doing paid stuff, but I still like to have two bodies even when doing landscapes and such for pleasure:


In harsh conditions it's great not to have to change lenses.

It's wonderful to be able to set up one body on the tripod with filters etc. in wait for a specific shot, but still be able to have the other camera in hand to wander about and try different angles with a different lens. I've got some good shots that way.
In the event of a camera failure, you'll still get your shot.


----------



## JohanCruyff (Jan 12, 2017)

Thanks to all for your suggestions, from the waterproof compact camera to other variations of the combo.  







pwp said:


> JohanCruyff said:
> 
> 
> > ...What do you think, fellow friends from CanonRumors? If you expect to take pictures of (for example) wildlife + landscapes, do you take one camera with you (and switch lenses) or two cameras (keeping the second one in the backpack or not)?
> ...




To be more accurate, I have to say that I had two cameras on my neck only for a couple of walks (in a rain forest etc.): most of the time, of course, the second body rested in my backpack. 
And, for the city walks during the evening, only the 6D with the light EF 35mm F/2 IS came with me.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jan 12, 2017)

Depends on the value you can get selling it versus keeping it. I had a single "ILC" camera (DSLR) for a long time, then got a M1 to replace the P&S. I was never happy using the M1 or M3 to back up the DSLR for serious stuff; they weren't responsive enough. Different battery types was also an issue. It meant bringing multiple spares and chargers.

I then did a wedding and had rent a second body and setting it up (AFMA) with my lenses and getting the C modes to work how I want to use them was a pain, so I got a refurb 7DII when the multiple discounts erroneously stacked. I've been using two DSLR bodies ever since, but I usually use one at a time. For trips and vacations, I bring both bodies. For kids' shows, etc. I set up the 7DII (with EF-S 18-135 IS, the only EF-S lens I have) for video and use the 5DIII for stills.

Having a second body gives piece of mind as a backup, gives me higher frame rate and pixel density, and allows me to take video (I save by not having a dedicated camcorder) and stills at the same time. That has more value to me than selling it.


----------



## mnclayshooter (Jan 12, 2017)

pwp said:


> JohanCruyff said:
> 
> 
> > ...What do you think, fellow friends from CanonRumors? If you expect to take pictures of (for example) wildlife + landscapes, do you take one camera with you (and switch lenses) or two cameras (keeping the second one in the backpack or not)?
> ...



This +1. I use the 16-35 f4 on one, 100-400 on the other for a fairly broad-spectrum of coverage. Usually the one with 100-400 is carried closer/easier to quickly get out in the event of animals/fleeting subjects. 16-35 is for landscapes or still-lifes that tend to not run/fly away. 

I struggle with carrying too much gear and have studied and invested in several means to carry gear - one of which is a hydration pack with some capture pro clips on the straps and/or the Black rapid single and double sling straps that allow you distribute load from your neck/shoulders to more of your entire torso which GREATLY improves the issues of muscle strain. I'm regularly hiking into rough terrain though, so having hydration is the main reason for the pack, not for carrying gear. The Capture clips make for a good secondary benefit of the pack straps. 

Just some food for thought - not really focused on your primary question which is whether or not you "need" two bodies. 

My response to that question is that having 2 gives you a little better comfort that if one stops working, you have another that can use the same lenses. Something to give consideration to, especially when talking about EF vs EF-S lenses and compatibility with bodies. 

I've also relied on a G-series G12 and G1X or S100 before and have very few regrets about using them as either a main or secondary camera either... especially considering the weight and compact nature of them relative to space available for packing other stuff needed for the trip.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 12, 2017)

takesome1 said:


> This is the exact reason I take the wife with me on vacation.
> She thinks she has a camera to take pictures but really she is just carrying my backup camera.
> 
> But you are experiencing the old dilemma at the local national park. Landscape or wildlife or both. I found I get better shots if I only have one camera in my hand and focus one shot at a time.



Having a wife who has some interest is a real plus. I take the 5DIV + 400mm DO II + TCs, my wife takes the 5DS R plus 100-400mm II (along with her Swarovski bins, and we have a G3 X or EOS M to cover wider angles). She actually uses the camera and gets some good shots, so we are well covered, and we have a back up. For our next safari in Borneo in the summer, I am tempted to throw the 7DII into our luggage as a further back up as the whole trip is dedicated to photography. On my first serious bird photographic expedition, a trip to the Pantanal in Brazil, the autofocus on my 100-400mm Mk I failed on the last day so you really need a back-up lens as well.


----------



## Valvebounce (Jan 12, 2017)

Hi Johan. 
My main comment is these are complex electro mechanical devices that do sometimes fail. Having had a very low use 40D shutter fail whilst on holiday I was really pleased to have my previous (300D) body with me and I don't go anywhere of any photographic significance without a spare body. 
Also I would highly recommend not carrying one camera around your neck for two hours, let alone two, for any time, photography is much more fun when your neck doesn't ache. 

Cheers, Graham.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jan 13, 2017)

I have just one DSLR right now, I've had two most of the time in the past. The downside to having a crop and a FF is focal lengths If you have say a 24-70 and a 70-200 lens, no matter which camera you install the lenses on, the effective focal lengths do not dovetail. 

I'd want two cameras, each with its own lens so I did not have to switch back and forth. I'd also want to be able to use the lenses on one of the cameras in the event one camera was out of order. To me that means two FF or two crop bodies using the same batteries and memory card types.


----------



## Zeidora (Jan 13, 2017)

I only missed once some shots due to lack of spare body. On a diving trip in French Polynesia, my UW housing flooded, and I did not have a spare Pentax LX with me. Not easy to come by, and completely impossible in French Polynesia. 

For other remote places I've been to (Montecristo Island, St. Kilda Archipelago, New Britain), I've always had a second and even a third body. If I am within a day of a decent camera place, I would not bother. If something breaks, buy a new one on the spot. Given the high turnover rates particularly on dSLR bodies, I don't think it is prudent to have two identical, or same vintage bodies, unless you use them for discrete purposes (say 5DsR and 1DxII). My current old body (5D2) got converted to full spectrum, so not really a back-up body.

Heading off to Australia in a month for a month, won't bother with getting a backup body. There are plenty of camera stores down under. And easy to get to as well.


----------



## Eldar (Jan 13, 2017)

If I am under strict weight and size restrictions, I might only bring one body and be very selective with optics. This happens on certain hiking/skiing trips and on certain travel, where photography is a secondary activity, e.g. business travel. For everything else I bring two cameras and I have done so since the 1980ties. During the last years my combo has been 1DX, combined with a 5DIII and later a 5DSR. Currently it is a 1DX-II, with a 5DSR or (from quite recently) a 5DIV. I sometimes throw in a Sony RXIII IV for trip documentation.

In very cold, wet or dusty (especialy that) environments I prefer to avoid changing lenses.


----------



## gwflauto (Jan 13, 2017)

I always go on extended trips over several months with two SLRs and usually a small P&S. For birding and wildlife on those extended trips I use the 70D with Tamron 150-600. For everything else I carry the 6D with all kind of other lenses. Because of several problems with moisture in the electronics of the 6D I decided in September to go with a 5DMkIV, a wonderful camera.


----------



## photojoern.de (Jan 13, 2017)

> What do you think, fellow friends from CanonRumors? If you expect to take pictures of (for example) wildlife + landscapes, do you take one camera with you (and switch lenses) or two cameras (keeping the second one in the backpack or not)?


When I upgrade from a 6D to a 5 DSR, I thought the 6D would be useless. But I really start loving to have a second body with me. I use the 6D with Magic Lantern to do time lapses while I am trying other compositions and focal lengths with my 5 DS R. I always have it as a backup. The second body might not be with me when I do city walks, but when going to a location for intense shooting, i.e. sunrise and sinset, I love having a second body with me that uses a second lens. The 6D is rather light for a full frame body so this is the ideal landscape second body.


----------



## Duckman (Jan 13, 2017)

I almost always use 2 bodies; I like being able to cover different focal lengths/perspectives on a whim and I find constantly changing lenses cumbersome. Of course, there are other benefits to owning 2 bodies as well.
-J


----------



## Ian_of_glos (Jan 13, 2017)

Duckman said:


> I almost always use 2 bodies; I like being able to cover different focal lengths/perspectives on a whim and I find constantly changing lenses cumbersome. Of course, there are other benefits to owning 2 bodies as well.
> -J


what are the other benefits?
I am about to upgrade from a 5D mk 3 to a 5D mk 4 and I am trying to work out whether to trade in my old camera body or keep it as a backup or second body. What is your advice?


----------



## slclick (Jan 13, 2017)

I used to own two bodies, my 5D3 and a 7D but have been going solo with the 5D3 after selling the 7D years ago. I tried a couple things, had an SL1 for a couple months, used the spouses S95. All it told me was I don't want a 2nd body to be tiny or lcd priority. But what really has had me at odds was the classic quandary two FF bodies or one FF and one Crop. That seems to be an easier question to answer with the latest releases and all the good reviews I've been hearing on the 80D and M5. But still, there's always the hanging on phase of waiting for something else i.e. 6D2. So I wait. But the street price on the 80D combined with thinking of it being my Tele and Macro body is very alluring. 

Anyone use the 80D with the 100-4002?


----------



## Duckman (Jan 13, 2017)

Ian_of_glos said:


> Duckman said:
> 
> 
> > I almost always use 2 bodies; I like being able to cover different focal lengths/perspectives on a whim and I find constantly changing lenses cumbersome. Of course, there are other benefits to owning 2 bodies as well.
> ...


not having to change lenses in sandy or wet conditions.... having a backup camera as you mentioned...I also like being able to look at something, frame it up immediately, even at different focal lengths and decide if it's worth pursuing...It also can mean the difference between getting a shot or not; some moments don't wait for even the quickest of lens swaps.
If you can afford to, I'd keep it as a backup... at least for now. You can always sell it later.
Try going on a shoot with two bodies and use them both.. see how you like it. It can be a pain sometimes (space/weight of two) but for me personally, the tradeoff is worth it. Especially on photo oriented outings and paid jobs. 
You will still have the option to just bring one body if you want to travel light or shoot casually. 

-J


----------



## Act444 (Jan 13, 2017)

Interesting question. 

I've thought long and hard over the years, and traditionally I stick to just one body and one lens, choosing the combo that I think will get me the greatest percentage of desired shots. To minimize risk of accidents, I rarely, if ever, change lenses in the field (outside home or a hotel room). When I do carry multiple bodies, they must be for uses unique to each body; for example, when I had a 7D2 - I'd occasionally pair it with a 5D3 to shoot both action, to utilize the extra speed and reach, and for general indoor social photography, to utilize the superior IQ and high ISO performance of the FF sensor. Now, when I use 2 bodies, it has been the 5D3 and 5DS R - the 5D3 for general use, and the 5DS R for when I desire high resolution shots, like posed portraits. Although one time I did work a 5D3/SL1 combo (again, for duo of IQ/reach ability), only to find I ended up using the 5D3 95% of the time just because the gap in IQ given the shooting environment was just _that_ big...

But in a situation where I don't need the high resolution of 5DS R, I usually end up with just one body and one lens, compromising on focal lengths that I don't think will be important.


----------



## Boyer U. Klum-Cey (Jan 13, 2017)

Always two, when my agin singular body is cooperating. In addition to different focal lengths, different action, not having to change lens, et al..., every now and then, a previously reliable camera/lens combination goes over to the Dark Side with minimal notice. Unless you have Jedi training, having a working body and two lenses can save the day.


----------



## Valvebounce (Jan 14, 2017)

Hi Boyer. U ......
That is my point as I mentioned before, I think having had a camera "go over to the Dark Side" makes one far more aware of the likelihood of a failure happening to you and not just someone else! 

Cheers, Graham. 



Boyer U. Klum-Cey said:


> every now and then, a previously reliable camera/lens combination goes over to the Dark Side with minimal notice. Unless you have Jedi training, having a working body and two lenses can save the day.


----------



## bholliman (Jan 16, 2017)

I currently just own 1 DSLR, a 5DsR. I gave my 6D to my son a few months back. I owned 2 DSLR's a few times prior to the 5DsR/6D combo I had for a year. I had a 7D and 6D for the first 9 months I owned a 6D back in 2013. 

The M5 is my second body now and I'm pretty happy with the combo. I often carry my 5DsR on a BlackRapid strap and the M5 in a jacket pocket or held with a Peak Design Capture Pro clip on my belt or on the BR strap. I often have the 22/2 lens on the M5 and 70-200 f/2.8 II on the 5DsR or sometimes the 300 f/2.8.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 16, 2017)

Valvebounce said:


> Hi Boyer. U ......
> That is my point as I mentioned before, I think having had a camera "go over to the Dark Side" makes one far more aware of the likelihood of a failure happening to you and not just someone else!
> 
> Cheers, Graham.
> ...


I had a body fail in the middle of a wedding....and to make it worse, it was the day after the warranty expired! You have no idea how glad I was that I was carrying a second body that day.....

I believe that one of the corollaries of Murphy's Law is that when something fails, it will fail at the worst possible time.


----------



## Valvebounce (Jan 17, 2017)

Hi Don. 
Damn that is bad luck, have you worked out what annoyed you the most, failing during a wedding or failing the day after the warranty ran out? 
Did you have the camera repaired, and if so did you get any kind of break for the fact that it was only one day out of warranty or were they completely inflexible about it, some companies would sooner have the good will than the money,  some vice versa!  :'(

Cheers, Graham. 



Don Haines said:


> Valvebounce said:
> 
> 
> > Hi Boyer. U ......
> ...


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 17, 2017)

Valvebounce said:


> Hi Don.
> Damn that is bad luck, have you worked out what annoyed you the most, failing during a wedding or failing the day after the warranty ran out?
> Did you have the camera repaired, and if so did you get any kind of break for the fact that it was only one day out of warranty or were they completely inflexible about it, some companies would sooner have the good will than the money,  some vice versa!  :'(


The repair was free.... 

Failing at a wedding was what annoyed me, but I was second shooter doing crowd and family shots so I was "nice to have" and not critical... and it only cost me about 15 seconds from the realization of it dying to being back in option.


----------

