« Do You View Camera? (Gibellini) | Main | Wednesday Open Mike: Prance Master (And: Food Book List) »

Tuesday, 09 August 2016



Fortunately most of my camera gear is not worth stealing. There was a major fire in the apartments where I now live five years ago so another fire would prove suspicious.

This is not theory, nor is it speculation or daydreaming: it is actually happening for me. With the changes that come about through becoming a pensioner and needing to live within one's means while adhering to some core principles I have found myself having to divest myself of all my camera gear, both recreational and commercial, and returning to something about which I have always had a great respect and satisfaction — a twin-lens Mamiya with a 105mm DS and a 55mm wide angle. Some Diafine, some FP4+ or some Fuji Acros and I am off running to run the race.

I asked myself that question once and I'd probably buy the same thing because I don't see enough progress in more modern gear.

- a used d700
-> because I believe d600/d750 are a step back in handling and because I do not want 36 megapixels d800

- second hand afd lenses
-> because I believe they're good value, they're usually more compact than recent iterations, because I don't need afs or vr...

- speedlight

- polarizer

- a small messenger bag and a newswear waist pack (best thing for hiking)

Alternativelly, I'd take a good look at fuji xt2.

I would replace the Fuji kit that I shoot with now. After thirty years of doing this for a living, using all sorts of gear (including a view camera!! :), the Fuji kit makes me the happiest overall.

...waiting to see the new Hasselblad...

Probably not the most interesting response, but I'd stay with what I have now; except I'd buy the Oly Pen F, and the E-M1 MK2 (assuming it was out), the pro lenses, and a few primes I've come to enjoy. And the Pana-Leica 100-400 zoom!

While it's perhaps interesting to have a fresh start, there's a lot invested besides money, namely how everything works.

I like how the system I know performs. There are probably better ones, but I'm more interested in taking pictures than learning a new system.

Interesting question, but often moot. In the UK, generally, you don't get a cheque; you get replacement goods.

This happened to me, about 8 or 9 years ago. At that time I had a couple of Nikon DSLRs - a D70 and D80 - with some ordinary lenses, an old Canon (film) SLR - possibly my 1988 EOS 650 - and a lens or two for that. All of these were stolen in a burglary (break-in of my house). The claim was agreed by my insurance company and the details passed to a firm of loss adjustors, who called me and agreed a replacement list of equipment. I got 2x Nikon D80 (the D70 was no longer available) together with exact replacement Nikon lenses. For the Canon gear I got a new EOS 300X - specification-wise, it was actually an improvement on the old 650 but of course was a plastic piece of c**p. (I've still got it - it's never been used.) And for some reason they couldn't get find a nifty-fifty lens, so they offered me a 50mm f2.8 macro instead which I accepted.

I spoke to my local photo dealer about this and they agreed that this was what generally happened. They said that previously, insurance-funded replacement outfits had been a measurable part of their business, but that in the years just before it had vanished.

So no big cheque, and no opportunity to change. The insurance company's view would be that I had been perfectly indemnified - I had lost certain items of equipment of certain specifications, and I had been supplied with certain new items of equipment with the same or better specifications. Job done.

I'd head south in the winter for a few months!

That is a happy situation with new money in hand!! I would go for mirrorless, which ever brand is available. Here in India, not all brands or models are easily available. Certainly not DSLR (or phone cameras). I am disgusted to gills with them.

Sony DSC-RX10M3

Fujifilm X-T2 with 10-24, 35/2, 56/1.2 and 100-400 lenses, with X100T as backup.

Most likely Fuji: XT2 with 10-24, 16-55, and 55-140 for landscape. XPro2 with 14 f2.8, 23 f2, 35 f2 and 50 f2, when the missing f2 versions are available, for street and daily carry kit. This would be way more than enough.
I'll never have a Leica budget, and Canikon are out of the running with their current line up of gear. Sony would be an alternate, but I'm not too excited about the lens size/ cost of the better Sony glass.

I think I'd go for a used Leica Monochrom and Zeiss M or maybe some older Leica lenses. I think this would combine my current film and digital shooting interests most efficiently.

Starting fresh with an adequate supply of cash in hand? I'd rent a Sony full frame camera a decent lens from Lens Rentals...followed by a similar spec Fuji setup. One of the two would probably feel right and produce better, more consistent images than the other. Since all of my Olympus stuff (not exactly a well-rounded kit) was stolen, I'd probably return to the endless battle of the menues only if their approach to the 5-axis IBIS proved critically important.

I would go out and buy an XPRO2 and a bunch of lenses, and basically leave it at that for a while.

I'd want two systems, one of which would be lighter weight for hiking with. For that I'd go with a Panasonic GX8 and an all-in-one zoom lens probably the Tamron 14-150mm. I'd replace my Canon 7d (original model) with an 80D. To go with that I'd want a macro lens and a couple of zoom lenses. I'm not hung up on primes. Modern zoom lenses are more than adequate unless you are a pixel peeper, more interested in what the camera/lens combo can render than in what the photographer saw and wanted to share with you.

Clean sheet is what I'm about to "artificially" do, selling almost all my Sony and Zeiss stuff.

I've explained at length the reasons on my blog, but it all boils down to the fact that unless you see two prints of an identical subject side to side shot at the same time (i.e. what I did) the difference between the 36Mp A7r and the 16Mp X-T10 are negligible in the focused point up to a 1 meter wide print, and the X-T10 has actually a huge advantage when it comes to have enough of the scene in focus (I shoot landscapes, mostly).

I will go for Fuji X-T10 + X-100T + 14 + 18-55 (the 16-55 is too big and lacks OIS) + 35 (either 1.4 or f/2) + 90/2 + 55-200.

On the side, just for when I'm out with the bike or for non-photographic travels, I'll keep an Olympus E-M10 (soon to be replaced by a Panasonic GM5 + 12-32) + 14-32 + Panasonic 25/1.7 + Panasonic 35-100 (the small one, not the 2.8 version).

I'm staying with 16Mp for now because I already have an X-T10 that I bought to test the Fuji waters and I'm loving it; and besides because I'm not so convinced by the results I'm seeing from the new 24Mp sensor, I want to try it first personally.

As always YMMV.

Never had anything stolen, but I started two times over again. From Canon FD to Nikon and then to Olympus micro 4/3. Had good reasons to switch. Both times I I told myself that two, or three lenses at maximum should be enough. But after a while I end up with at least six primes, all with the same angles as in my former system. And every time I make the same mistake by getting a telephoto zoom that I sell again after using it twice.
I have a weak spot for the Fujifilm X and its lenses. One for Halle Berry too, but I am too much attached to my current model.

Instead of all the Leica equipment I'd buy Olympus OM1 and Zuiko lenses. I'd skip the Hasselblad and go straight to an ARAX 60. In other words, I'd go for the equipment that's given me excellent results for a tiny proportion of my total equipment spend.

Items I'd buy again exactly as before: the Mamiya 6 with all three lenses.

What I might add for the extra cash left over from all the expensive gear: a Linhof Master Technika Classic. Or maybe an XPan. But I hope I'd have the strength to bank it.

I would buy much less kit. Currently I have sold nearly all my Canon bodies and lenses (over 14 months period) and purchasing Fuji XT1.

Compared to my original Canon 10 (6MB)it will be better in every way. I went digital ahead of most people and spent a lot of time colour managing and trying to print at home.

I bought colour balancing devices and shocked so called experts who did all their colour balancing after the photography!

Eventually I got sorted and profiled my screens and had everything printed by a lab (originally via CD).

I had to do tests on Labs and was shocked that most appeared to know nothing about colour management and that they seemed to ignore calibrating their printers.

I found so many so called experts saying jpeg was great and raw was unnecessary. Now I look at my Fuji jpegs and it finally is really true.

My studio flashes still work 100%. My original manfrotto carbon fibre tripod is still great but I have a forest of monopods and a clutch of camera bags.

So having gone through the big and expensive learning curve I will end up with a X100s and a XT1 with the 56mm F1.2

If you want to hire me my rates will be the same.

Fuji X because they are one of the few that offer a 35mm eq prime and a Hasselblad 500CM, the only camera I ever regret selling.

After 15 years with Canon, I just sold all of my gear and started over with Fuji. The new outfit includes an X-Pro2, 16mm f/1.4, 35mm f/2, and 56mm f/1.2. It all lives in a Billingham Hadley small. I couldn't be happier.

The same cameras I have now that I like and value the most:
- Mamiya 6 with 50mm lens
- Minolta TC-1
- Rollei 35S
- Chamonix 4x5 w/ old petzval lens

If there was enough money left over I'd try to get a Widelux


If my RX10 got stolen, I'd replace it with the RX10ii. No hesitation.

Not that it's the perfect camera. It's a bit bigger and heavier than my personal ideal, and there were more than a few frustrating trips through the menus to get it configured the way I wanted.

But the lens/sensor combination is excellent, and more than that it's just such a Willing tool. "Yeah, sure." it seems to say. "I can do that."

Panasonic GX85 + Olympus 25/1.8 and Panasonic 15/1.7 lenses.

The current D7000 and X100 combination works well.

As a replacement, I'd first consider a FujiFilm X-Mount solution, just for the lens quality and selection, which I'm very envious of. Perhaps an X-T1 on discount with a 23mm f/2 and a 56mm to replace my current 35mm f/1.8 DX and 60mm f/2.8 Micro Nikkor (my portrait lens). I'd have to force myself to overlook the odd rendering problem with the rendering of FujFilm X-Trans raw files in my preferred raw converter but I could manage that, I think. If I found otherwise, then a Panasonic GX 8 or Olympus OM D of some sort.

I'm keen to move away from non-pro DSLRs. My D7000's autofocus shifted from moderate back focus in daylight to significant to front focus in the blue hour but Nikon tersely diagnosed 'no fault' and returned it to me. I eventually took to an allen key to adjust the secondary mirror position and it's sorted now but I'd like to never go through that again.

My wife switched from Canon DSLRs to Sony mirrorless – I like the cameras a lot but the APS-C lens selection is too limited.

If I had no cameras or lenses at all, and had the money to do as I pleased... I think I'd replace my stolen Fuji equipment with the latest Fuji equipment, including most of the same lenses I currently own (14mm, 23mm, 35mm f/2, 60mm macro, plus the Rokinon fisheye). I'd have to think about whether to buy an X-E2S or an X-T2. I've been really, really happy with the Fuji system, aside from a few annoyances with the menus (but that would be true with any modern digital interchangeable-lens camera, and Fuji's cameras have better physical controls than any other brand).

I'd probably go Fuji mirrorless, which is what I've got now... Sony would, of course, be the other consideration, but Fuji's very good 24 mp sensor is enough for most purposes (the biggest appeal of Sony is the super-sensored A7rII), and Sony still hasn't caught Fuji in lens lineup comprehensiveness and quality.
The answer would certainly change if I needed flash or some of the extremely specialized accessories Nikon and Canon have. Fuji has an exceptional lens system, but far fewer accessories other than lenses. Sony and Micro 43 both have flash systems, and Nikon and Canon have flash systems as well as really specialized accessories.
I wouldn't pick Micro 43, despite compactness, excellent lenses and a few standout features (Olympus' image stabilization!). I just don't think that sensor quite makes it for large prints...

Hmmm... Just back from a night out shooting the sunset and sunrise and used my Olympus OMD-EM10 and Pentax K20D about the same amount. I think I'd go with Sony full frame mirrorless and then regret it in about three years.

I struggled with a very similar situation about 2 years ago: I was at a professional crossroads, and was given the green light by the CFO (my bride) to rebuild my system to support my new job as a photojournalist. Being a lifetime Nikon guy, and already having a stable of Nikon lenses, I naturally considered sticking with the Nikon FX system, and just upgrading/trading/swapping lenses until I had the set I wanted/needed. However, I kept looking again and again at the Fuji system, especially lured by the X-T1 bodies. It was so close a call, that I had to create a spreadsheet to compare all the costs associated to understand the differences for what I needed.

In the end, I decided to go with Nikon for two very specific reasons, although for others they wouldn't necessarily be such a big deal: integrated flash/speedlight performance, and video capabilities. I determined that these would be necessary in my work, and that the Fuji system just wasn't there yet. Two years later, though, I think it would be a different conversation.

I still sometimes wonder what a Fuji system would look like for me...maybe someday.

If I lost all equipment, my first task would be to find a real clean Fuji GW 690 film camera or a clean Rolleiflex with Xenotar or Planar lens. The Fujis are surprisingly inexpensive from some of the Japanese sellers on eBay. As for digital, I am not sure if it really matters much any more (Sacrilege! Bite my tongue!). I have Fuji now and the output is fine, so I would probably return to Fuji.

For me, a retired senior citizen, very serious albeit casual shooter, my choice would be the across the board Fuji X System.
Starting with an X-100T, an X30, and X-T2 with a compliment of a 60 macro and two large range zooms (10-24 and 18-135).
Sony is AOK, but I really think their bells and whistles are a bit more than I need at this point in my shooting life.
I WAS a full range Canon DSLR advocate constantly climbing the technology ladder in their system, but the size and weight for the high end bodies and glass began to wear me out.
Bigger is not better, nor is full frame (at least not any longer). IMHO.....

I recently sold my Nikon D200 and D700. I bought a Sony A7r and an NEX 6. I used the NEX6 so much more I sold the A7r to a Mirrorless friend who had a Sony NEX7. The a6000 got stolen and I think the term is I'm self insured. I bought a Sony A6000 and it got stolen. Again self insured. My friend long term loaned my his NEX 7 and I still have the Zeiss 55, and 4 Nikon lenses with Sony adapter. If all of that disappearred without Insurance I would stay with Sony mirrorless start research all over on the new models. Minimum 24 MP and built in flash. I like that Sony pancake zoom for walking around and I would supplement it with Zeiss FE lenses and a long Sony telephoto zoom (wildlife).

Olympus M4/3 with a large lens assortment, both Oly and Panny, one body modified for IR capability, and a Leica DLux Type 109 for carry around.

I'd be tempted to take the money and head off for a rather fine trip with no camera at all, just to see what a trip without a camera is like (probably immensely blissful and refreshing). If relatives demanded photographs on my return, I'd probably "borrow" a random selection from the internet to satisfy them - most travel/vacation images are so similar that no one would ever know the difference. And then, if I missed my camera kit, I'd buy the same again - Olympus. And if I didn't miss my camera kit, I'd likely be able to afford another no-camera trip surprisingly soon after returning from the first one ...

Well, presumably the insurance money would only cover what I spent on my equipment and nothing more. Since I bought what is, for my needs and within my budget, the best system available today (Nikon DX bodies with FX telephotos, primarily for wildlife), I'd probably do the same thing again. A comparable full FX set-up would cost significantly more, and would be beyond my budget. And Canon vs. Nikon is six of one, half a dozen of the other, so I might as well stick to what I know. Kinda dull, I know!

Ok, stick with m43 I think, just switch to the newest Pen-F style model *after* having made sure that I can use it well with glasses. And then buy two of them, as I did with the E-M5

Lenses? Basically the primes, 12/17/25/45/75. I don't know if I would bother with the zooms again, being full aware that the 12-40mm is excellent - just heavy.

And that would leave me with a bit of cash that I could invest in paper and ink, or books maybe.

I love my D750 and nikkor lenses, but at 67 I am carrying my Panasonic GX7 with 20mm, F1.7 and 42.5m F1.7 lenses more often than not. That said if it was all stolen I would buy two Panasonic GX8's with the 12-35mmF2.8, and 35-100F2.8 as a great two body system. I'd add the 7-14mmF4 for landscape work and of course replace the 42.5mmF1.7 as it is an amazing portrait and low light lens. I know I would miss the amazing dynamic range and beautiful files of the D750, but I'm sure it would pass. If I were much younger I would replicate the Nikon system that I have and add a Fuji X100T.

My first thought is that having to replace my equipment in late 2016 would be painful. With all my gear lost I'd have to get a new camera, but at the same time all the new possibly cool stuff is just around the corner.

I'd want to see what Sony does for the Mark III series A7 cameras and what the Olympus E-M1II will be like. Also, what's up with the new Sigmas?

It's not the answer to your question, but given the potentially cool stuff around the corner, I'd probably just get some used Olympus OM-D and a used Panasonic 20mm to go with it. Then I'd wait a bit. If Sony brings the goods I'd get a Sony A7III along with some 35mm lens and get a used 45mm lens for the "new" used OM-D (way cheaper than getting a portrait lens for the Sony).

"Begin from the beginning" again, huh! Do I get to use a time machine and go back to a younger age too? Answer to that figures into my purchse:

I have been an APS-C'er most of my digital life of 12 years. If I could start over a little stronger than I am now, I would jump to FF and buy a Sony A7Rxx and a couple Loxia manual focus lenses. But, sigh, in my present "state", I would again create a new system right from where I'm "living" now - in Fugiland. That would mean 2nd generation XT-2 and the same light and capable 18-55 zoom back again with it's OIS. But I would also go for a couple primes if that insurance company was real "sweet"!

It would be a KISS system - perfect for fading into the sunset with :-)

If I had to replace My Canon 1 series Bodies & Lenses, I'd probably wait and buy the Canon 5D mk IV with just a 24-70 & 70-200
and the new Hasselblad as soon as I was certain they were manufacturing the wide angle.

If there was enough money I would go for the Leica 262 M-D (the one without screen), 28 Elmarit, 50 summicron, and 90 Elmarit. It would be the digital equivalent to my favourite analogue setup; the Mamiya 6 system.

Maybe it's the allure of the hypothetical, but I'm not sure I'd replace any of my digital equipment. I'd double down on analog photography and repurchase my current setup: Mamiya 7ii with 80mm and 65mm lenses, Two Leica R6.2 bodies with 35mm, 50mm, and 90mm Summicrons, and a Konica Hexar AF. The funds from my digital gear would instead go towards film, development, and Opticfilm 120 scanner.

I would still get to keep my iPhone, right?

The new Hasselblad X1D with a few lenses, yes, absolutely no doubt!
A new iPad Air to connect unto it, and good carbon tripod to put it on.

I had that happen in the 90's, and went up-spec in glass and down-spec in body. (Same brand as was stolen.)

That was not a bad decision, but after a bit of time I wished I had the same (pro) body as was stolen.

I loved the lenses, so it was an interesting experience overall.

The lesson learned is simply this - total system counts, as does the operation of said system, specifically the body.

To directly answer the question, if it happened today, I'd replace my Olympus M4/3 system with the same or perhaps Fuji, as the bodies are all nice, and both system have the lenses I want.

A Nikon d810 would replace my d800, and I'd buy the 24-70mm and 70-200mm Nikkors again. But what about the 35mm f1.4 - I dont' know. Sure, it's beautiful, but is it necessary for me?

Samsung NX1 is the best for 4k video, and I'd definitely get one again. For NX1 owners who missed this: there's an active modding scene for Samsung cameras. For example the NX1 can be modded to get rid of the 30 minute maximum video clip length, which is almost unique in DSLR video. For shooting events, this alone puts NX1 ahead of the competition.

For stills, I certainly wouldn't go mirrorless.

Leica M-P 240 with 35mm f/1.4 Lens, 3–4 batteries, 2 SD cards, a cheap flash, flash cord and two sets of flash batteries, associated chargers.

Gosh, I hated to lose that D200 that marked my first sufficiency in SLR let alone DSLR. But to soldier on-arranged around my significant other's iphone 6 plus-I would go D500, 10.5, 35DX, and old school 180 AF D for my personal fulfillment. My wife recently shot a wedding reception and I printed 8x10's that pleased all who saw them-a level I did not expect from i gear. The 10.5 "Fisheye" is just flat out fun and entertaining to play and learn with-makes a plastic, ever shifting world. The 35 is very good to excellent if not quite outstanding in my world, and 180 gives me a ~300 f 2.8 sufficient for detail and wildlife. That is phase I. If I found that kit insufficient, I would add 17-55, a lens that seems outstanding but somehow gets little praise from the usual reviewers, ed. MJ being an exception. If I was too constrained with my ancient 180, I might pop for the versatility of a 70-200 in some form. Oh yes, a nod to mirrorless with X100T for its position in lieu of 35 Summicron Leica and the observation that more people seem to mention X100T as "the ONE" camera they could live with forever. Cool Beans.

I'd up-grade from Fuji X-T1 to the X-T2, replace a most of my Fuji lenses and save any leftover cash for the 80mm macro lens when it comes out next year.

Easy enough for me. Replace some of what I have with current equivalent gear and pocket any left over insurance money.

I now mainly use Fuji with some Canon and Olympus (old Evolt and early Micro 4/3). I would replace the Fuji equipment with identical but more up to date bodies--a pair of X-Pro2 bodies and an X-E2S (possibly an X-T2 as well) with 35/1.4, 23/1.4, 18/2 and 14/2.8. I would also pick up an X100T to replace my X100S. I haven't kept up with the most recent Canon gear but I would replace what I lost with a couple of current model bodies (APS-C) and a few lenses (minus the long and heavy zooms and telephotos). Since I've used Canon EOS gear so long, I have a lot of it. I wouldn't replace it all. I can do without replacing the Olympus gear...in fact I think I dropped the insurance on it last year anyway since it mostly sits idle with all the film equipment I haven't used in years. Obviously I hoard photography equipment.

What an interesting question!

Without looking at anyone else's answers for inspiration, I would have to say I would do a straightforward replacement, upgrading to slightly newer models of camera. E.g.:

Panasonic Gx-7 to Gx-85 (yay for 4k video!)
Panasonic Gf3 (the really tiny one with the 12mp sensor) to whichever tiny sucessor model has the 16mp sensor.
Panasonic 45/1.8, 20/1.7, replaced with the same.
Olympus 14-42 IIIr msc, replaced with the same. (The best kit lens I've ever used.)

So, two cameras, three lenses.

There's a whole basket full of legacy lenses and the cameras I adapted them to, but I wonder if I would bother replacing them? Or would I instead add a few more micro four thirds lenses? I'm not sure.

The addition scenario looks like this:
Olympus 17/1.8
Panasonic 14/2.5.
Wide angle (21mm-e) adapter for the Panasonic 14/2.5
Fisheye adapter for the Olympus kit lens.

The replacement scenario for the legacy lenses looks like this:
Nex 5n + focal reducer
Nikkor 105/2.5 (glow!)
Nikon Series E 50/1.8 (different glow!)
Nikkor 45/2.8 GN (a nice Tessar formula)
Nikkor 35/1.4
C-mount adapter for Micro 4/3
No-name 25/1.8 c-mount tv camera lens.
All of these lenses have their own undeniable character, but I can't say that any have ever been essential to my photography.

To contextualize: I currently use a Fuji X100 classic, Nikon V1, Fuji X-E2 + 35/2 and Sony A7II with a Zeiss 35/2.8 + a lot of old manual focus lenses.

Right away I would get the newest iteration of the Fuji X100. Second a good, small and fast 1" sensor camera with a standard zoom range, probably a Sony RX100 or a Canon G5X.

Then it gets a little complicated.
Rationally I think I would be fine with a X-Pro2 with a couple of fast primes and the 18-55mm OIS. But I get a lot of fun using legacy glass on FF, and a used A7II is pretty affordable so, I probably think in the same lines I thought earlier this year: if I like two systems, why not have both? To save money just buy low-used older models second-hand. So probably a X-E2 or X-T1 and a Sony A7II again.

Having a case of Early Adopter's Disease, I'd probably buy in 2016 what I bought in 2015: Sony A7R2, Zeiss Batis 25 & 85, Zeiss Loxia 21 & 35, and the Sony/Zeiss 55. This kit covers most of the bases for me (and I can always rent what I don't own.) It's so well suited to how I work that my beloved Olympus E-M1 mostly sits in the closet...

That's a tough question because I don't see any obvious choices in a market where every option has pros & cons. I'd absolutely intend to take advantage of the opportunity to simplify my kit (I use an RX100 and a DSLR and a mirrorless now). But I'd still want things that are hard to do with minimal gear. So I really don't know. What's intriguing to me is a kind of crazy setup:
RX100 (any model)
But that's a small fortune in fixed lens cameras that need to be replaced if they fail, and still a bit of redundancy of purpose (though a consistent user interface between them). The appealing thing about it is on any given day, I'd be happy carrying just one camera (and, obviously, one lens).
Part of the reason I keep looking at new camera & lens announcements is I'm waiting for some system to be the obvious replacement for my existing hodge podge.

I'd get another GR and a used Leica M4-P or M6 for B&W, plus a coupla lenses; less $, used Nikons. If younger and/or more tolerant of EVF's, a new Fujifilm EX-1 body can now be had for under five.

Having just switched to Fuji X a few months ago, and being quite pleased with it, I'd simply replace what I've got.

I would go with Olympus micro 4/3 and the pro zoom lens and primes. The quality is more than good enough for me and the lesser weight and size is a blessing.

Oh my, it would be like a new home with nothing to move!

I would stick with Micro 4/3; so an Olympus Pen F body, the Panny 12-35 2.8, the Panny 35-100 2.8, the Panny/Leica 15 1.7 (my favorite walk around lens), Nissin i40 flash, 3 stop ND filter, circular polarizer, a light tripod, and a smaller bag.

Plus i would have $ left over to take a trip and take more pictures. Sounds a dream actually.

I had to do that once. Around 1979; my Leica M3 with 35, 50, and 90mm Summicron lenses, and my Pentax Spotmatic with 28mm-400mm lenses were stolen. I actually took a year off from photography, but then bought a Nikon FM with 35/2 and 105/2.5 lenses. I somehow didn't know about the 85mm offering, and wish I had, because I never liked the 105mm; it was too long for that niche, and too slow.

I was trying to avoid the expensive Leica option, and in some sense succeeded since I've never owned one since. SLRs had gotten quieter and less shaky, and the viewfinders had improved, so trying the SLR side first to see if I could make do without the Leica was the plan, and I did.

Doing it today...well. I've been thinking about what importance the Nikon full-frame has in my current lineup for some years. I think, if I were starting from scratch today, I'd be carefully examining the Fuji system against the Olympus, and maybe also looking at what Sony is doing but they scare me as not being committed for the long haul or the serious development. Definitely mirrorless if I can possibly make a single system work for me. Probably making some sacrifices on AF capability, definitely some sacrifices on low-light. I want the low-light and AF of the Nikon D5, but my budget doesn't support that, and I'm close enough for a lot of things in the other systems.

Hey, if this is a thorough-going burglar they also took the on-camera flashes and the studio strobes and light modifiers and stands and the hot-lights, right? So I've got that money to put into whatever the new plan is also?

Hmmm... tough one.

If you're other than Nikon or Canon, products are evolving rather quickly. Even in the face of a still camera market contraction. So whatever I'd get could be stuck in time, unless the system was extensible and fully keeping up with trends in the broader electronics industry. Fuji's are simply too large, lack IBIS and besides they're really not an electronics company.

To answer the question: If Sony doesn't introduce an IBIS APS-C mirrorless body, I'd likely go "whole hog" into Olympus with that beautiful 100-400 Panasonic for birds/motorsports, Oly primes, and maybe a fine high-end f/2.8 std-zoom. Otherwise it'd be Sony APC-S with Sigma Art DN's (which I dearly love) and adapters for my old manual focus Nikkors.

You can't edit so I'll add, in my pre-coffee stupor I forgot about the Hasselblad X1D and two lens kit. I'd probably opt for that over the Fuji and still add a 500CM with an 80mm CFT.

Great, now I have a featured reply after I finally found some sort of a first impression review of the Sigma SD Quattro :)

Unless all my gear gets stolen, as in the esteemed TOP editor's scenario, I think the Magic 8-ball says it's "highly unlikely" I'll be getting a Foveon sensor Sigma this time around either.

Not really related to this thread, but the Sigma seems like a poor man's digital medium format camera. Mostly I could deal with having a slow to use camera and not great high-ISO performance isn't really a deal breaker, but this combined with only getting image stabilization in the lens, and it not being available in the lenses I'd want, is a deal breaker.

I guess I'm just not curious enough about Foveon to put up with the possible downsides.

I have been very happy with the Fuji X100S, X-T1, and 11-24, 18-55, and 55-200 lenses, so I would simply update the cameras to the X100T and X-T2. I still have a Nikon F100 and 28-105 lens that I have been meaning to sell but somehow never get around to doing. Having them stolen solves the problem.

Maybe someone should send Nikon/Canon a link to this comment thread - very few so far seem to crave in their direction... Pertinent, in light of your recent columns.

Hi Mike,
It's a fascinating dilemma. Losing my kit would be painful, but having not insured it for the past thirty years means that, in theory, I've built up a nest egg to easily replace it and to also purchase that new Miata we're both lusting after!
The big issue would be...what am I planning on shooting next and what level of quality am I aiming for? I've spent the past few years shooting with micro four thirds cameras and am confident that these can produce the A2 prints and the double page book or magazine spreads that are my personal criteria. They are also light and unobtrusive, helpful if one is out photographing people all day.
So, given that I'm unlikely to turn into a landscape or architectural photographer overnight, I would almost certainly stick with the GX8 or the EM1 cameras, or their successors. If either of them came out with a radically improved viewfinder, one that really works in bright light, that camera would win my vote.

I did a clean sweep when I went all-digital in 2009 after film and darkroom work from the early 70's. In addition to selling all of my darkroom gear (including a densitometer to you), I sold all of my film cameras....4X5, medium format and DSLR systems.... and swapped my Leica M6 and M7 for a couple of M8.2s. My Leica M lenses still worked fine. A few years ago I traded one of the M8.2s for an M240.

The M system has sufficed as my sole digital camera gear since that transition. Expenses have been devoted to the post-processing end of the workflow, where I needed to devote time and effort toward producing comparable print quality in the digital realm.

Starting fresh, I'd get another M and replicate my lenses. And since I'm now pleased with my digital print workflow and results, I'm starting to look for another system to complement the M, possibly the Leica SL or the Hasselblad X1D. Or, if prices eventually plunge on the Leica S007 (as they have with the 006), that might entice.

With age (and retirement) comes a bit of wisdom (and simplicity).

I'd get a Leica M Typ262, a 50mm Summicron, a 50mmm C Sonnar, a 35mm Summilux, a 35mm C Biogon, a 28mm Voigtlander Ultron, a 90mm Canadian Tele-Elmarit, and a Ricoh GR for my purse.

Mark Kinsman pretty much nailed the perfect system for me, but if I had a limited budget it would be Fuji X-T2, 14 f/2.8, 18-55 f/2.8-4, 55-140 f/2.8 plus the excellent 1.4X extender. That would likely cover me for 99.5% of my shooting scenarios. And an X100T as my 35mm FOV go-everywhere camera.

If it happened now, I'd go with the Sony A7 line. If it happened in 10 years, when I'm retired and with time on my hands, it would be an 8x10 view camera, a 12" Dagor, and a pile of film.

I would first buy another Ricoh GR, my favourite digital camera for the last few years.

Find another nice Leica M4 and lenses, wait until they produce a digital M that I would want to use.

Consider the Fuji X series, but only when they cease the failed X-trans experiment.

I would stick with Nikon. On a system rebuild, I would opt for a pair of D750 bodies. I like the weight reduction enabled by the monocoque construction and I think 24 MPx is the sweet spot for full frame. I would avoid the bazooka-like f/2.8 zooms and opt for a collection of primes -- the f/1.8 series being fine for my needs, of reasonable weight, and priced more reasonably than the f/1.4 series. I would not be afraid to fill in voids in the line with used AIS lenses (e.g. 105mm f/2.5). I would not bother to replace my DX bodies.

No question that I'd immediately replace my Nikon D810, but now my closet would probably contain maybe five lenses -- Nikon 14-24mm, Sigma 50mm Art, Nikon 85mm, Nikon 70-200mm, and maybe a tilt-shift 24mm -- rather than the 15 (oy, I just counted!) that it now contains. I'm hoping nothing is stolen, though, until Sigma releases its 85mm Art lens this fall.

Just give me the new Hassy X1D with a normal and a portrait lens and a Fuji X100T, please.

Current camera/lens of lust: http://www.photospecialist.co.uk/panasonic-lumix-dmc-gm5-leica-15mm?gclid=CI-qssT9tM4CFeEV0wod_UIB_w

What a fantastic little package that would be.

I would replace the aging Sony A7 with a new A7ii. I would get another FE90 macro lens immediately.

Rather than replace the Nikkor, Minolta & Leitz R-mount manual lenses, I would get the Batis 85/1.8 and 25/2 for the A7.

I would probably give up the Sony/Zeiss 35/2.8 to help fund some of the above mentioned upgrades. I would probably get another Sony/Zelss 55/1.8.

Replacing the Canon EOS-M system for casual & backup use would be a tough call. For sheer bang for the buck it would be hard to beat just getting another one of those. (w/ 22/2 pancake & 11-22 UWA zoom - probably skip the 18-55 kit zoom...) But if funds permitted, it would be fun to at least investigate a Ricoh GR or Fuji X100.

XT-2 and X100T along with the exact same Fujinon primes and 10-24/4 lenses.

I saw this question earlier this Tuesday morning August 9, and was "then" about to
reply when the telephone chirped and I was distracted.

I currently own a D750, and three pieces of suitable glass, a Nikn F100 which if stolen would mean the perpatrator would have unlocked the safe buried in the basement. And stolen the small AA battery powered point & shoot Canon from the Honda Ridgeline truck.

I'd pocket the money and move on to other things. Have some 35,000 colour slides mostly of railways, ships and motorcycles.
Am slowly sorting these to sell or give away.

At age 70 have no desire to expand my image collections; here in Canada slide film processing is difficult to find, and/or sending film to the US for processing and mounting is just too expensive. Don't forget our dollar is only worth 70 cents compared to the US dollar and can see the value of our currency dropping to 50 cents or less.

What would I do? Go to the local pawnshop from where have purchased all my previous point and shoots, all for less than $50.00 and purchase a cheap in terms of price. camera.

Problem solved.

M2/35mm, M3/50mm and a 90mm lens because everyone needs a 90 they never use.

Under the terms of your hypothetical, I would be a wealthy man indeed, and could basically purchase any gear I wanted. I guess I would start where I left off, as I have been stopped cold by the firewall of current Leica/Nikon/Sony prices on their new FF gear. So: Sony A7RII with a compliment of primes, a Leica M with 16-28-35-50-90, and a Nikon D3 with some nice primes. Oh, I would also need a new computer to handle the mongo-size files these cameras would produce. Probably wouldn't replace the medium format, LF, or miscellaneous smaller sensor (Fuji X-Trans, Olympus, Sony a6000 etc.) cameras.

The interesting thing about this hypothetical is that there is nothing that is stopping me from selling the Wisner 5x7, the Linhof rail camera, the Zone VI 8x10, the Hassleblad stuff, the Leica film stuff, the Jobo Autolab 2000. . . and buying exactly what I have listed above. It is just an attachment to things, a character flaw I believe, that keeps this clutter around. But there it is.

There's no doubt that I would buy another Ricoh GR and another Fuji X100T. After that, I would probably opt to not replace my Pentax DSLR kit. Not that I don't still enjoy it, but if starting from scratch there's no reason to even go there.

I also have smaller Fuji and micro 4/3 ILC kits. One or both of them would have to go. Assuming I kept one of them, if I decided I was not interested in video, I'd go with Fuji. If I decided I wanted a good amount of video to be a part of my hobby, I would pick up a Panasonic GH4 (or GH5), two or three zooms and two or three primes.

And yet... I suspect I would be sorely tempted to kick up a couple of Nikon's new DL cameras with one-inch sensors. Even if I bought all three of them - the 18-50, 24-85 and 24-500 - it wouldn't be much more money than buying three mid-to-high end lenses for any of the other systems that I have now. Those Nikons, along withe the GR and X100T, might do the trick while taking up a lot less space. And no lens changing.

A couple of Sony RX10iii's (I'm brainwashed to believe that professionals should have an identical back-up...) and then I'd take the remaining balance and put it into plane tickets.

I'd buy another Pentax K-1 with either the Pentax 31mm f/1.7 or the Sigma 35mm 1.4. Something normal and maybe a wide to short tele zoom. Or chuck that and by a Sony A7r and a Zeiss lens.


Hasselblad 500 series, Leica M3 & M6, OM3Ti, OM4Ti. Each with yur basic wide, normal and short tele lenses. New darkroom built onto the house. Hasselblad Flex film scanner and top end Mac plus 24 inch printer.

So I falsified my insurance policy - SO SUE ME!!

No doubt, I'd stick with my Sony gear. Between their native E and FE lens offerings, Zeiss Loxia/Batis options and the almost endless number of adaptable full frame lenses (now with autofocus thanks to Techart), the options are both staggering and satisfying.

Wants and needs are two different things.

I'd love to have a Hasselblad X1D, but I what would I do with it. Maybe put it on a shelf, and look at it from time to time?

A CAMBO ACTUS-DB2 with a a 100Mp Hasselblad 6 shot back. But since I've retired I have no need for this type of camera anymore.

Maybe a Sony α6300 with a Zeiss Touit 12mm f/2.8. Nice, but too bulky to fit in the pockets of my cargo shorts, so i'll have to pass.

What I need is an iPhone 7 plus. It will fit in my pocket—and I won't stand out in a crowd.

Hands down, my Canon 5Dsr system and Fuji X-100s

Merely mi dos pesos

I'd buy that ridiculous Leica M-D with a 35 summicron and an 18mm and call it a day. Seriously.

I would replace (or update) some of what I have now. That would include the M240 and M246 Leicas, 6 or so lenses, plus an M6 for film.

Then Olympus EM-1 and EM-5 II bodies with about 7 lenses from Olympus and Panasonic from 14 to 400

A couple of Sony A7r2's with about 5 lenses. Actually, I could well do without theses.

Finally, a good lightweight 4x5 folder with 4 lightweight lenses
from 58 to 240 and some graphmatic holders.

If I were limited to one system, then it would be the Leicas. I enjoy those the most.

Wow. That is tough. It is hard to know, since I have avoided picking up or looking at any new cameras since I purchased my E-M1. I guess I would probably look at Sony, Panasonic, Fuji mirrorless offerings. I don't think I will ever go back to a DSLR. I love being able to see the changes in settings reflected in the viewfinder image.

In the large format world, I would probably try to find an easy packable 4x5 to replace my Crown Graphic. I don't know what would replace my Walker Titan. I would have to a used one. Or maybe a used Deardorff with the 5x7 and 4x5 revolving back. An Argentum Whole Plate camera might do the trick. I don't think I could ever get along with the front standard setup on a Chamonix. Do I need a monorail. Generous insurance settlement? Then perhaps . . . .

If my equipment were stolen, my problem would be that I haven't even bothered to insure my entry level APS-C DSLR and 35mm prime that I tend to use most often now. This is not an overly fancy set of gear by any stretch of the imagination but I think I'd be perfectly happy with a new incarnation of what I currently own and use. I might as well go mirrorless this time (perphaps with a Panasonic GX80/85 that comes to my mind first + 2 or 3 neat prime lenses).

The horror, the horror. If I lost all my gear today I would be loosing coverage from a Rollei 35t up to a Cambo 4x5. 35mm, MF and digi 4/3rds plus FF. Actually my wife and I have been having this discussion recently, if we wanted to pare down, what would we keep or replace. I would never be able to give up film so I would have to have at least a Blad with 50, 80 and 120mm lenses. For digi I would be happy with either a Sony RX10mkIII or a Panasonic GX8 with 100-300, 7-14, 12-35 and a 20mm to round it out. The only thing that troubles me about the Sony RX is that it doesn't go wide enough. If it gave me 16mm 35 equiv. I would have sprung for one already and sold off my beloved Nikon D700 and a boat load of Nikkor glass.

I would replace what I have now. The wonderful Fujifilm X-system.

I sell stuff that I don't use, so probably end up with the same cameras ;-)

I would replace my M262, 25/2.8 ZM, 35/2.8 ZM, 35/1.4 ZM, 50/1.4 ASPH in a heartbeat. I would consider a Fuji X-Pro 2 with the forthcoming 23/2 over the X100T, which goes to work in my bag every day and is my choice for times the Leica is not practical.

Still need a DSLR occasionally. I would swap out the Canon 6D, 40/2.8 and 24-105 for a Nikon D610, 28-300 and a 50.

"I guess I'm just not curious enough about Foveon to put up with the possible downsides."

You might consider seeing what Oly delivers in the E-M1 II. Although what noise there is about the High Res Mode added to the E-M5 II in a firmware update focuses, as usual, on resolution numbers, there is another side to it. The tiny sensor movements that allow increased resolution are also used to expose each pixel location with a sensel of each color. So, no Bayer interpolation.

Imaging Resource did some nice comparisons that show the color resolution advantage. While not the same tech as Foveon, it accomplishes the same thing; each pixel has data for each color.

Oly's original announcement of the feature and current rumors suggest that the E-M1 II will have a much faster HR mode, suitable for hand held shooting.

For me, it's about what I would NOT buy again, not what I would buy. I'm very happy with my Nikon gear, and older Canon gear. But, I would not replace the Sony NEX 7 - purchased for a specific job that ultimately fell thru. And then like most Sony models fell in value faster than you can say Lytro. Which is the most regretted camera purchase ever by me. As you may know Lytro simply walked away from from their camera's and stopped all updates to their software rending the camera value next to nothing. And while the Samsung NX1 with it's two pro level zooms really is a great system now that I have a Nikon D500 and Samsung appears to be slowly existing the camera business this would also not be replaced.

Is this before or after I have to call an ambulance for the poor guy why injured himself trying to carry all that crap away? Or maybe I should help him?

I can't imagine I'd do anything but replace the stuff I use regularly, and let the rest go. I might buy only one E-M5 II at first, and wait to see what the E-M1 II really offers. Even harder would be to hold off replacing the Oly 12-50 to see what the coming 12-100/4 Pro offers.

It would be nice to think of the lenses and bodies that have become jilted closet queens finding new homes where they are appreciated. Hey!, maybe I should be that burglar! \;¬)>

I'd replace it with the same thing I have now (Olympus m4/3 and iPhone).

Probably wouldn't get the 17mm lens this time though. The 12 and 45 alone are fine.

Ahh. The 'if I won Lotto' day-dream.
I'm currently using a standard workaday photojournalism kit of Canon6D and 5Ds with L series 16~35, 50 & 70~200 plus quite a few other goodies.
Sometimes its way too much, sometimes not enough. So, my photo nirvana would likely be a combo of Fuji X goodness (XT2 + XPro2 with primes) for the documentary and shoot-from-the-hip photography I do a lot of, and the new lust-worthy Hasselblad X1D with its 45 and 90 (wide and short tele) for the more exacting projects.
And yes, it would need to be a VERY generous insurance payout to achieve it.

The comments to this entry are closed.