Keeping an old outdated camera as backup. Keep to use?

So last month I bought a new camera 5D Mark III, to replace my Mark II.  I had upgraded my Mark II from the original 5D.  I originally kept the first 5D thinking I would want to keep it in case I need to use it.  As I'm sitting with 3 camera bodies now, I'm realizing that there's a really good chance I will most likely not use my 5D or my 5D Mark II again.  At least that is what happened when I upgraded to the 5D Mark II in the past.  Mainly because, why use outdated tech when you have something that is better?  There is no reason to do so. 


Do you agree? 

It depends on the type of job you do. 

I did a wedding about seven years ago when my camera gave problems.
There was no time to fiddle. I immediately went on to my back-up.
When I had time to fiddle, I got it going again, but I will never be without a backup.
Old tech? I will do a whole wedding with an old 5D today.
If I were you I'll sell the 5DII and buy another lens with the money.
Why carry around a camera still worth good money as backup if you might only use it once in the next 5 years?
By then it lost another few $100's value.

When I got my D5000, I kept my D70 as a backup. Then got my D7000 and gave the D70 to a niece. I prefer the D70 to the D5000 but it just didn't have the resolution I needed for what I do.

My wife uses my old camera

I set my older cameras on display and they are quite an attention getter. I find selling them just isn't worth the time for the little money they usually bring. I have only sold a couple in the past and regretted it every time. You have to decide these things for yourself, of course....

Still have all of  my older DSLR's & use all but the oldest . That one's relegated to my car just so I always have a camera with me... Plus it is a CCD not a CMOS  sensor & takes better IR images with the R72 IR pass filter.

I did have an old one and yes it never got used, so I gave to brother to have

 Nice collection of gear, well it's nice to have a spare.  You just never know. 

Hassner wrote: It depends on the type of job you do. 

I did a wedding about seven years ago when my camera gave problems.
There was no time to fiddle. I immediately went on to my back-up.
When I had time to fiddle, I got it going again, but I will never be without a backup.
Old tech? I will do a whole wedding with an old 5D today.
If I were you I'll sell the 5DII and buy another lens with the money.
Why carry around a camera still worth good money as backup if you might only use it once in the next 5 years?
By then it lost another few $100's value.

 There are people shooting weddings with Polaroids.  Not about the camera, it's the photographer (as I'm sure you know). 

Eh, not really.  All I need is one main body and mirrorless for backup would be nice.  

I would keep one as an abuse camera along with some cheap glass. Then you have a kit that if it gets damaged you have nothing to be upset over. Call it your riskier shots camera. 

Joves wrote: I would keep one as an abuse camera along with some cheap glass. Then you have a kit that if it gets damaged you have nothing to be upset over. Call it your riskier shots camera. 

+1

On the second day of a recent two week trip to France, I took a flying header in a church in Normandy, while fully encumbered with a D3s with 14-24mm f2.8 mounted to a monopod, which ensured I could not avoid crashing. What immediately came to mind was that my trip wouldn't be ruined, as I watched pieces of the lens hood of the 14-24 skitter along the old stones, because I lugged the D7100 as backup. I got the 7100 when my wife expressed an interest in my D200, which had been my backup until then. So, yes, I think keeping an old camera for emergencies makes sense, and Ernesto has the right idea as to which to keep.

John Landolfi wrote: On the second day of a recent two week trip to France, I took a flying header in a church in Normandy, while fully encumbered with a D3s with 14-24mm f2.8 mounted to a monopod, which ensured I could not avoid crashing. What immediately came to mind was that my trip wouldn't be ruined, as I watched pieces of the lens hood of the 14-24 skitter along the old stones, because I lugged the D7100 as backup. I got the 7100 when my wife expressed an interest in my D200, which had been my backup until then. So, yes, I think keeping an old camera for emergencies makes sense, and Ernesto has the right idea as to which to keep.

One of my favorite cities to photograph!

Glen Martin wrote:

John Landolfi wrote: On the second day of a recent two week trip to France, I took a flying header in a church in Normandy, while fully encumbered with a D3s with 14-24mm f2.8 mounted to a monopod, which ensured I could not avoid crashing. What immediately came to mind was that my trip wouldn't be ruined, as I watched pieces of the lens hood of the 14-24 skitter along the old stones, because I lugged the D7100 as backup. I got the 7100 when my wife expressed an interest in my D200, which had been my backup until then. So, yes, I think keeping an old camera for emergencies makes sense, and Ernesto has the right idea as to which to keep.

One of my favorite cities to photograph!

This happened in Coutances, in the 11th Century Church of St Pierre. which preceded Notre Dame of Paris.