Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Haenzel Loc: South Holland, The Netherlands

This, the moving too fast, needs some explanation...

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

My personal opinion is that, in the Nikon line, the D850 would be the best for you. I have owned one since Day 1 and I traded my D810 to get it. While the D810 was not very good at all for sports, the D850 is much much better. Overall, the D850 is a wonderful camera. I use the D5 as my primary for sports because, IMHO, that's specifically what it's made for. After that both the D850 and the D500 are useful. Being a Full Frame body, the D850 is so much better than the D500 for low light shots. When shooting sports, I normally use RAW Medium as my file type/size. I've been shooting sports for over 50 years. Best of luck.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

My personal opinion is that, in the Nikon line, the D850 would be the best for you. I have owned one since Day 1 and I traded my D810 to get it. While the D810 was not very good at all for sports, the D850 is much much better. Overall, the D850 is a wonderful camera. I use the D5 as my primary for sports because, IMHO, that's specifically what it's made for. After that, both the D850 and the D500 are useful. Being a Full Frame body, the D850 is so much better than the D500 for low light shots. When shooting sports with the D850, I normally use RAW Medium as my file type/size. I've been shooting sports for over 50 years. When speed is not the primary concern, or file size is, it's hard to beat the D850, so I use it for everything else. As I am a Nikon shooter, I'm not qualified to speak about any other brand. Best of luck.

sirlensalot Loc: Arizona

In my opinion:
Best color rendition - Canon
Best dynamic range - Nikon
Best / most accurate AF and AF tracking - Canon with Sony a very close second
Best sensor - Sony and Nikon a close tie
Best Value - only you can determine based on your style and need.
Best in low light - would give the slight edge to Sony, with Nikon a very close second, with Pentax a very close third.
Average MP these days is 24. Plenty in my opinion. Keep in mind as the MP increase so does file size and the fact you need lenses that can take advantage of the higher MP. If you are a RAW shooter, your computer needs more speed for up / downloading in PP.
Advice is free - which is exactly what it is worth. Go visit a real camera store when / if possible. Nothing better than face time with a pro.

IMO - lenses are as or more important than camera bodies. Invest in quality glass and you will never be disappointed.

You can find likes and dislikes with all of them. I still prefer my old Canon 5D for portraits and weddings. lol

digit-up Loc: Flushing, Michigan

That sounds like a true “Pentaxian” to me. REALLY!!!...RJM

davyboy Loc: Anoka Mn.

Please don’t listen to the fan boys that say m4/3 can’t produce images that can compete! The Olympus you mentioned can absolutely produce large photos of breathtaking quality

davyboy Loc: Anoka Mn.

You might want to rethink that big heavy D850 sounds like you’re a candidate for mirrorles

nadelewitz Loc: Ithaca NY

Okay, Longshadow. Define "best" for us, so we can all KNOW what we have to buy.

We know (maybe you don't) that "highest price" does not define it.

We know (unemotionally) that Nikon is not the definition of the "best". Same for Canon or any other brand. There are only "preferences".

We know that there are many options that can do what a particular person "needs" or "wants" to do.

Bill P

There are too many things wrong with this question. What are you shooting now, and why do you feel the need to"upgrade"? What will this substantial investment give you? It won't give you better pictures unless you are crippled by inadequate equipment. Too many people think the camera takes pictures, just like a hammer builds a house. A camera is a tool, YOU take the pictures. Most people will see real improvement by shooting more and practicing.

And the other best advice is to rent a D850 and try it out.

davidf_logan Loc: Logan, Utah

Exactly. It is like asking what is the best screwdriver? If you want to hammer nails the question makes no sense. I have a Canon 5D iv that I would never dream of taking backpacking. For that I have a Sony Nex-3 16MP and it is amazing. I have a Sony a6000 for travel.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

The Nikon D850 camera is fully capable of action photography.

However, a lot of action photography means powerful telephoto lenses... and that's where a full frame (FX) camera like the D850 comes up short. In order to have the same "reach" with an FX camera you'll need a whole lot more powerful lens. Where you might use a reasonable size/weight/cost 300mm telephoto on a DX camera, you're basically going to need a much bigger, heavier and more expensive 500mm lens for use on the FX camera (actually it's 450mm, but no one makes a lens that focal length so you have to choose between 400mm and 500mm). You probably won't want to shoot for very long hand holding a 500mm lens, so will probably also want to invest in a fairly sturdy tripod rig. That will make you less mobile.

Yes, an alternative with the D850 is to switch the camera to "DX crop mode". But, when you do that you'll essentially be reducing the camera from it's 46MP image potential all the way down to around 20MP. There are far less expensive DX cameras that give you higher resolution than that!

A ton of resolution like 46MP with an FX camera is generally not necessary, ideal or even desirable for action photography... But it is great for landscape photography, portrait photography if you will be making very large prints from your images. You'll really need to make prints larger than 13x19 before you'll see much difference between what the FX camera produces and images from a 20MP or 24MP DX camera (or now 32.5MP, just introduced by Canon).

An ultra high resolution camera also is very demanding of the lenses used upon it. It's not very forgiving and will bring out any short-comings of the glass used upon it. Big image files from a 46MP camera also require bigger memory cards, fill up hard drives faster and call for a computer with more processing power and RAM to work with them.

In fact, the lenses you choose to use will make more difference than the camera you use them upon. Good glass is more important than all the "gee whiz" features of the camera. FX glass is widely available, but of necessity is larger and heavier. It has to use larger lens elements to cover the larger image sensor. DX lenses can be smaller and lighter... and more affordable. Plus, DX cameras can make full use of both DX lenses and FX lenses. FX cameras essentially need FX lenses (again, yes, DX lenses can be used, but will "hobble" the FX camera for all practical purposes).

I use Canon gear... both crop sensor APS-C (DX) models and full frame (FX). I shoot a lot of action photography, including many equestrian events, and the vast majority with the croppers. Full frame just isn't all that necessary. I've had clients make as large as 16x20" prints from images I made with my crop sensor cameras... no problem! They came out great (even with older, lower resolution models I used in the past).

Below were shot with various Canon APS-C DSLRs with 8MP (30D), 15MP (50D), 18MP (7D), 20MP (7D MkII)...











I haven't tried one yet, but based on early reports the new Canon 90D with its 32.5MP sensor should be a great APS-C camera for many things! That's higher resolution... in an APS-C camera... than in all but one of Canon's current full frame cameras (50MP 5Ds and 5Ds-R). Should be quite good for landscape photography... at least for all but the very biggest enlargements. Plus it can shoot at up to 10 frames per second, matching the 7D Mark IIs that I currently use. It also has a high performance 45-point AF system that's usable with lens/teleconverter combos with effective f/8.

The 90D also suggests we'll soon be seeing an 83MP full frame camera from Canon. They recently patented a sensor with that resolution. Plus 83MP just happens to be exactly what 32.5MP APS-C scales up to in full frame. That's only rumor so far, but I'd put money on a bet that this very high resolution full frame camera will be a mirrorless camera in the EOS R-series... able to take advantage of the new line of RF lenses Canon is beginning to produce. I've heard some rumors of Nikon having a 60MP camera in the works, too. That's likely because Nikon buys some of their sensors from Sony, who just intro'd a 61MP full frame camera. We'll see!

Now that cameras are computers, they are always getting "bigger", with new features added, while costs keep dropping. (Old digital cameras depreciate rapidly, as new models are introduced.)

Really serious landscape photographers.... and some wedding/portrait photographers... go even bigger than full frame. Medium format digital cameras have been available for some time with 50MP and 80MP sensors. Now we are seeing 100MP and even 150MP!

For a lot of things, mirrorless cameras can offers some advantages. They use AF sensors embedded right in the sensor, which means they can have many more than a DSLR (the EOS R has over 5000!) and can focus almost anywhere in the image area. There's also no need to "calibrate" mirrorless AF systems, as may be necessary with DSLRs for optimal focus accuracy. They also use electronic viewfinders that can give you a preview of the image your current exposure settings will produce, as well as assist with manual focusing. However, for action photography, most still prefer an optical viewfinder such as a DSLR uses. Electronic viewfinders draw a lot of power, so 2X to 3X the number of spare batteries may be needed. There also are rather limited selection of lenses for mirrorless... Sony, Fujifilm and Olympus/Panasonic have the most extensive system of lenses for their cameras, but still less than half what's available for Canon or Nikon DSLRs.

Sony makes both full frame and APS-C mirrorless. Canon and Nikon are both relatively new (one year) to full frame mirrorless, so have pretty limited lenses so far, but many in development. Canon has a separate system of APS-C format mirrorless, but it's more amateur geared and has only around 8 lenses available after five years.

Panasonic has just introduced a full frame mirrorless, but has very few lenses for it so far. It uses a mount that several other manufacturers will be using, including Leica. But those will be relatively pricey.

Olympus'/Panasonic's other mirrorless are all Micro 4/3 format. They share the same lens mount, so between them are able to offer a fairly good selection of lenses. The upper limit of Micro 4/3 sensors currently is around 20MP... Most are still closer to 16MP.... But who knows what we might see in the future.

In terms of area... millimeters squared... APS-C sensors are approx. 50% larger than Micro 4/3 sensors (330 to 360mm sq. versus 225mm sq.)

And, in turn, a so-called "full frame" sensor area is over 100% larger than APS-C sensor area (856 to 864mm sq. versus 330 to 360mm sq.)

Still, medium format digital sensor area is 70% to more than 100% larger than full frame! (1350 to 2178mm sq. versus 856 to 864mm sq.)

joncogar Loc: WV

Use caution....buying a high dollar camera and Hi resolution camera won't make your photos better.
Great photos are created by the person using the camera. I would recommend a camera at least 24 megapixel, will shoot raw photos, your existing lenses and can use an add in flash.
Use your extra money and learn Adobe photoshop. With photoshop you'll have the ability to make a bad raw photo
look great. I use a Nikon 7200 with my old 30 years lenses and it takes great photos.
Good luck and enjoy

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

Here's something we just don't agree on. Period. When you use a lens made for a full frame camera on a crop frame body, you do not get any extra reach or magnification. A 300MM on a crop frame is still a 300! Yes, the angle of view changes, but that's all. The moment you switch to a crop frame, you loose the low light ability and tonal range of the full frame. Say whatever you want, but no amount (length) of reply is going to convince me as it's just the laws of physics. A reply is not necessary as what I say represents my opinion only and what you say represents yours. Best of luck.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Hmmm, best - best sensor, best dynamic range, best ergonomic controls, best reliability, best weatherproofing, best.....
As someone stated prior (above), there is no one best camera with the "best" everything in it. They all have trade-off. The best would be the one with the least trade-offs for that person.
We all have opinions that indicate what we believed to be the best.

My comment was tung-in-cheek for "anything less than the best is trash". Tons of people believe that.

Best car, best computer, best TV, best cell phone, ... best is relative, in many cases, to the user. Best for their needs.

Now if an item fails in a short period of time, obviously it is not the best.
But, it could simply be a one-in-a-? early life failure, which could be an outlier, and the product really was the best.

I agree, the highest price does not necessarily mean the best, but better is usually more expensive. Like a burned-in disk drive for $125 vs. one that isn't for $75.
A higher price may indicate better though (ie. plastic body vs. metal, metal lens mount vs. plastic, ...).

Then there's always "best for the money" (biggest bang for the buck).