Your camera body choice

[O'Rork]

What do you think makes for choosing a particular camera?

A few things to consider;

1 resolution/mega pixels/image quality...you may consider file size and your equipment to handle same

2 quick shot situation ability/shutter speed/focus system speed/continuous frame speed

3 iso/low light ability

4 ruggedness/build quality

5 ease of use/button layout/menu complication (these you can grow into like new shoes)

What's your order of priority? Price shouldn't be considered in this quandary (although many sales are subject to affordability)

My priority is as listed, 1 through 5. Intended use is a consideration, as is considered in my order selection.

If you have other considerations, short of preexisting glass, please explain.

 

[EIngerson]

5D MK III. nuff said.

 

[DorkSterr]

For me it was Build Quality, FPS and low noise and high ISO.

 

[Derrel]

1)camera brand and associated lens fit--Nikon or Canon or ????

2)sensor performance/megapixel count--is it a good imager for its era???

3)viewfinder quality--can I SEE thru the camera easily with my glasses on?

4)viewfinder quality--is it a sharp,clear, large image...or a cheap pentamirror camera?

5)viewfinder quality---again, is it a GOOD viewfinder? If not, I do not want the camera. Case in point: Nikon D700 vs D3 series....the D700 finder is not as good.

 

[runnah]

1 ruggedness/build quality - In my line of work, stuff gets banged up, dirty dusty and wet.

2 ease of use/button layout/menu complication - Don't bury **** in menus. I wan a button i can push or a dial to spin.

3 iso/low light ability - Meh, that is why flashes are invented.

4 resolution/mega pixels/image quality - Again, after a certain point it does'n't make much of a difference.

5 quick shot situation ability/shutter speed/focus system speed/continuous frame speed - PPPPPP Proper planning prevents piss poor performance.

 

[goodguy]

1.IQ
2.Low ISO performance
3.File size
4.Button layout

Dont care about weather seal or ruggedness, I am a couch poteto in heart and anything that is too rough is not for me or my camera anyways.

 

[O'Rork]

5D MK III. nuff said.

And a fine choice it is. As would be several others........But why?

 

[gsgary]

Leica nuff said

 

[Dao]

I am not a pro, so if all my DSLR camera die and I need to get one now, then I need a camera that ....


- Work with my existing lenses and flashes.
- Has top display and 2 wheels.
- Min of 10 to 12 Mega Pixels.
- Do not need to be a ISO king, at least decent at ISO 1600 (or maybe ISO 3200)
- Decent build quality but not too heavy.
- Decent AF.
- Not too expensive. Maybe between $1000 to $1500. (Refurbished or used)
- Video capture.

That's all I can think of now.

 

[gsgary]

Both my Leica's are over 30 years old work perfect and will do for next 30+ years and beyond

 

[bhop]

1. Do my M lenses fit on it?
2. Is the rangefinder patch clear?
3. Are there any light leaks?
4. Do all the shutter speeds sound like they're firing properly?

 

[table1349]

5D MK III. nuff said.

1DX... End of Discussion.

 

[EIngerson]

5D MK III. nuff said.

And a fine choice it is. As would be several others........But why?

First, just due to the fact I have built up my collection of lenses, I stick with Canon.

Other than that, IQ, High ISO capabilities, AF system, build quality, comparison results and camera's reputation.

 

[coastalconn]

Being a birder, my list has different priorities than most.

1 Speed and AF system

2 Build , (I'm always by water, tripping on rocks and laying on beaches)

3 IQ

4 Layout and ergonomics of the body (quick controls)

5 High ISO is important to me, but I'm getting by with the D300.....

 

[bratkinson]

In my case, the priorities changed based on what I had at the time. When I first moved from a point and shoot to a 30D with the18-135 and 55-250 kit lenses, I was happy for a while. I tend to shoot wide and crop later to get extraneous people and/or distractions out of the picture. Having only 8mp to start with I couldn't, for example, crop a landscape format shot to portrait format without a major loss of IQ.

So, when I first knew I had to upgrade, it was 1. more pixels and 2. in my price ranne of about $1000. A 60D fit the bill perfectly.

But as I used the 60D more and more, I was shooting more and more low-light indoors at church with no flash. First I upgraded the glass to f2.8 and faster, and a 24-105 f4L. That helped. But I still found that ISO 3200 was starting to get a bit noisy (I pixel peep sometimes). Also, even though I had all L glass, I still thought the pictures could be a bit sharper. So, at that point, my priorities were 1. better IQ 2. better ISO.

A 1Ds mark iii used was my plan and then out came the 5D3. I had to have that drop dead sharp focusing and ISO that everybody was raving about. Then it became a matter of getting the money together. I bought the 5D3 in November. I'm still awestruck with the sharpness and ISO. A month ago, I cautiously tried ISO 5000 and was blown away by the results. And once upon a time ASA 200 film was 'fast' for me...

Note that build and ergonomics are not/were not part of my criteria.