a working solution

[garbidz]

After having been changing lenses by the seaside and ended up with spots on the sensor and dust in the viewfinder, I decided to put the (Sigma) 24-70 on the 350D and the 50-500 on the 30D and leave them there unless I can change lenses somewhere where there is no saltwater mist or flying sand around.

The (very serious) guy at the service shop told me that most of the problems with digital SLR's come from changing the lens, which most of the time you would not have to do at all, at least not for the pictures' sake.

3 Park Road, in Gardens, Cape Town.
Beautiful service!

[CorruptedPhotographer]

what?

O_O is that not one of the reasons we buy SLR's? The ability to change lenses based upon need? Just switch faster. Use common sense, dont switch in the open if you can help it. :)

[forsakenme720]

Well, putting each lens on a different camera and carrying them around may be a solution for you, but considering most people don't have 2 SLR's, it's not really much of a solution that people can use.

Also, I agree with Corrupted. There's no reason to have an SLR if you're not going to switch lenses.

[pturton]

Changing cameras makes more sense than changing lenses if the capture of the moment has any importance at all. I would never leave home with serious picture taking in mind without 2 bodies and an extra lens or three. But as the corrupted fotografer says, when changing lens is a must, do it with caution.

Most people with DSLRs only have one lens, two at the most; a kit lens and a tele zoom. Anyone serious about an interest or hobby gets the appropriate equipment.


Gear List: 8 pound sledge

[garbidz]

I can clearly see another reason for using a SLR, digital or not.
It is seeing exactly what you get on the shot and pushing the release, when.
I paid serious money to get the bodies cleaned. Gives respect.

Twin bodies also gives the comfort of having a backup in case of malfunction or..."misplacement"

(My 20D was stolen)

[liza]

Most people with DSLRs only have one lens, two at the most; a kit lens and a tele zoom. Anyone serious about an interest or hobby gets the appropriate equipment.

I must be really serious. I have nine lenses, and the kit lens isn't among them. :lol:

[CorruptedPhotographer]

I must be really serious. I have nine lenses, and the kit lens isn't among them. :lol:

You are the queen of serious liza! Just look at your display picture! Cant get more serious than that haha :D ;)

[liza]

Gee, maybe I should change it if it's that bad...

But back to the topic at hand... If you are having qualms about changing lenses due to the dust issue, perhaps you should read the info here:

www.cleaningdigitalcameras.com

I've found it to be rather informative.

[garbidz]

to avoid all that hassle...an extra 350 body is not that expensive?
you plan ahead your shoot and have two cameras set up

change if you have to but only if

(BTW the authors seem to agree with my idea)

Why the hell should I want to get myself to do all this. Why should I find a couple of extra hours of free time to do risky stuff I am not trained for just because I want to fool around with some extra lenses I happened to buy in a whim...

No, thank you.
You play around if you like.
With your camera bodies and spotted pictures, not mine.

[Dorman]

Sensor dust comes with the territory of owning a DSLR and swapping lenses. You'll get dust changing your lenses at home (even on your two bodies) prior to your dual camera shoot. What if you get out shooting and the situation actually calls for a third lens you didn't already mount on a body? Hopefully you'd swap it and get the shot, that's the idea of an SLR.

I'm in no position to afford a 2nd body right now, I'd love to have a backup, but I'm not a working photographer so it's not a huge issue. I swap lenses while out and about, but I'm careful. Swap quick and not in the open of water, wind, dirt, etc. I've also cleaned my own sensor, not too difficult at all...

I guess what I'm saying is that I can see the purpose in having a backup body, or carrying two different setups to a shoot when you know you'll be ping-ponging back and fourth between two lenses, but at the same time, don't totally dismiss switching your lenses to get a shot.

[garbidz]

What I am after here is that people would realize that each time they screw off the lens, the camera's insides are exposed to pollution. Each cleaning again means a risk of scratches and unexpected damage.
And certainly a waste of time.
Each spot you have to work on means extra time spent and a degradation of quality.
Do I really have to change to 10-22 for a 22 mm picture or could I just take two steps backward and shoot with the 24-70?
What about my beautiful 1.4/50mm? Is the end result really so superior that I should unscrew the 50-500 (and put it back again for longer focal lenth shots) on the beach or should I just accept the (stopped-down) zoom quality and save my equipment.

I think my answer is clear.
For me, that is.

[grego]

SLR gives the luxury of changing lens. When you change them doens't matter though. If you go through a whole day with just two lens on two different cameras, that's fine. In another situation, you might use different. If the situation only probably needs 2 and you have two cameras, good.

[catsith]

(My 20D was stolen)

ouch!!!!!

I own an s2, and very happy with it, good learning stage for when i might upgrade to a dslr. It is a personal thing, I didn't want to be changing lenses etc, (especially when trundling around paris and rome on holidays) but then i am restricted by what i have. It is less to cart around, but then i don't get the sort of shots that a lot of people post here (eg, dimitri, bald eagle etc) I met a guy who took some great night shots of the coloseum at night with a dslr and tripod, i had neither, but managed to get a reasonable shot anyway. Go with what works for you.

[rklepper]

Do I really have to change to 10-22 for a 22 mm picture or could I just take two steps backward and shoot with the 24-70?

That is correct, but what if you were after that shot that only 10mm would give you?

[garbidz]

you are asking the obvious
my point is that there should be an indication to changing lenses other than having extra lenses in your bag you haven't used today

and when you do change, take cover
I live next to the beach where there is a constant mist of salt water and when it is windy, sand

you don't see it until it lands on the sensor

[saravrose]

I don't change lenses often.. if at all I generally pick the lens that I'm going to want that day and i'm good to go.. I do have them with me if the need arises.. (and there has been situations where the lens that I have on the camera isn't getting the job done and I have to switch)..the whole point of having a DSLR is being able to change lenses to suit your needs.. that being said..use your rocket blower.. watch for sensor dust and if you see anything serious arise take it to a professional..

sari

[liza]

I think Doc and I are coming from a different place, because we both shoot with primes more often than zooms.

[garbidz]

that's seriously serious seriousness....

smiles

M ("doc" Garbidz)

[malla1962]

I have 7 lenses and no intention of buying another 6 bodies lol.:D:D

[garbidz]

Aren't you a darling!

I am not planning to buy four extra bodies either as it is evident that such a situation where I'd need all my lenses at short intervals is quite improbable.
What I am saying that each time you detach the lens, grit enters and lands on the sensor.

If this can be evited with a bit of planning ahead, why not.
Obviously, I am missing something as I do not get any kicks from changing lenses.

Clean pictures I like.

[forsakenme720]

I don't think there's really much to this argument. People buy SLRs to have the ability to switch lenses. This is just a plain fact. If you know what you're doing (you don't have to be a professional) and take care with what you are doing, changing lenses often shouldn't be a problem. I find it odd to carry around multiple cameras just because you are scared to change lenses, but to each his own. All I know is that I'd rather buy more lenses than spend money on another body that I don't really need and don't want to lug around. Again, this is just my honest opinion.

[forsakenme720]

Aren't you a darling!

I am not planning to buy four extra bodies either as it is evident that such a situation where I'd need all my lenses at short intervals is quite improbable.
What I am saying that each time you detach the lens, grit enters and lands on the sensor.

If this can be evited with a bit of planning ahead, why not.
Obviously, I am missing something as I do not get any kicks from changing lenses.

Clean pictures I like.

Wow, you are quite the paranoid one. What type of bag will you be carrying 5 cameras and 5 lenses in? Also, imagine what kind of gear you could have purchased instead of those extra bodies... Lol, nevermind...I didn't see the word "not" at first.

[garbidz]

I state quite clearly in my signature that I have a Crumpler backbag. I like it, no changes planned.

I put you in possession of truth by telling you that there is an "edit" button you can use when you notice your mistake, seven days after the message has been posted.

You are obviously not acquainted with "paranoid" word meaning.
The expression you were looking for is "schizoid".
Which also, I am not. Are you drunk?

[forsakenme720]

I state quite clearly in my signature that I have a Crumpler backbag. I like it, no changes planned.

I put you in possession of truth by telling you that there is an "edit" button you can use when you notice your mistake, seven days after the message has been posted.

You are obviously not acquainted with "paranoid" word meaning.
The expression you were looking for is "schizoid".
Which also, I am not. Are you drunk?

Hmmm...I'm a little confused here. Is this all directed at me? Because for one, I never really said anything about your backpack, I just meant that no bag would be able to fit 5 SLRs and five lenses confortably; i.e. - it was a joke. 2, I never talked to you about the "edit" button and the only post I edited was 2 minutes after I first posted it, not 7 days. I'm not sure where you got that from. 3, the word I was looking for was paranoid, but as I said, I didn't notice the word "not" so I said nevermind. Again, if you're post wasn't directed at me, just ignore this message. If it was, then I'm really really confused.

[garbidz]

enough