Jerrin1 Loc: Wolverhampton, England

It's horses for courses. I have taken two cameras out with me for years; up until recently they were both Canon. My last two 35mm cameras were a Canon EOS 5 and an EOS 10. My last two Canon DSLR cameras were a 7D mark II and a 70D. I traded those in for 2 x Olympus EM1's, but due to my failure to obtain more than about 12% birds in flight keepers I bought a Nikon D500 to solve that problem. I now own a D500 and an Olympus EM1 mark II. I doubt I will change either camera in the forseeable future, as both are brilliant and updateable. I use them according to their strengths in particular areas of wildlife photography; and for me, they are the best two cameras on the market for my style. My choice of cameras and lenses would not suit others, whose style differs from mine.

crazydaddio Loc: Toronto Ontario Canada

Precisely. Under good lighting and no motion (and you dont care about bokeh etc), smartphone will do the job. Cloudy day/indoor, movement...gonna be tough...

peterg Loc: Santa Rosa, CA

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Excellent! Opinions and stories from personal use are fine, but you have to do independent research. I am satisfied with everything I have, but that doesn't mean it's the best stuff available.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Sometimes you have to take other things into account than sensor size and rating. Here is a list I actually used when choosing a camera platform:

Availability of a wide range of excellent native lenses
Excellent adaptability of existing lenses from various manufacturers
Ability to record both stills and video using the same system (body, lenses...)
Ability to record high quality audio with no AGC, using peak meters and headphones
Ability to record 4K video without limits on recording time
Compatibility of raw images with Adobe Lightroom and Photoshop (ACR)
Ability to work acceptably well at ISO 1600
Ability to print 15x20 at true photographic quality (240 PPI from original, in-camera pixels that can be interpolated to 30x40)
Small, light, portable, and inconspicuous — full range kit fits under an airline seat (body, two flashes, two LED lights, two zooms, a macro lens, wireless mic, shotgun mic...)
Weather- and dust-sealed
Excellent battery life
Shutter tested to 200,000 cycles MTBF (mean time before failure)
Cost that leaves room in the budget for other accessories (software, copy stand, lights, audio mixer...)

I couldn't find that COMBINATION in a Nikon, Canon, Fujifilm, Leica, Sony, or Olympus, (or even Pentax) so I bought a Panasonic GH4.

Previously, I had used a mix of Canons and Nikons from 1968 on. I have also used a Calumet 4x5, Camerz Classic with 35mm, 46mm, and 70mm full frame unperforated film formats, Camerz ZII and ZIII with split 70mm unperforated film format, Bronica ETRSi, Fuji 6x17, Mamiya C330 and RB67, Yashica Mat 124G, Olympus Pen F (half frame 135 film), and probably half a dozen other cameras on occasion. Throw in my Dad's Polaroid, my uncle's Argus C44, a Stereo Realist, and a few junky box cameras and Instamatics... Each served a need for something I needed to photograph at the time.

Here's my point: To use the right tool for the job, choose your tools based on your needs. Photography relies on a SYSTEM of components that must work together. You can optimize any one component in the system, but your results are limited by the weakest component in the system. So consider your goals and try to balance things out.

It is nearly impossible to buy a BAD camera today. Lens designs are getting more and more sophisticated with each new generation. The latest gear from ALL the manufacturers will satisfy SOMEONE's needs quite well.

The old mantra that you should follow the crowd because it's "safe" can leave you with a heavy investment in the wrong tools, if you're not paying attention.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Each have their strengths and weaknesses.
What is important to you?

dck22

Or the best for the next person. I did my research, made my purchase and found that what I had was technically great, but not right for me. More research, sell at a loss, and buy again. This time I got it right. (for me)

Fuji

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

I am in partial agreement with your statements. When in 1963 and living in Spain I bought a Nikon F body with a 50mm f1.4 lens I immediately saw that my images were far better than those of my previous cameras, a Konica and a Minolta. Ever since I have been using Nikon not saying that other brands are not as good.
As the years went by I came to realize that a camera and a lens are only tools and that it is the photographer who actually makes the photograph. Indeed, if the lens has good quality the photographs will reflect it.
Selecting a camera is a very subjective matter. Experienced photographers tend to select what they know fits good in their hands, with appropriate ergonomics and the features that will be most useful for them. All modern cameras are very capable and optics are better than ever, regardless of manufacturer.
Now that you mentioned that in the old days the camera brand and name did not make a difference, what about the Exakta, Contax and Leica of the 40's? They did make a difference. What about the Nikon F of 1959, didn't it make a difference? It is obvious that camera brand made a difference.
As I said, today we are fortunate having such excellent cameras and lenses available to us and still the difference resides in some cameras having more features and been better built quality than others but even the so called entry cameras are very capable of excellent photographs.
Sensor size is important and I am sure that your eyes cannot discern the details between a 17 megapixels sensor from another with 36 unless you go to humongous enlargements, that you and I have to look at from a distance because of their size. We do not enlarge to those sizes on a daily basis if we ever do. Noise is better handled by a full frame but that is changing rapidly. Good bokeh with a crop sensor can be easily achieved with the proper lens and technique.
Quality as I said is excellent. Mind the photographer not the camera brand.

Jeffcs Loc: Myrtle Beach South Carolina

Start out in film days;
Canon was first system
Traded in for Nikon
So glad I did go to Nikon lenses I purchased in the 70ds fit and work on my D5 & D500 canon can't do that again glad I went with Nikon
Later for ease of traveling weight/size went 4/3ds Olympus with their pro lenses OMD I mark II and a Pen F
Not giving up on Nikon
So I'm using both systems for different needs
I found it

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

Pentax. For me Pentax since 1977. And much of the glass I already have. In the film days I might have lusted for a Nikon F3, Leica M, Leica R, Rolleiflex, or Hasselblad. But I was seduced by a few Pentax models (I owned a Pentax 6x7 too.) Today, I'll be happy once I can afford and buy a Pentax K-1 FF Body (has a 36MP Sony Sensor similar to the Nikon 810).

father christmas Loc: Goodlettsville, Tennessee

The camera you will carry and USE! An expensive high quality camera sitting at home is useless

Nalu Loc: Southern Arizona

The one in you hand, as long as its Canon.

wj cody Loc: springfield illinois

so true, but don't leave out the K1 Pentax - nice brick of a digital imaging device.

Meeker

This is a very helpful knowledgeable and thorough check list for making a purchase in today's complicated camera electronic industry. In addition, my current dilemma, is sorting out quality control and quality repair services. I, personally, had a 2 year and 10 month old Olympus camera that had a shutter gear case replaced twice and the motherboard fail with no replacement available. In a search for a replacement camera, other quality control complaints have surfaced about knobs falling off, viewfinder burn, and camera strap attachment bracket lug bolts failing. This poses a serious challenge for consumers.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado