Re: Why two digital camera bodies?
- From: "WannabeSomeone" <WannabeSomeone@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 08:49:45 -0500
"Donald Gray" <donald@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:5e4hn1tl1o8qj16fdboer0r5iv8hfe6hem@xxxxxxxxxx
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 08:54:17 -0700, Bill Funk <BigBill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[]You carry two DSLR bodies on vacations? I'v ebeen knoiwn to carry my DRebel and an A75, but carrying two DSLR bodies seems overkill to me.
I carried 2 cameras with me on my holiday to New Zealand, Australia and USA...Thank goodness I did...
Imagine fullfilling a childhood dream of standing on the rim of the Grand Canyon and having the battery go down on my Nikon 5700 - My EOS5 came to the rescue....
I shall always carry a backup camera...just in case.
Will it be cheaper and lighter to carry some extra batteries instead of an extra camera? The extra camera's battery may go down on you too.
Wannabe
=======
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Why two digital camera bodies?
- From: Donald Gray
- Re: Why two digital camera bodies?
- From: Charlie Self
- Re: Why two digital camera bodies?
- References:
- D200: incompatible batteries. Scammed again.
- From: Paul Rubin
- Re: Why two digital camera bodies?
- From: Donald Gray
- D200: incompatible batteries. Scammed again.
- Prev by Date: Re: A shorter 5D review
- Next by Date: Re: Slideshow software
- Previous by thread: Re: Why two digital camera bodies?
- Next by thread: Re: Why two digital camera bodies?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading