teesquare Loc: USA

The freedom of choices is perhaps the best tool we have as photographers......
Or, at least those of us that do not search for reaffirmation of our abilities to choose based on "who sells the most cameras"....

:lol:

jack1000

I’ve been dabbling in digital photography for years at the point and shoot level. I always wanted to get into the more advanced levels, but never made the jump until a friend gave me an old 1960s version Canon AE1 with a full complement of lenses a few years ago. I discovered Ugly Hedgehog and began reading and studying. I read post almost every days for a couple of years before deciding on a Sony a7ii with a 28/70 kit lens and an adapter for the AE1 lenses. None of the old lenses are expensive, but I’m having lots of fun learning and am getting great images. One lens in particular is a Vivitar 75-300 (available on line for around $50). I’ve used this lens to get great images of hummingbirds and other animals and used it to record my grandkids receiving graduation diplomas in large auditoriums. If you do decide on Sony, I recommend downloading Gary Fong’s tutorial. It’s a great way to learn every feature of the camera quickly.

lloydl2 Loc: Gilbert, AZ

I go way back to Minolta with my first real camera being a Minolta 101 and ending with the Maxxum so it was a logical choice to move to Sony. I tried an early minolta/konica fixed lens and then picked up the sony alpha 100 when it first came out. About a year and a half ago I went full frame with the alpha 99 (which I love), and also have a sony rx100 m3 which is my grab and go camera that mimics my slr but fits in a shirt pocket and takes fabulous photos...

Jim 100 Loc: Everett, Washington

Like Nicksr, my last film camera was a Minolta. I have a Sony SLT 77 and I think its great.

dnathan

These posts are very interesting. I'm still trying to find out if there is an IQ (+?) or other real life differences between the Leica V-Lux (114) & Pana zs 1000? Keeps me busy when not shooting. :(

4ellen4 Loc: GTA--Ontario

It is not the camera body that makes the quality of the image. It is the glass and the lens construction that give the result of the image. If you check the test results of a lens test of the various brands--you will see that Nikon lens test beat most other brands. The only other brand that is better than Nikon is the Zeiss lenses

planepics Loc: St. Louis burbs, but originally Chicago burbs

I have a Sony A77, a Canon AE-1 Program (rarely used) and just bought a Panasonic LUMIX FZ-200 from another hogger to take on a vacation next year due to baggage restrictions. I'm starting to read up on the 220-page owner's manual. Seems like it's going to be a nice camera...I hope I won't regret taking my DSLR. I'll be in Israel for 2 wks.

Kuzano

Have owned all the Pro models... Great for whites and skin tones... Use Nikon bodies, hence use all Nikon lenses. The S5Pro used the Nikon D200 body and had one over 254,000 shutter actuations. Also liked my X-E1. Looking at the new X-T10.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

Yep, the only drawback to the Fuji S5 pro was that it used special Fuji batteries that looked identical to the Nikon.
Paired with a Sigma 50-150 2.8 zoom makes it hard to beat.

cambriaman Loc: Central CA Coast

I was Nikon for film and experimented with P&S Fuji and Minolta before going back to Nikon DSLR because of all the Nikon glass I have. Experimented with Sony NEX-5 to try out mirrorless interchangeable format and liked it because of the smaller physical size and weight, and articulating LCD viewer but returned to Nikon D800E for IQ. On reading Hog comments I am experimenting with Canon SX-50 and find the size, weight, IQ and articulating LCD plus optical viewer very enticing and very portable. The D800E with 28-300 Nikon lens weighs over 5 pounds the Canon just over a pound. The IQ is very good on the Canon. The next road trip will help me decide what to keep.

Mojoni Loc: Eastern Tennessee

I've had Nikons since the film days. Tried a Canon when I switched to digital but now have been using a Pentax K5 11s for the past few months. I love getting to play with old legacy lenses that don't bankrupt my funds. The older lenses are so incredibly sharp and fun to play with.

Donald Moore

The bulk of older photographers have accumulated a lot of lenses and that kind of controls some brand loyalty. I would love to try new cameras, but the lens expense is staggering.

bigmac115100 Loc: Florida

Sony NEX 7 and a6000

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Canon and Nikon have been the most successful in the market for ages. Canon has the largest share. Nikon has the high end. And yes, we are missing out when we ignore other brands!

Competition is great for innovation, and many companies offer camera features and form factors not available in the major brands.

Sony is a relative newcomer to the game, but grew into it through acquisitions. They make the sensor "chips" that go into a lot of other brands' cameras, including Nikon's offerings. Their bodies are solid, and their lenses are sharp.

Fujifilm used to sell Nikon bodies with their own sensors and electronics stuffed inside. Their claim to fame was dynamic range. But their limitation was not making the whole camera. Now they make excellent X-Series mirror-less cameras and a line of professional grade lenses to match.

Panasonic makes the LUMIX line of mirror-less cameras. Their GH4 is a Micro-Four-Thirds format (m43) interchangeable lens camera that is certainly worth looking at, especially if you care about video. It is currently an independent filmmaker's mainstay, but it also takes excellent still photos.

Olympus is the other major player in m43. Their OM-D cameras are legendary and are favored by many still shooters.

The line of lenses available for Micro-Four-Thirds is particularly extensive, as is the capability of m43 cameras with adapters to fit lenses you might already own. See http://hazeghi.org/mft-lenses.html for the m43 lens list.

The clear advantage of m43 is size and weight reduction. A full pro kit of m43 gear is 1/3 to 1/4 the size, bulk, and weight of a full frame dSLR rig. Of course, m43 also comes with some practical low light limitations (6400 is about the reasonable ISO speed limit), and image size limitations of around 16GB (the sensor has 1/4 the area of full frame camera sensors). Depth of field is also extended by the equivalent of two f/stops over that of full frame cameras. That can be a benefit or detriment, depending on your subject matter.

www.dpreview.com is one good source for information and gear reviews. Check them out; the site's been around for over 15 years. They have about the most extensive collection of lengthy and detailed camera and lens reviews anywhere.

davyboy Loc: Anoka Mn.

which is better chev.,Ford honda dodge? whats the best color?Guess what what ever floats your boat that is indeed the best