Should my partner & I invest in the same lens brand/system?

Is that business partner or relationship partner ?

Business partner, yes, both same system.

Relationship partner. Anything goes.

I think you should each buy what appeals to you most as individuals, what you think you can do your best work with.

If your partner really wants to 'shoot food'.

Cailean Gallimore said:

Cailean Gallimore wrote:

I think you should each buy what appeals to you most as individuals, what you think you can do your best work with.

Click to expand...

staydecent said:

staydecent wrote:

The limiting factor is I'd like to get two bodies for under $1000. I'm currently leaning towards the Panasonic GX1 for myself, and the Canon T3i for my partner.

My main question is: Should we both invest into the same lens mount system? Moreover, would it be redundant if we had the same camera body?

Click to expand...

Personally, I think it's a bad idea to get two different lens mounts. My Jan is always reaching into my camera bag for glass, flash units and other things. I shoot professional level Nikon gear and she loves the entry level Nikon gear, but everything pretty much interchanges. She loves it this way because she doesn't have to carry a separate camera bag out on a shoot.

For example, I may get an assignment for a posed set on Miami Beach on a several hour deal. She might come along for fun and be regularly grabbing items out of my location kit at the site, then wander around the beach area. I've even seen her bring a couple of sunbathers off the beach into the set and have the lighting guy hook her into the set lighting. LOL It was a case where they were shooting video for television advertising and I was doing some stills because my company partners with them. They sponsor one of our broadcasts.

So, I'd be considering the Canon gear just for the size of the system offered. You could also look at the Nikon D5100 lineup or the excellent Pentax K30. $1000 is a very small budget for a pair of DSLR cameras and associated lenses. Whatever you ended up with, I'd get different starting lenses. Maybe one with the kit 18-55 zoom and one with a faster prime like the Canon or Nikon 50 f/1.8. Nikon also has a very sharp and inexpensive 35 f/1.8 for $195 that could go on one camera. 35mm has the same field of view on these digital APS-C sized cameras as 50mm did in the older film days you remember. Sony and Pentax also have excellent inexpensive 35mm kit type lenses available too. Unfortunately Canon has not done it yet. They have a somewhat inexpensive 40mm though that is superb.

Panasonic has a somewhat more limited lens availability in very inexpensive glass like this. What is really nice and surprising is that all this newer inexpensive glass by Nikon, Pentax and Sony are exceptionally high in optical quality, rivalling the more expensive glass in that way. Nikon so far has that 35 f/1.8, a 40 f/2.8 macro lens, the 50 f/1.8G all between $195 and $245, then slightly more for the 85 f/1.8 portrait lens. Note that the 40mm and 85mm are considered and have been tested as two of the sharpest lenses by anyone at any price. Sony and Pentax have a couple also to go with those 35mm in that low low price range. They are also as good optically as their more expensive models. It's really a good time for entry level cameras with an array of lenses matched in price and extreme high optical quality. None of the above lenses are slouches in any way except they are mostly plastic builds.

I would also suggest looking at the Sony a58. The only thing I don't care for is the plastic lens mount on that camera. It's a first by anyone and I'm probably wrong to not care for it, but I don't. Otherwise it also is a great choice. Sony tends to load their entry level models up with lots of newbie whizbang features which I don't at all care for, but you might like to play with like auto HDR and Panorama modes to name a couple. I think they get old inside of a week or so, but some new people, in this Instagram generation, love the idea. I prefer an optical viewfinder, but some prefer Sony's OLED electronic viewfinder and swear by it.

Remember, many here are armchair photographers with zero images on display anywhere, yet they feel the need and qualification to suggest what they purchased for you. Brands can be like a religion to some folks and have nothing to do with usability. If someone claims that Brand A is the best, go look at their gallery and see what you think about Brand A. If they have nothing in a gallery then go to their linked website. If there's nothing at all, consider what that might say.

Anyway, that's my rambling opinion.Take care and have a wonderful summer.

and please excuse typos.

From a finacial point of view getting two bodies with the same lens mount makes the most sense. However you should get cameras that you each like. If you can find a system that you both like, I suggest getting that. You can get two of the same bodies or two different bodies depending on what each of you like.



$1000 is not a lot for two bodies so you should consider buying late model used cameras. B&H, Adorama, and keh.com are, IMO, the best for used gear.

My partner does not shoot. But when I got a 2nd body, it was a Micro4/3 instead of a 2nd DSLR. Different types of cameras each have their place. If both of you were getting a DSLR, then I would say keep it the same brand. But otherwise, mix it up.

Kelly Cook

First, buying camera gear isn't an investment. Apart from a few classic items that will one day be worth more than you pay for them everything you buy will lose value - the opposite of an investment.

This isn't just a semantic point - it means you are using up your money for the sake of enjoyment, so it's important that you maximise that enjoyment at the lowest price that does the job.

I occasionally go out on photo days with my two brothers and son. Our DSLRs are from Pentax (me), Canon, Nikon and Olympus. The amount of equal or overlapping lenses we carry would cripple a donkey. If you and your partner shoot a lot together I'd say it's far better to use a common lens mount.

Whether you get the same body or not depends on your tastes. There's certainly no need to buy different just for the sake of it. After all, plenty of people carry two bodies anyway, either as back up or to reduce lens changing.

I wouldn't even argue against getting two copies of the same lens if there's one that you both like: if you buy different systems you'll have this sort of overlap. For example, you might both get the kit zoom as a go-anywhere basis, and then get a single copy of (say) UWA, fast-normal and telephotos.

The two body from the same company has worked for my wife and I over the last 40 years, I am not getting into a brand war but it is a company that has made few changes to its lens mount over the years as a result we have some quite ancient infrequently used lens that can be used on our more modern bodies if the need arises, over the years we have upgraded in a progressive way a body here, a lens next, etc having the same mount has minimised the amount of duplicated F/L lens we have bought, camera bodies particularly have been handed on to family members when we have upgraded so within our house there is quite a pool of equipment we can all make use of ( we are all amateurs by the way ) apart from my 851.4G which is a ' me ' only item

Gerry Winterbourne said:

Gerry Winterbourne wrote:

First, buying camera gear isn't an investment. Apart from a few classic items that will one day be worth more than you pay for them everything you buy will lose value - the opposite of an investment.

This isn't just a semantic point - it means you are using up your money for the sake of enjoyment, so it's important that you maximise that enjoyment at the lowest price that does the job.

Click to expand...

I have to disagree a little here, Gerry. I think you're making a semantic point. Really. An investment doesn't have to mean for profit as in investing in stock. You can invest in your tools or career, full well knowing the tools depreciate immediately. You can invest in your hobby and enjoyment as well. Same thing, the objects that help you pursue this may be guaranteed to depreciate tremendously.

A good investment in a new camera lens may be one that works so well, you'll not need another in that range ever, or maybe it's so well built, you expect a lifetime of hard use out of it. That would be possibly a better investment than a cheaper lens not meant to take hard use.

Also, some photographic gear does increase in value and not because they are collectable. My two Nikon 105 f/2.5 lenses are still pretty pristine and I bought one slightly used in the mid 1970s and the other new in 1978. Both are now worth a little more than I paid then. My Nikon 300 f/2.8 is around four to five years old and I'd make close to $600 if I sold it used today, and I bought it brand new off the shelf. The same goes for a few other items. It's not the rule, but the exception I realize. Nonetheless.

So I think this is definitely a semantic issue. The word can be used in many ways not having anything to do with increasing monetary value.

Make it a wonderful day, my friend.

I would suggest to get the same system for the simple reason you can have interchangeable lenses. Nikon d7000 and a Nikon d3100 unless you're looking for new equipment

Sir Aglund said:

Sir Aglund wrote:

I would suggest to get the same system for the simple reason you can have interchangeable lenses. Nikon d7000 and a Nikon d3100 unless you're looking for new equipment

Click to expand...

Just curious, but why are you saying that to me. You replied to my post and I'm not sure who you're talking to.

Guidenet said:

Guidenet wrote:

I think you're making a semantic point. Really. An investment doesn't have to mean for profit as in investing in stock. You can invest in your tools or career, full well knowing the tools depreciate immediately.

Click to expand...

I'm definitely drifting off the main topic here, Craig, but for the fun of it I must say I disagree with this. A workman doesn't invest in his tools - he buys his tools as an investment to further his career; because, of course, from his career he intends to earn more than the price of his tools.

This is, of course, true of the tools that a professional photographer buys, and I should have made clear that I was talking in the context of amateur photography. Indeed, a good rough and ready of the difference between pro and am photographers would be the way they evaluate expenditure on equipment.

Guidenet said:

Make it a wonderful day, my friend.

Click to expand...

And you, sir.

mgd43 said:

mgd43 wrote:

From a finacial point of view getting two bodies with the same lens mount makes the most sense. However you should get cameras that you each like. If you can find a system that you both like, I suggest getting that. You can get two of the same bodies or two different bodies depending on what each of you like.

$1000 is not a lot for two bodies so you should consider buying late model used cameras. B&H, Adorama, and keh.com are, IMO, the best for used gear.

Click to expand...

Like a few others have mentioned, it's really about what each of us like. As this is a hobby for both of us, we should get whatever camera either of us enjoys. So, thanks mdg43 for pointing this out so succinctly.

For the curious: Originally I was going to gift the new camera, but ill just accompany her at the store and hopefully help in choosing something. I think the Nikon D3100 or the Pentax K-30 are good options (especially for the price), but we'll see what suites her. And, as for myself, for the short-term at least, I'm going to keep using the Panasonic FZ35 as well as bring our my Canon T70 (film) again.

Thanks for all the feedback everyone!

staydecent said:

staydecent wrote:

staydecent said:

mgd43 wrote:

From a finacial point of view getting two bodies with the same lens mount makes the most sense. However you should get cameras that you each like. If you can find a system that you both like, I suggest getting that. You can get two of the same bodies or two different bodies depending on what each of you like.

$1000 is not a lot for two bodies so you should consider buying late model used cameras. B&H, Adorama, and keh.com are, IMO, the best for used gear.

Click to expand...

Like a few others have mentioned, it's really about what each of us like. As this is a hobby for both of us, we should get whatever camera either of us enjoys. So, thanks mdg43 for pointing this out so succinctly.

For the curious: Originally I was going to gift the new camera, but ill just accompany her at the store and hopefully help in choosing something. I think the Nikon D3100 or the Pentax K-30 are good options (especially for the price), but we'll see what suites her. And, as for myself, for the short-term at least, I'm going to keep using the Panasonic FZ35 as well as bring our my Canon T70 (film) again.

Thanks for all the feedback everyone!

Click to expand...

Ah, a T70! I still have mine, but haven't shot with it in some years. That camera makes the most pathetic sound while rewinding film, like it's barely able to manage and will die if you don't say encouraging words. Alas, it has never become a classic, but it's a good, solid camera. The buttons on top are so eighties.