Change lenses or have 2 bodies?

I carry two bodies most of the time. I use Pentax K-1 mII bodies with manual focus prime lenses mounted, so the pair is fairly light and easy to handle in a single sling bag. I really dislike changing lenses in the field for the reason you indicated... it is usually a fiddly process at the scene, takes too much time, and the moment is usually gone by the time the task is done. Having a second body ready to go is my answer.

There is a street photographer, Alex Majoli, who wore two Olympus C-5060s at once at different lengths from his neck to always be ready and avoid missing the moment. But those are much smaller cameras.

My first lens was a superzoom and I got a second lens a couple years ago which also has ridiculous zoom range from ultra-wide to normal, so I have only changed lenses a few times so far, and only inside the house. It's only few months ago that I got a third lens, a prime, so I have been wonderomg what is the proper procedure for changing lenses outside (e.g. camera facing downward?). I am still nervous changing lenses inside, let alone outside.

I think if you really want to avoid missing the moment, it had better be two identical bodies. Otherwise, I think two lenses and one body is faster. Using the camera should be as intuitive as possible, and two different bodies with different controls would only get in the way.

Alan,

The singular of lenses is lens. You got 2 out of 3 wrong. 😀

Over the past ten years, I only use one camera at a time and with one fixed lens.
And I usually shoot first (take the photo) and think afterward.
I don't have time to manipulate a zoom, the present moment has already evaporated.

It could only be me that swapping lenses should be part of the fun of shooting ILC system. Not everyone would know or happy to swap lenses! If taking away this fun, why not use a fixed lens camera?

Some might never like to swap lens. Can't explain, just feel they just hate to do it. My wife is among them.

Some might say swap lens could miss shooting opportunity. It is true but would depend on how fast we can swap lenses. Max 2~3" might not miss shots as expected.

From various forums I learnt that many might use camera bag not convenient for lens swapping. Nearly most people will cap their lenses while they are not on a camera. Some might perfer to use waist strap.... These would never help on speed of lens swapping. IMHO when you can develop your own fast lens swapping routine, you might find lens swapping will not take a lot of time.

I am shooting with a 1 camera 4 lenses setup. A 24-70 (same for the following lenses), an ultrawide 14-28, a 90-300 and a 35 prime for low lighting. Except the 35, I could swap among the 3 zoom lenses 3~4 times out of 10 shots...

My own flow of operation is as below:
1) never over worry on lens swapping in the field. Lenses, camera and the mount are more durable than we might expect. Dust can be dealt with easily. The right protection might keep the risk of dust, rain or snow onto the sensor low too.

2) get the right camera bag. I perfer a bag which can always at my side or front. No need to unload it (e.g. a backpack). Has a flip top cover for easy opening and closing.

3) set up the right configuration. Best to have lens partition of N+1. N= no. of spare lenses, +1 is for the unmounted lens, so I can store the unmounted lens inside the bag directly.

4) swap lens with 2 hands and a neck strap. So I shall wear the camera on my neck, right hand keep the camera in fixed olace (could face the nude camera down or inside my jacket to protect it from the environment), left hand unlock and unmount the lens, put it back to bag, pick out the new lens, mount it onto the camera.

5) all lenses will be uncap (front and back, having hood attached to avoid finger print) before starting a shooting session. Just to cap the unmounted lens, store it, and uncap the new lens could take up more than a few seconds before the lens can be mounted on to the camera. Also we need both hand to cap & uncap the lens might put the nude camera in risk against the environment too.

The above works well for me. I am size and weight concern. I would avoid carrying more than 1 body as much as possible.

For certain special conditions, e.g. ball game, safari touring, tracing birds or war zone, I could imagine swapping lenses might be impracticable, multi cameras could be better.

My 2 cents.

My goal is to be able to walk and change out a lens in roughly 10 seconds. I can generally do that for most of my lenses with the exception of my 100-400 which takes me probably about 10 seconds more and requires me to stand still.

Albert does something similar using a camera bag. Instead I keep my spare lenses in lens cases on a heavy duty web belt. There are several advantages. First a camera bag is typically uncomfortable for day long use due to the straps digging into my shoulders. A camera bag is a fixed size. With a belt the weight is on my hips and I can pick any number of extra lenses depending on the type of shooting session. Typically I might start with a wide to medium zoom on the camera and a short range telephoto in one lens case. I often shoot macro which means a dedicated macro lens and a speedlite. That could be quite a load for a bag but is no problem with cased lenses on a belt.

Changing a lens is quick. I start with the camera hanging on a neck strap. I push the camera lens release and slightly rotate the lens. I grab my new lens choice from its case and remove any caps. I twist and remove the existing lens with my left hand while bringing the new lens into position and attaching it with my right hand. It is virtually one motion with the camera open to the air for only a fraction of a second. I then cap and store the lens in the empty case.

Up to about 4 months ago, I was dead set against carrying more than one body. Could not see the point of it. After all, we buy interchangeable lens bodies, for exactly that reason.
Them, out of curiosity mainly, I bought a Panasonic G100. At a stupid price. Like less than $500 Au brand new. For a small, lightweight everyday everywhere camera that I wasn't particularly worried about, should I damage it. Doing stupid things. Like jumping my mountain bike with camera on board.
Turns out I really really liked it, and when I spotted another for much the same stupid price, I bought it. As a backup, or should they vanish from the market. Popped my Panasonic Leica 9mm f1.7 on it, and thoroughly enjoyed it. I got to thinking, and popped my Panasonic Leica 15mm f1.7 on the spare body, the rest is history. I'm a convert. I still pop my Panasonic Leica 25mm f1.4 in my bag, or Siggy 30 1.4, and occasionally throw in either my Panasonic Leica 50-200, or Lumix PZ 45-175 of in going somewhere that warrants them, bit the PL 9 is basically stuck to one body.
So I now carry 2 bodies, but still change lenses, as the great majority of time I shoot faster primes. Don't even notice the weight, a G100 weighs about 340 grams and I'm carrying a few lenses anyway, uses the same batteries, charger, SD cards, post processing is identical and gives the same colour, contrast, everything, there's not much to dislike.

you have stressful life... may be limit the (focal range of) moments you chase ?

We (my better half and I) do mostly go out for a hike of something else with at least two bodies each. One body specific for tele and the other for wide to standard
I do carry a third with film (same brand so I can use one set of lenses on all three bodies)
And some time we do challenge our self with going somewhere with a single body and single lens 😁

I always mean to type "lens" but for some peculiar reason it seems to come out as "lense" half the time. I'm just happy to see that I'm not the only one...

As long as you do'n't type 'the len is tack sharp'

For me? Two bodies. The Tamron 35-150 / 2.8-4 VC is "glued" on my 6D2, all other lenses I use on my R. I think a three body solution might even be better (for me).

In my DSLR days, I used a single body with a so-called "super" zoom lens, D7000 with first the 18-200, then the 18-140. I know I was missing resolution, but when I shoot steam locomotives I don't want the distraction of lens-changing for safety reasons. Then, for travel, the same setup for convenience reasons.

With my Z 6 came the 24-70 lens, a quite capable lens for that focal length range. However, I missed the ability to crop the scene with as with my previous lenses, so I bought the F-mount AF-P 70-300 fill that need. Tomorrow, I'm going to ride a train with all that kit, the 70-300 mounted to the old D7000 so I don't have to swap lenses to use it.

Now that Nikon has good zoom lens alternatives I'll probably procure one when the budget allows...

I don't mind changing lenses and I don't feel like I'm missing opportunities often while changing the lens, so it's just a single body at a time for me.

I started using two bodies way back when, I discovered I missed a lot of opportunities because I had B&W, instead of colour film in my camera. So I used to carry one camera with monochrome film and the other with Kodachrome. When I was shooting performing arts, I had two bodies to always have the camera available. Having more than one body just became a habit.

With digital I usually buy one body new and a second body SH. I then forget which is which! With digital, it is to avoid lens changing and the ever present threat of dust.

Having a spare is useful too, if your main camera needs to be serviced or repaired.

Doing that while in a moving Zodiac with water splashing around is tough. I use 2 bodies in those sorts of scenarios. But in others, like wanting to stay lighter while hiking, I’ll take one body & 1 or 2 lenses, depending on expected reach needs, and change lenses. Really depends on the scenario.