What do you insure?

I'm looking at updating my insurance on my photo gear, but am having trouble figuring out where to draw the line.

I'm a hobbyist, and don't make any money off my photography. I've currently got the body and lens I originally purchased covered under a rider on my home owner's insurance. I realized recently that I've since purchased more than that value in additional lenses, flah, etc. so it's time to update the rider.

My intent is to cover body, lenses, flash, and battery grip. I don't know however about insuring the smaller stuff: filters, lens hoods, camera bags, batteries, CF cards, etc. Although none of those items are particularly expensive, if someone were to walk away with my camera bag, there's probably at least $1000 in small stuff. Then there's the really small stuff -- cleaning materials, grey card, etc.

Anything I don't explicitly get a rider for would be covered under the general policy, but with a $500 deductable, replacing the small stuff would still be costly.

I guess my problem is that I'm not worried about something happening to A filter, or A battery -- if it's lost/taken/damaged, I'll replace it; my concern is the collective value if my whole bag disappears.

How do you handle this? What line do others use when deciding what to insure?

I would cover the big stuff. The smaller stuff can always be claimed verbally after the fact. We had water damage a couple of years ago, and my laptop was toast. I never had any receipts for it (got it from work), and it was never insured officially under the rider. I just gave my insurance company the brand and model, and received a new one from them - no questions asked. If I were you, I'd insure the bodies, lenses, flashes, hoods, and that's about it.

Insure your right hand :P. Kind of hard to shoot with just one hand. I agree with aridan, insure the big stuff, the small stuff can be more easily replaced.

silverhalide wrote in post #5797773
How do you handle this? What line do others use when deciding what to insure?

You need to determine the risks involved and then bet the odds. If you work in high crime areas, leave stuff unattended, etc. I would insure the whole enchilada.

On the other hand, if you live/work in a safe area and your gear never leaves your sight, I'd just insure the major stuff.

A lot has to do with your comfort level and your ability to replace the uninsured items.

Regardless what you choose, I hope you never need it.

If the replacement value of an item is less than my deductible amount, I don't insure it. Then again, when I go out to shoot, I only take what's needed. If you're the type that takes all of your gear with you in a single pack or case, then you should consider insuring all of it since you'd be more at risk for a total loss.

aridan wrote in post #5797796
If I were you, I'd insure the bodies, lenses, flashes, hoods, and that's about it.

I think that's where I'm heading -- and possibly some of the filters -- a 77 mm B+W MRC UV or polarizer isn't cheap.

hommedars wrote in post #5797905
A lot has to do with your comfort level and your ability to replace the uninsured items.

And hence my problem -- replacing any one of the items, well within my ability; replacing all the small stuff, not so easy.

argyle wrote in post #5798345
If you're the type that takes all of your gear with you in a single pack or case, then you should consider insuring all of it since you'd be more at risk for a total loss.

Exactly my case. I'm still at the point where I can take all my stuff with me (although I'm sure the wife would disagree on that).

hommedars wrote in post #5797905
Regardless what you choose, I hope you never need it.

As the saying goes, "from your lips to God's ears." I hope so too.

Thanks for everyone's help.