Poll: Which camera brand do you find best?

[Dave Humphries]

Oh, and 87.2% of statistics quoted in the pub are wrong.

No mate, you're way off, more like 98.7654321% (approx.)

... and my pub facts are in the golden 1% that are true!

[crisscross]

Probably no difference in make between obvious contenders, but Nikon has the advantage, I think unique, that it has a full range of PP software dedicated to the myriad extra goodies included in NikonElectronicFormat (.nef) that can be made full use of in (and only in) Capture NX2. If Canon cared to develop DPP beyond its limited range, in which it is very good, or other manufacturers followed Nikon formula, the choice would be so much wider.

[rpcrowe]

Buying a camera is like marrying into a very large, close knit family. You are generrally stuck with them. It can be a real pain if you don't like the family into which you marry; even if you love your bride! The lenses and accessories available for the camera are very important.

What do I like best about my Canon cameras: the lenses! I especially like two lenses: 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and 70-200mm f/4L IS. I absolutely love this combination of lenses, especially used on a pair of 1.6x cameras because I can cover 90-95% of my photo needs with these two lenses. I don't believe that Nilkon has lenses that will match up with these two. I also like that every Canon 1.6x crop camera from the least expensive to the most expensive and from the oldest 300D or 20D to the most recent issues can be used with any Canon autofocus lens, from the least expensive to the most expensive and from the oldest to the newest with no worries whether the lens has an autofocusing motor built in. This certainly gives a photographer a greater selection purchasing Canon lenses both new and used.

I also love the 300mm f/4L IS and 400mm f/5.6L lenses which allow a photographer to get into long range wildlife shooting at a relatively reasonable price.

[Donald]

Buying a camera is like marrying into a very large, close knit family. You are generrally stuck with them. It can be a real pain if you don't like the family into which you marry; even if you love your bride!

Wonderful explanation Richard. I'm going to save that one for future use.

[Thomas J]

I especially like two lenses: 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and 70-200mm f/4L IS. I absolutely love this combination of lenses, especially used on a pair of 1.6x cameras because I can cover 90-95% of my photo needs with these two lenses. I don't believe that Nilkon has lenses that will match up with these two.

The Nikon 70-200mm 2.8 is widely lauded (for good reason) to be the best 70-200mm money can buy.

But you are right on the 17-55, unless you're on a DX (APS-C) sensor, then the Nikon 17-55mm F2.8G AF-S DX IF-ED is the best you can get, though pretty expensive for what it is.

[Librarian]

I see very little mention of Lumix and the more expensive version......
I can never claim to be more than an average snapper, but I had a G1 and LX3 on loan to play with and thought they were great - had I more financial resources I think I would have gone down the Lumix line - as it is - I'm now armed with an EOS 500d which I bought nearly new. I hope the hands that hold it don't let it down.

PS I remember reading a comment that went something like: " The best camera is the one you are holding when the picture presents itself"

[Glenn NK]

Probably no difference in make between obvious contenders, but Nikon has the advantage, I think unique, that it has a full range of PP software dedicated to the myriad extra goodies included in NikonElectronicFormat (.nef) that can be made full use of in (and only in) Capture NX2. If Canon cared to develop DPP beyond its limited range, in which it is very good, or other manufacturers followed Nikon formula, the choice would be so much wider.

From reading many posts on more than a half dozens photo forums, it seems that very few Nikon users actually use the Nikon software - one of the reasons is that Nikon charges extra for the software. If other manufacturers followed the Nikon formula, then even more people would be using third party software. Canon does not charge for their software.

On the Naturescapes forum where there are many Nikon shooters, I'm not aware of one that uses the Nikon software. By far, most are using CSx and an increasing number are using Lightroom.

Glenn

PS - just for fun, I asked the following question on NSN: "How many of you use the Canon or Nikon supplied software?" The answer should be interesting.

[rambler4466]

Find sites that compare the features of the models you are considering. Then go to test the 'feel' and how easy it is to get to the features you like to use. Your can also rent to try.
http://www.digitalreview.ca/content/...Compared.shtml

[lorenzobix]

I use Nikon. The reason is that my father with the nikkormat first and then with the D80. it was natural to buy an F3 for my film shooting. when i started making serious things, to not make all my lenses useless, i kept stayng in nikon with the D700.
through years i've learned a lot and understanded that i was lucky because for the kind of photography i do, the nikon Philosophy (low Mpx, low noise, fast autofocus) was perfect. Maybe in i started using canon i'd have felt "costricted" and not happy of the equipment? or maybe now i would take different kind of photos? i don't know, really, the answer.
I do not even know how it's possible to compare the two biggest brands (nikon and canon) considering that, excepting the very new nikon D800, the kind of photo they are thought for are very different. then, if we just talk about non-pro cameras, my considerations are true till a certain point because the standard is quite shared between nikon and canon, the quality is guaranteed, and the specifications, for the same prices, are very similar; with the exception, maybe, of the price, necessarily lower for the bigger canon company.
The pro lenses moreover are very high level in both brands, and in my opinion the little differences are very hardly knowable because of the differences i said before and the necessity to compare, in the same time of a lens, also the camera sensor and it's capacity to record light signals, the noise cleaning, acutance, resolution, ecc ecc, of a camera. even comparing models considered of the same level is, for me, not revelatory. Just think about the comparison between Nikon D700 and Canon 5D: 12mpx vs 21, and a bunch of reasons that make the two "second level " pro bodys made for different things.

[lorenzobix]

I use Nikon. The reason is that my father with the nikkormat first and then with the D80. it was natural to buy an F3 for my film shooting. when i started making serious things, to not make all my lenses useless, i kept stayng in nikon with the D700.
through years i've learned a lot and understanded that i was lucky because for the kind of photography i do, the nikon Philosophy (low Mpx, low noise, fast autofocus) was perfect. Maybe in i started using canon i'd have felt "costricted" and not happy of the equipment? or maybe now i would take different kind of photos? i don't know, really, the answer.
I do not even know how it's possible to compare the two biggest brands (nikon and canon) considering that, excepting the very new nikon D800, the kind of photo they are thought for are very different. then, if we just talk about non-pro cameras, my considerations are true till a certain point because the standard is quite shared between nikon and canon, the quality is guaranteed, and the specifications, for the same prices, are very similar; with the exception, maybe, of the price, necessarily lower for the bigger canon company.
The pro lenses moreover are very high level in both brands, and in my opinion the little differences are very hardly knowable because of the differences i said before and the necessity to compare, in the same time of a lens, also the camera sensor and it's capacity to record light signals, the noise cleaning, acutance, resolution, ecc ecc, of a camera. even comparing models considered of the same level is, for me, not revelatory. Just think about the comparison between Nikon D700 and Canon 5D: 12mpx vs 21, and a bunch of reasons that make the two "second level " pro bodys made for different things.

[Tim Bond]

Hi

The same as everyone else has said. The best camera is the one that you can afford to live with. If you are getting most of your moral support from one or two people borrow from them and follow then around, shoot what they shoot and compare. A favorite camera is another matter. Mine was a Miranda Sensorex. Had everything one could wish for except an anti-gravity device. It still works, had it out couple of months ago, but a damaged view-finder leaves a lot to be desired. Good luck on your journey.
Tim

[Big Wrench]

Good luck. There are hundreds of cameras to choose from. I have come to the conclusion that completing a good training program in photography is much more important than selecting a first camera. I heard a good statement about photography: "It's not the arrow, it's the Indian...." that is important in hitting the target. In our case, shooting a great photograph. I'm going to try to go back to basics and concern myself with selecting ISO, a.k.a. ASA setting, shutter speed and, F/stop. Back in the old days, film speed was a concern. Now, it's ISO setting. Of course, choice of lens is very important. Available lighting is a concern, too. The art of being a good photographer depends on the artist, the quality of the paint brush isn't as important as the artist. Good luck. Practice shooting that arrow.

[Big Wrench]

Donald, There is always divorce court.

[Colin Southern]

Buying a camera is like marrying into a very large, close knit family. You are generrally stuck with them.

Nah - a marriage is only a temporary thing, but a good camera is something to be treasured for ever and ever! (OMG - hope my wife doesn't read this!!!)

[Andrew1]

For me it happens to be Nikon.

I started out a few years ago with a Praktica. It was the first one I found that I could afford at the time. I think that was the best camera I've owned. As my abilities and wants expanded though I found it difficult to find other pieces to plug onto it. Up next came a Mamiya. Again, the best I could afford at the time and a few more attachments available. I think that was about the best camera I've owned. Up next was the turning point and became the anchor in all my future purchases. A working colleague had a camera shop on the side and gave me a fantastic deal on the brand new Nikon FM. And WOW! Talk about available add-ons. Most were out of my reach financially but I did manage to get a 35-105 zoom with Macro. I could take just about any photo I wanted with that baby. I think that was about the best camera I've owned. I eventually wore out the shutter on the FM and it was beyond economical repair but I was offered another great deal on a replacement that fit the bill. A used Nikon F3 had been used in a copy stand. It wasn't used very much but the copy stand had worn off a good deal of the lacquer on the base. Nobody else wanted the ugly duckling but it really didn't matter much to me. My existing lenses fit and I added a 70-300 AF. There was no AF on the camera but I got the lens at "cost" and it still worked just fine. I still have and use the F3 but not as much as I should. At Christmas I bought about 20 rolls of fresh on-sale B&W film I have every intention of using up this year. I think that is about the best camera I've owned. When I retired a couple of years ago I wasn't taking many photographs but planned on doing more. At the urging of my wife and son (a BA in photography) I let my wife buy me a (ugh) digital camera. I had lenses and a history with Nikon already so that's the route we went. After a bunch of research the then brand new D300 seemed to be perfect for what I needed. Unfortunately (or fortunately) the camera was just a body so I of course had to get a lens to go with it. My wife understood that seeing as how I was already so well accustomed to the 35-105 macro, the only choice I had was the DX equivalent 24-70 right?? I did get back into photography quite a bit and a short time later my wife commented she thought I was taking too many photos where the subject wasn't showing up well enough. My giving her a quicky lesson on optics and explaining the shortcomings of my kit soon had the addition of a 70-200, just to please her of course. That camera goes with me just about every time I leave the house. I think it's the best camera I've ever owned.

By the way, when my son went into art school I helped him chose his camera and I thought the best for him was a new Canon 30D. I imagined he would have many different assignments to complete and zero money to invest. My "anchor" for him was the ability to rent lenses and in the city we were in, three stores rented many lenses and the majority of what they had available was Canon. That's the only reason. It's worked out well for him as he moved up to the 5D. I imagine he feels it's the best camera he's owned.

[visio]

I love canon

[drjuice]

First, what I like may well not be what you like if you come up with your own evaluation criteria.

I tend NOT to choose the most popular (Nikon and Canon, particularly) because I've found their technical support and repair services inadequate based on my previous experience with both.

I got an alpha 700 at first (December 2006) then added a 77 last year. I chose Sony primarily because I could use my Maxxam lenses, of which I had/have a full kit, on them. IMHO, my Maxxam lenses were/are far superior to the lighter (probably partially plastic) lenses for the other cameras.

That I've got maintenance contracts on my alphas is huge from my perspective because of the really hostile environments where I often work, even if I use raincoats to keep out both water and sand on land. If I'm in a reachable place, they usually have my repair(s) back to me by the close of business 48 hours after I ship. The only hitch is if it would require their shipping it on Sunday which delays it by an additional day, though in at least one case, it made it to me the same day it shipped. (I haven't figured that one out yet!) If I'm in an unreachable place, they do the repairs in the same amount of time, but the shipping and return may take 2-3 additional days in each direction.

I also like Sony's Memory Stick ProDuo technology because it matches up with what comes built into my computers. The great advantage from my perspective is the that the MSPD is teeny so I can carry a couple of dozen of them of various capacities in the volume of space occupied by the memory stick technologies offered by other camera vendors when I was making decisions about five years ago for the 700 and then last year as soon as I came on the 77 at a show.

Finally, I like the work of the pros who are on Sony's Pro Team. They've done a BUNCH to help me make better images.

HTH.

v

[Hani7up]

Nikon D300
Soon to acquire Nikon D800

[Hani7up]

I might also add that the majority of good brand cameras and lenses produce good to excellent images. However, I believe that before buying your camera, you should always go to the shop and handle it, get the feel of it, as you MUST be absolutely comfortable with the camera in order to concentrate on what you're shooting. Inremember way back with film cameras when Olympus introduced the OM 1, people loved the idea and the Zuiko lense were quite good, but the camera did not feel at home in everybody's hand. Also, todays Digital photography is a continuos process, you need to have a certain knowledge of post processing in order to attain the results that you are seeking. Pressing the shutter is only the beginning, the good part is yet to come!

[gsrunyan]

I shoot Sony. The only brand I have ever used when I got my 1st digital (just after the earth cooled).