It started with a mid-size sling for a DSLR and a couple of ordinary lenses, plus the paraphernalia: battery charger, lens care, etc…
It was upgraded to a bigger backpack when I added a 120-400mm to the lens collection.
But then this was too big when I am just walking around in a city, so I added a messenger bag in which I could fit a DSLR.
Then, I switch to mirrorless, and the messenger bag is repurposed to carry the camera plus one extra lens.
The messenger is also used as a insert in a very worn out street backpack.
But the combo above is over the size for a carry-on bag in Air France, so I get a smaller messenger bag and a small €7 Decathlon backpack to cover it up.
So I am at 6 bags to choose from. And the forgotten sling from the beginnings could be back in service because it looks like the right size for the mirrorless, a 100-400 and a couple more lenses. Or I get a smaller backpack, because, well, 7 is a magic number, isn’t it?
I now need to go into the camera shoe business. Obviously there’s potential to sell boatloads of shoes to men by pretending they have utility in their hobby.
I have more bags than my wife and I have bags to hold my bags for storage. Still, I wouldn’t dare delve into her handbag. I don’t know how she stores so much stuff in one bag. At least my camera bags have strict order and places for everything.
Wow, how big is that messenger bag? My 40 L Shimoda Action X40 would fit within Air France’s carry-on size limit. I wouldn’t want to be carrying anything even larger than that on one shoulder.
That carry-on can be put in the hold if the plane is full (and in practice it was…). So I’m talking about the “accessory” (40x30x15). The 15cm thickness is definitely a bit tight.
Asked my “wife” (technically not married) and she has zero handbags but uses totes. I have one camera bag so I have more camera bags than my “wife” has handbags!
My experience is that the small/accessory carry-on is almost never measured, especially if it is a softshell bag that is not outageously outside the limits.
As the number of my lenses increased, the bags got bigger, and peaked at the Tenba DNA 15 Pro Messenger. However, fully loaded, my carrying distance was strictly across the road from the car.
After that full-load phase I taught myself to take fewer pics per concert, and concentrate on the individual portraits. So I now carry only two or three primes, plus, sometimes, one zoom.
For travel, I have aps-ccamera+lens bag and aps-ccamera+two-zooms bag. And both are feasible wimp on foot carrying.
Not even sure how many that leaves with always-under-the-bed status!
Old story; the photographer, on his deathbed, confides to a friend: “My worst worry is that my wife will sell my gear for what I told her it cost me.”
Sold some of my earlier gear recently. I would have loved to sell it at that price, but it deprecates pretty fast (at least camera bodies, I have had better luck with some of the lenses).
“Photographer” can also easily read “audiophile” too. The joke is found in both genres. Probably more.
What is the photographer’s equivalent to the audiophile’s “digital cable that reduces distortion”?
Maybe 3D pop (just use old lenses with CA and imperfections if you want it).
“Needing” Leica/Luxury cameras while being average at best at photography. For me expensive/luxury tools are worthy of the best master craftsman. While people are free to do what they want with their money, for even “good” photographers, they can achieve the same experience with many other very good tools. These luxury tools should be earned.
What is the photography equivalent of audiophool bullshit? We do seem to have much less. But I’m sure it’s non-zero.
I have heard “You have to use only the simplest of equipment because the masters can make great art with it.”
Not entirely untrue. When GAS strikes, I sometimes remind myself that a friend’s first-published landscape was taken on film in a plastic camera with no settings.
Sure, some of those masters used (and use) 10*8 cameras. But, to even use that gear, one has to be a very expert photographer.
