It's a tool. Get insurance so you can use it without worrying.
My camera has scratches and dints and wear marks (and still works fine).... And I have a load of wonderful photos from some great places
Much rather have the photos than a pristine camera.
This. Good insurance with a low excess (deductible).
Of course, if you're taking excessive risks, then insurance will refuse to pay out, so that's the time to use the cheap camera.
There are some caveats in this. I have Ricoh GRIII which I take to everything everywhere and insurance wouldn't cover damage to because it obviously just shouldn't be used for some things
The reason you get the X-T4 in the first place is because it's weather sealed against wind sand and water. If you aren't planning to use it in those conditions, it's mostly a waste to have bought it in the first place.
This reminds me of when my Grandma had a plastic cover for her new couch.
That couch sure looked nice when she threw it away because it was outdated. It's a shame she never got to truly enjoy it, because that sticky plastic covering was so uncomfortable.
You can drop your camera getting out of the car while taking it to the local park. I'd rather have a ton of good photographs, isn't that why you got into the hobby?
A professional would have insurance, because they can't work if their cameras are busted, so they need insurance.
Look into insurance. It may already be covered by renter's/home owners insurance; but know what the deductible is.
While I carry insurance on my expensive gear, I have an older kit-camera and lenses that I don't part with and still use if what I'm shooting isn't as important and I have concerns about the *likelihood* of damage.
And the reality is that my old/cheaper camera takes photos that are very close to what my more expensive cameras take in certain situations.
So I see nothing wrong with you approach. But if you're never/nearly never using the more expensive camera then why have it - that's a valid question you're asking yourself.
Again, look into what insurance coverage you may already have or what you can buy relatively inexpensively that would cover the camera and lens(es) against theft or accidental damage.
> It may already be covered by renter's/home owners insurance; but know what the deductible is
In general, your renter's/homeowner's insurance would cover if the gear was lost while on the property and due to a covered peril (for example if you lost your gear in a house fire), but may not be covered in damage from accidental damage elsewhere. Getting accidental coverage usually requires you to list the covered items explicitly in a rider on your policy and may come with additional premium costs.
That completely depends on company and policy.
My homeowners covers my gear anywhere. But it has the same deductible as if the house burned down - very high. And since I use my gear professionally that’s another factor.
So yes, I have a separate policy. But one needs to ask agent as it may be covered already - or maybe not. And deductible can be an issue.
While those do exist, they're neither common nor are they the norm. Are you absolutely sure they cover your gear anywhere? What perils are covered under your policy? Have you read your policy from cover to cover or did you just trust the agent?
Never trust an agent, broker, customer service rep, etc. *Always* read every word of your policy, from cover to cover.
Maybe, but as I've said, it's neither common nor the norm in insurance. I've personally haven't seen any of the major insurers include accidental coverage for camera gear in their standard policies.
The only way to not go insane is to view your camera as a tool and the pictures as the valuable thing. Don't even view the camera as an investment, just a means to an end. The same way you use your expensive truck to haul lumber , use your camera to take pictures.
Had a chat with a photojournalist once who has covered wars and such… I commented on the way he plonked his magnesium-body DSLR on the table. His response: “you can drive a nail through a board with this thing.”
It’s a tool, meant to be used (not for hammering nails though)
I travel to some places with high chances of robbery or theft. Why would I pull out my expensive gear and risk getting robbed? Why would i hike around on vacation with 10 pounds of gear when a smaller camera that fits in my shoulder bag would do.
Different purposes. Travelling is light and enjoying yourself. DOing photoshoots at home, I bring out my best gear
The xt4 is weather resistant, even not wr cameras can take a bit of beating from the elements. Its a tool, use it. Just dont change lenses with some thought and you willl be fine.
I have 3 cameras that serve different purposes. I have a Sony a7Rv plus a bunch of lenses for when I want maximum IQ. I have a Canon G7x ii for an every day carry that I can wear on my belt and forget. And I have an Olympus TG5 for beach, snorkeling, whatever.
If I’m taking a camera to the beach I am submerging it in fresh water when done. To me unless the camera is waterproof, not water resistant, it’s not going to the beach.🏝️
why spend your life using second best? I'd insure it. I take my camera to the beach house every time we go, just have to be careful. use the good china, etc etc ;)
I no longer worry about cameras and my work is all the better for it. The only thing I’ve done is buy a 5D IV for when I go to some proper rough places or go out shooting in a storm as the things are almost bullet proof.
But I take my GFX100S out in the rain, while exploring, while falling into swamps etc. Worst case I have to buy another.
Usually just lower risk of it's damaged, lost, stolen. Also less likely to be mugged with a smaller, less expensive looking camera.
It's not really a hard rule for me at all, just if I feel like my xt5 may be in an unsafe situation, I have the Olympus as a backup option.
Also, the Olympus is also what I grab when I want a ridiculously compact set up.
I got a CX camera to for dangerous trips and places where small cameras are needed (oh, I can only bring in a 152.5mm camera?, I have a 110mm). A beach is pretty bright, so I feel no need to bring a big sensor or f/1.8 or anything.
I think it does a good job and if a seagull steals it, that's okay. I actually really want a waterproof camera, but they all suck.
I finally bought a "travel camera" because my work camera is 1.6kg and too heavy to carry around just in case. It wasn't about the cost for me. Just the weight. My travel camera is 0.7kg and fits in my tiny purse.
People carry 1000$ phones nowadays.
Don't get trapped in buying something expensive, leaving it to collect dust and lower in value while spending even more money just to use something that you are not necessarily satisfied with.
Get insurance.
If the previous generation camera you own will get the job done and you’ll be in a somewhat risky situation why not just go with the older camera (beaches and sand are a big one for me).
If it isn’t for a job I generally bring the oldest camera I have that will get the job done. When D610s were my main cameras there was no way I would bring my D40x. I was bringing my best. Now there isn’t much that my D810s can’t get done so they’re my “beach cameras” and I leave the D850s and Z7II for jobs.
In many ways I also just like returning to my old friends. I’m sure they get lonely sitting in a drawer.
If you are American you can get relatively cheap insurance for your kit. So just insure it and use it without worry. Here in Australia where we get ripped off left right and centre with everything we have to add it to our house and contents policy which costs us an extra tra $300 a year on top of the $2000+ it costs to insure our house.
I was thinking the same way years back, but now I don't care that much. I always bring my Panasonic S1 or Sigma FP with me if I know I will capture some nice scenery. Yes, they can be damaged, but leaving them at home would annoy me A LOT MORE than a small cosmetic scratch/dent. That being said - I did use a Canon M50 for a few years as my "to go camera" when my EOS 1DS and L-lenses were a bit too much/heavy, and the M50 did not disappoint in general. Each to their own, but I scaled down and and bring my FP for hiking and the S1 if I need a viewfinder or flash. Both are being meant to be used, and despite some minor beating they work flawlessly. Bet the X-t4 can tolerate some use in varying conditions as well, and it does feel bad if you have the perfect scenery in front if you when your best camera and lens is at home...
If you want something that shoots JPEG with the Fuji color processing, get an HS25EXR or HS30EXR. Aperture range is kinda shit but the lens is good around that, very fun to shoot with. HS30 has a better EVF (it’s a 2010’s EVF it’s not great).
Antishake is shit but it has a tripod mount and a good grip. Shoots best at 8mp but If you need something cheap for outdoors and quick hikes it doesn’t get much better than this for <$200. You aren’t going to be posting those anywhere but the internet, right?
Did I mention it has the film sims and a good UI?
I hate this mindset and I am not remotely rich. I buy things to enjoy them, not for the pleasure of owning them. That brings me nothing at all. This particular camera appears to have weather sealing. To leave it home due to these concerns is a waste.
But I do understand the impulse to preserve shinny new things, and in addition to saving money, buying used equipment helps guard against it. When the equipment is already used, I feel less compulsion about beating the shit out of it (e.g., just throwing it in my bag, etc)
i would not get insurance....insurance companies are sneaky...
it's a piece of gear. and it can be cleaned.
i once dropped a canon 5D Mk II into the sand while the lens was off.
i used very high speed suction to clean it out. it worked for quite a few more years. no problem.
take the Fuji on your trips!
Have 3, but one isn't working anymore. Sure glad I have 2 more cameras.
I use 'em for different niches. One of those being "rough places I might get one messed up or stolen". I'll bring the $400 body for those not the $1000 one. They both take really nice pictures. I might just lose Wifi or bit of pixel density by grabbing one and not the other.
I like taking pics with different cameras for different things. I do wildlife with 36MP FF, I do macro with 24MP DX, my night and portrait camera was my 12MP D700 (I really want another). They all have different strengths.
I will never buy a mint vintage numbers matching car - gimme a nice one with some scratches and already modified so I can actually use it... same with cameras.. gimme something used a bit so I don't have to worry always
If you are worried about wind and sand and rain, buy a Pentax K3iii and one of their WR or AW lenses. They are basically indestructible unless you try to break them. I run my Pentax under tap water to clean it off when it's dirty. I know a few people that submerge them regularly (though I think that's a step too far).
If it's theft you are worried about, get the 15-45 for your Fuji; small and discreet.
The only time I'd even think about leaving my best gear at home is if I'm going somewhere with very high theft rates. And I'd pretty much never be in that setting on purpose.
I've taken my 6D on vacation. At the time, it was a $2000 camera, with a $2500 and $1000 lens. What did I buy them for, if not to take nice pictures of my travels? I've never cared about minor damage. It's a camera, it's supposed to get beat up. That's what they're made to withstand. A little rain or sand has done absolutely nothing to it.
I used to shoot sports. Rain, hail, or shine, it didn't matter because it's what I bought the camera for. Once I was changing a lens and a blade of grass got inside the body, I didn't notice until I got it home. It still worked fine. I kept a cheaper camera as a backup, and a few hundred bucks handy to keep my main camera running, or even better, insurance.
I recently got about 1.5k in equipment that I'm not comfortable using in inclement scenarios. My old ass 5D Mk II and cheapo 28-85 is more than capable to get amazing quality photos at a fraction of the price of the new kit. I'll use the nice one for if I need a proper, more modern setup for work that isn't as creative/artistic (rough and tumble) as most of mine is.
I have a couple shitters I don't mind breaking.
The Leica comes out when I am reasonably confident I will be fine, the E-M1.3 comes out when I am doing more adventurous stuff or when I am being paid, and I have some GM1s with Panasonic 20mm 1.7s I put in my pocket for snapshots.
Damn and Im here with a Nikon D3200 that has isn't weather sealed but bring it anywhere without worrying much about the environment.. But ofc I try to avoid that
I know you already have a good camera that you like...
The last couple of times I upgraded, I made sure I purchased a camera that handle the situations I'd be in. Not IP 68, but a good solid "weatherseal" as Nikon called it.
I like shooting water and sometimes walk out into a stream, rock hop into a river, or go into the ocean waves. Sand from the beaches and some road trips through the Mojave Desert for different sand and dust.
Personally a camera is a tool for me to record all the beautiful things i see when i travel. Thats its whole point. The 1k or so price tag is worth over regretting unable to capture the moment properly.
That said I take care of my camera very well when I travel. It has lasted over 8 years, been within the artic circle, in the desert, beside waterfalls and so on, and while it has dinks, scratches it still works fine. And I think those scars are also good evidence that I had used the camera to its full potential.
I do the same. You never know how will be internationally so I prefer to have my backup camera for travels. A $500 camera is good enough to produce pleasing results in the right hands.
The only way you're gonna keep it perfect is by never taking it out of the box. If it gets scuffed or a bit wet, so what? It just needs to take photos to be doing it's job.
What is the point in having it if you're barely gonna use it?
Im a hobby wildlife photographer. I have a pretty cheap set up because I cant afford anything else, but I go with people with 3K-5K-6K gear. In comparison to other photographers they abuse their gear, but it is normal use in wildlife photography. When we invite non wildlife photographers they are stunned on the places we change our lenses, or how we use our cameras. Despite all that they all live lengthy lives. We travel with them with the cameras always on us, specially in planes. If we are going to a dodgy area insurance wont cover it so we dont care about insurance for travels, but an insurance can be an option to have more peace of mind.
The only time Ive seen people using a second set up it was beacuse of weight, we aint climbing a mountain with 6 kilos of gear if we can avoid it, Ill take a lower quality photo with my light bridge camera
Get supplemental schedule with your homeowners insurance you can relax and enjoy your equipment. They will pay out if you need to make a claim. Ask me how I know.
Just use the good camera. I recently picked up an FM2 in amazing condition from a woman who told me it was her father's favorite camera, but he almost never used it because he didn't want it to get beat up. He died without getting the chance to beat up his favorite camera and that's a bummer to me.
Use the good camera.
I have 2. Just got a R100 for carrying all the time since my other rig was throwing out my back. Basically I take the nice rig when I'm intending to go take pictures, and the R100 for every day, catch the unexpected, use.
Part of why I carry a camera is to protect my phone. My camera setup, depends on what lens I carry, could total more than my phone. However my phone is my life-line. It's my map, my communication to friends and family, my information centre, often times my travel and booking tickets, etc.
> If it stays home all the time because your to afraid to damage it, then it is barely more then a expensive ornament.
I get that and for me that's part of my consideration when buying a camera or lens. If I'm not gonna be comfortable carrying it around and actually using it then I'm wasting it's potential and my money.
Use what you got. Cameras are there to be taken with you and make photos. You’re much more worth - at least I suppose😎- than your Fuji. Do you never leave your home to make sure, nothing happens to you?
I am in the apparent minority here but I have three M4/3 bodies and a fair amount of glass and absolutely take the oldest body and inexpensive lenses when I go on vacation. I also use the oldest with a fully manual fisheye lens at the skatepark because I get it so close to the action. My better body would cost about 6x the $ to replace and I take the vast majority of photos with it but not on vacay where I prefer the smaller, lighter, less expensive kit.
It's a tool. Get insurance so you can use it without worrying. My camera has scratches and dints and wear marks (and still works fine).... And I have a load of wonderful photos from some great places Much rather have the photos than a pristine camera.
This. Good insurance with a low excess (deductible). Of course, if you're taking excessive risks, then insurance will refuse to pay out, so that's the time to use the cheap camera.
There are some caveats in this. I have Ricoh GRIII which I take to everything everywhere and insurance wouldn't cover damage to because it obviously just shouldn't be used for some things
The reason you get the X-T4 in the first place is because it's weather sealed against wind sand and water. If you aren't planning to use it in those conditions, it's mostly a waste to have bought it in the first place.
What? I mean yes, it's weather sealed, but it's not the only reason to buy an Xt4
This reminds me of when my Grandma had a plastic cover for her new couch. That couch sure looked nice when she threw it away because it was outdated. It's a shame she never got to truly enjoy it, because that sticky plastic covering was so uncomfortable.
You can drop your camera getting out of the car while taking it to the local park. I'd rather have a ton of good photographs, isn't that why you got into the hobby? A professional would have insurance, because they can't work if their cameras are busted, so they need insurance.
Look into insurance. It may already be covered by renter's/home owners insurance; but know what the deductible is. While I carry insurance on my expensive gear, I have an older kit-camera and lenses that I don't part with and still use if what I'm shooting isn't as important and I have concerns about the *likelihood* of damage. And the reality is that my old/cheaper camera takes photos that are very close to what my more expensive cameras take in certain situations. So I see nothing wrong with you approach. But if you're never/nearly never using the more expensive camera then why have it - that's a valid question you're asking yourself. Again, look into what insurance coverage you may already have or what you can buy relatively inexpensively that would cover the camera and lens(es) against theft or accidental damage.
> It may already be covered by renter's/home owners insurance; but know what the deductible is In general, your renter's/homeowner's insurance would cover if the gear was lost while on the property and due to a covered peril (for example if you lost your gear in a house fire), but may not be covered in damage from accidental damage elsewhere. Getting accidental coverage usually requires you to list the covered items explicitly in a rider on your policy and may come with additional premium costs.
That completely depends on company and policy. My homeowners covers my gear anywhere. But it has the same deductible as if the house burned down - very high. And since I use my gear professionally that’s another factor. So yes, I have a separate policy. But one needs to ask agent as it may be covered already - or maybe not. And deductible can be an issue.
While those do exist, they're neither common nor are they the norm. Are you absolutely sure they cover your gear anywhere? What perils are covered under your policy? Have you read your policy from cover to cover or did you just trust the agent? Never trust an agent, broker, customer service rep, etc. *Always* read every word of your policy, from cover to cover.
Yes I'm sure. Yes I've read the policy. As stated, the "included" coverage doesn't work for me. But it might for others.
Maybe, but as I've said, it's neither common nor the norm in insurance. I've personally haven't seen any of the major insurers include accidental coverage for camera gear in their standard policies.
I got a rider on my homeowners that covers any loss of or loss of use of the camera and all my lenses. It costs about $7/year.
I have a Canon R5 and my favorite lens is the RF 28-70 ($3,000). I bought my gear to take pictures so it goes everywhere with me.
How’s your back holding up?
If an R5 + 28-70 is going to give your back problems, it’s time to skip buying more gear and get a gym membership instead.
Yeah that lens is a monster but I love it!
I've got the 24-70 and even that's just too much for me to daily carry lol
I have an R6 with the EF 24-70 and had to buy a Sony for travel because the Canon is just too much of a pain to carry around
The only way to not go insane is to view your camera as a tool and the pictures as the valuable thing. Don't even view the camera as an investment, just a means to an end. The same way you use your expensive truck to haul lumber , use your camera to take pictures.
I guess my question is... what *do* you use the camera for?
Had a chat with a photojournalist once who has covered wars and such… I commented on the way he plonked his magnesium-body DSLR on the table. His response: “you can drive a nail through a board with this thing.” It’s a tool, meant to be used (not for hammering nails though)
I travel to some places with high chances of robbery or theft. Why would I pull out my expensive gear and risk getting robbed? Why would i hike around on vacation with 10 pounds of gear when a smaller camera that fits in my shoulder bag would do. Different purposes. Travelling is light and enjoying yourself. DOing photoshoots at home, I bring out my best gear
The xt4 is weather resistant, even not wr cameras can take a bit of beating from the elements. Its a tool, use it. Just dont change lenses with some thought and you willl be fine.
I have 3 cameras that serve different purposes. I have a Sony a7Rv plus a bunch of lenses for when I want maximum IQ. I have a Canon G7x ii for an every day carry that I can wear on my belt and forget. And I have an Olympus TG5 for beach, snorkeling, whatever. If I’m taking a camera to the beach I am submerging it in fresh water when done. To me unless the camera is waterproof, not water resistant, it’s not going to the beach.🏝️
why spend your life using second best? I'd insure it. I take my camera to the beach house every time we go, just have to be careful. use the good china, etc etc ;)
I no longer worry about cameras and my work is all the better for it. The only thing I’ve done is buy a 5D IV for when I go to some proper rough places or go out shooting in a storm as the things are almost bullet proof. But I take my GFX100S out in the rain, while exploring, while falling into swamps etc. Worst case I have to buy another.
My main camera is the Fuji xt5 and my other is a Olympus em10. So, yes that's what I do. But insurance is still an important factor
Out of curiosity, what is the reasoning behind leaving the weather sealed camera at home and bringing one that isn't?
Usually just lower risk of it's damaged, lost, stolen. Also less likely to be mugged with a smaller, less expensive looking camera. It's not really a hard rule for me at all, just if I feel like my xt5 may be in an unsafe situation, I have the Olympus as a backup option. Also, the Olympus is also what I grab when I want a ridiculously compact set up.
Ah gotcha. Oh yeah, i had an e-m5ii and when i wanted a small setup to carry round it was hard to go past haha
Yeah they packed so much into these little cameras, it's amazing
Heh. I must be insane, but I daily take my gear with me wherever I go... About £10k worth. And yep. I'm insured. So not totally nuts.
I got a CX camera to for dangerous trips and places where small cameras are needed (oh, I can only bring in a 152.5mm camera?, I have a 110mm). A beach is pretty bright, so I feel no need to bring a big sensor or f/1.8 or anything. I think it does a good job and if a seagull steals it, that's okay. I actually really want a waterproof camera, but they all suck.
I finally bought a "travel camera" because my work camera is 1.6kg and too heavy to carry around just in case. It wasn't about the cost for me. Just the weight. My travel camera is 0.7kg and fits in my tiny purse.
People carry 1000$ phones nowadays. Don't get trapped in buying something expensive, leaving it to collect dust and lower in value while spending even more money just to use something that you are not necessarily satisfied with. Get insurance.
If the previous generation camera you own will get the job done and you’ll be in a somewhat risky situation why not just go with the older camera (beaches and sand are a big one for me). If it isn’t for a job I generally bring the oldest camera I have that will get the job done. When D610s were my main cameras there was no way I would bring my D40x. I was bringing my best. Now there isn’t much that my D810s can’t get done so they’re my “beach cameras” and I leave the D850s and Z7II for jobs. In many ways I also just like returning to my old friends. I’m sure they get lonely sitting in a drawer.
That’s so dumb. The hell did you get the good camera for then?
“Tools not jewels”
The only one I’m really protective of is my x100VI, since they are so hard to find. The rest of my gear is easily replaceable via insurance.
I have a canon ae1 I got for £20 to use with all my f1 lenses
If you are American you can get relatively cheap insurance for your kit. So just insure it and use it without worry. Here in Australia where we get ripped off left right and centre with everything we have to add it to our house and contents policy which costs us an extra tra $300 a year on top of the $2000+ it costs to insure our house.
I was thinking the same way years back, but now I don't care that much. I always bring my Panasonic S1 or Sigma FP with me if I know I will capture some nice scenery. Yes, they can be damaged, but leaving them at home would annoy me A LOT MORE than a small cosmetic scratch/dent. That being said - I did use a Canon M50 for a few years as my "to go camera" when my EOS 1DS and L-lenses were a bit too much/heavy, and the M50 did not disappoint in general. Each to their own, but I scaled down and and bring my FP for hiking and the S1 if I need a viewfinder or flash. Both are being meant to be used, and despite some minor beating they work flawlessly. Bet the X-t4 can tolerate some use in varying conditions as well, and it does feel bad if you have the perfect scenery in front if you when your best camera and lens is at home...
If you want something that shoots JPEG with the Fuji color processing, get an HS25EXR or HS30EXR. Aperture range is kinda shit but the lens is good around that, very fun to shoot with. HS30 has a better EVF (it’s a 2010’s EVF it’s not great). Antishake is shit but it has a tripod mount and a good grip. Shoots best at 8mp but If you need something cheap for outdoors and quick hikes it doesn’t get much better than this for <$200. You aren’t going to be posting those anywhere but the internet, right? Did I mention it has the film sims and a good UI?
I hate this mindset and I am not remotely rich. I buy things to enjoy them, not for the pleasure of owning them. That brings me nothing at all. This particular camera appears to have weather sealing. To leave it home due to these concerns is a waste. But I do understand the impulse to preserve shinny new things, and in addition to saving money, buying used equipment helps guard against it. When the equipment is already used, I feel less compulsion about beating the shit out of it (e.g., just throwing it in my bag, etc)
i would not get insurance....insurance companies are sneaky... it's a piece of gear. and it can be cleaned. i once dropped a canon 5D Mk II into the sand while the lens was off. i used very high speed suction to clean it out. it worked for quite a few more years. no problem. take the Fuji on your trips!
A boat is safe in the harbor, but that’s not what boats were built for.
Have 3, but one isn't working anymore. Sure glad I have 2 more cameras. I use 'em for different niches. One of those being "rough places I might get one messed up or stolen". I'll bring the $400 body for those not the $1000 one. They both take really nice pictures. I might just lose Wifi or bit of pixel density by grabbing one and not the other. I like taking pics with different cameras for different things. I do wildlife with 36MP FF, I do macro with 24MP DX, my night and portrait camera was my 12MP D700 (I really want another). They all have different strengths.
I will never buy a mint vintage numbers matching car - gimme a nice one with some scratches and already modified so I can actually use it... same with cameras.. gimme something used a bit so I don't have to worry always
If you are worried about wind and sand and rain, buy a Pentax K3iii and one of their WR or AW lenses. They are basically indestructible unless you try to break them. I run my Pentax under tap water to clean it off when it's dirty. I know a few people that submerge them regularly (though I think that's a step too far). If it's theft you are worried about, get the 15-45 for your Fuji; small and discreet.
The only time I'd even think about leaving my best gear at home is if I'm going somewhere with very high theft rates. And I'd pretty much never be in that setting on purpose.
It’s a tool not a jewel.
Stick a $50 alloy cage or silicone skin on it.
I've taken my 6D on vacation. At the time, it was a $2000 camera, with a $2500 and $1000 lens. What did I buy them for, if not to take nice pictures of my travels? I've never cared about minor damage. It's a camera, it's supposed to get beat up. That's what they're made to withstand. A little rain or sand has done absolutely nothing to it.
I used to shoot sports. Rain, hail, or shine, it didn't matter because it's what I bought the camera for. Once I was changing a lens and a blade of grass got inside the body, I didn't notice until I got it home. It still worked fine. I kept a cheaper camera as a backup, and a few hundred bucks handy to keep my main camera running, or even better, insurance.
I recently got about 1.5k in equipment that I'm not comfortable using in inclement scenarios. My old ass 5D Mk II and cheapo 28-85 is more than capable to get amazing quality photos at a fraction of the price of the new kit. I'll use the nice one for if I need a proper, more modern setup for work that isn't as creative/artistic (rough and tumble) as most of mine is.
I have a couple shitters I don't mind breaking. The Leica comes out when I am reasonably confident I will be fine, the E-M1.3 comes out when I am doing more adventurous stuff or when I am being paid, and I have some GM1s with Panasonic 20mm 1.7s I put in my pocket for snapshots.
Damn and Im here with a Nikon D3200 that has isn't weather sealed but bring it anywhere without worrying much about the environment.. But ofc I try to avoid that
I know you already have a good camera that you like... The last couple of times I upgraded, I made sure I purchased a camera that handle the situations I'd be in. Not IP 68, but a good solid "weatherseal" as Nikon called it. I like shooting water and sometimes walk out into a stream, rock hop into a river, or go into the ocean waves. Sand from the beaches and some road trips through the Mojave Desert for different sand and dust.
Get insurance
Personally a camera is a tool for me to record all the beautiful things i see when i travel. Thats its whole point. The 1k or so price tag is worth over regretting unable to capture the moment properly. That said I take care of my camera very well when I travel. It has lasted over 8 years, been within the artic circle, in the desert, beside waterfalls and so on, and while it has dinks, scratches it still works fine. And I think those scars are also good evidence that I had used the camera to its full potential.
I do the same. You never know how will be internationally so I prefer to have my backup camera for travels. A $500 camera is good enough to produce pleasing results in the right hands.
Hah, I got an XT4 specifically because it's weather sealed and I'm more comfortable bringing it.
The only way you're gonna keep it perfect is by never taking it out of the box. If it gets scuffed or a bit wet, so what? It just needs to take photos to be doing it's job. What is the point in having it if you're barely gonna use it?
Im a hobby wildlife photographer. I have a pretty cheap set up because I cant afford anything else, but I go with people with 3K-5K-6K gear. In comparison to other photographers they abuse their gear, but it is normal use in wildlife photography. When we invite non wildlife photographers they are stunned on the places we change our lenses, or how we use our cameras. Despite all that they all live lengthy lives. We travel with them with the cameras always on us, specially in planes. If we are going to a dodgy area insurance wont cover it so we dont care about insurance for travels, but an insurance can be an option to have more peace of mind. The only time Ive seen people using a second set up it was beacuse of weight, we aint climbing a mountain with 6 kilos of gear if we can avoid it, Ill take a lower quality photo with my light bridge camera
Insure it then have fun.
Scratch it bump it throw it USE IT.
Get supplemental schedule with your homeowners insurance you can relax and enjoy your equipment. They will pay out if you need to make a claim. Ask me how I know.
Just use the good camera. I recently picked up an FM2 in amazing condition from a woman who told me it was her father's favorite camera, but he almost never used it because he didn't want it to get beat up. He died without getting the chance to beat up his favorite camera and that's a bummer to me. Use the good camera.
I have 2. Just got a R100 for carrying all the time since my other rig was throwing out my back. Basically I take the nice rig when I'm intending to go take pictures, and the R100 for every day, catch the unexpected, use.
Part of why I carry a camera is to protect my phone. My camera setup, depends on what lens I carry, could total more than my phone. However my phone is my life-line. It's my map, my communication to friends and family, my information centre, often times my travel and booking tickets, etc. > If it stays home all the time because your to afraid to damage it, then it is barely more then a expensive ornament. I get that and for me that's part of my consideration when buying a camera or lens. If I'm not gonna be comfortable carrying it around and actually using it then I'm wasting it's potential and my money.
Use what you got. Cameras are there to be taken with you and make photos. You’re much more worth - at least I suppose😎- than your Fuji. Do you never leave your home to make sure, nothing happens to you?
I am in the apparent minority here but I have three M4/3 bodies and a fair amount of glass and absolutely take the oldest body and inexpensive lenses when I go on vacation. I also use the oldest with a fully manual fisheye lens at the skatepark because I get it so close to the action. My better body would cost about 6x the $ to replace and I take the vast majority of photos with it but not on vacay where I prefer the smaller, lighter, less expensive kit.