Currently the BEST Camera Company?

Currently the BEST Camera Company?

  • Leica

    Votes: 115 22.2%

  • Cosina Voigtlander

    Votes: 79 15.3%

  • Canon

    Votes: 79 15.3%

  • Pentax

    Votes: 16 3.1%

  • Sigma

    Votes: 1 0.2%

  • Fuji

    Votes: 10 1.9%

  • Nikon

    Votes: 128 24.7%

  • Olympus

    Votes: 21 4.1%

  • Panasonic

    Votes: 30 5.8%

  • Ricoh

    Votes: 14 2.7%

  • Sony

    Votes: 5 1.0%

  • Other

    Votes: 20 3.9%
  • Total voters
    518
RayPA

RayPA

Ignore It (It'll go away)
Local time
9:09 AM
Joined
Jan 28, 2005
Messages
4,417
I struggled a bit with the word 'company'. I almost used manufacturer and brand. Anyway, considering the things you like to see in a camera producer (e.g., product line, innovations, quality, etc.) which company in your opinion is currently the best at producing cameras? I only get 12 choices, so use Other if your choice isn't listed. Explain your choice if you want.
 
Gandolfi, followed by Alpa, followed by Leica.

Unless you prefer smaller cameras, in which case, reverse that order.

Cheers,

R.
 
Sticking to the things I've at least fondled,

Zeiss
Linhof
Canon
Leica

William
 
Sony, overall, is producing the best value for the buck right now. Their FF DSLRs are excellent quality and value. I would move over if they accepted Nikon Pro glass. Panasonic is trying to compete.

The Sony/Minolta/Konica has produced better equipment then individually did within the last 5 - 10 years. I wonder what Leica airing with Canon would produce within 5 years? Not just keepinf up but forging ahead of the pack - they haven't done that in over 50 years.
 
Like hitting a moving target. As what you want to do with a camera changes so do your requirements as to what type of camera you want or need. It is not really possible to answer that in any way that makes sense for everyone universally.

Bob
 
Traut said:
I wonder what Leica airing with Canon would produce within 5 years? Not just keepinf up but forging ahead of the pack - they haven't done that in over 50 years.
Click to expand...
Well, no. Apart from (a) keeping RFs in production (b) introducing through-lens metering on RF (c) making the sharpest, contrastiest, fastest RF lenses, consistently, for most or all of that era... (Yes, I'm aware of fast Canon lenses, and the Voigtländer 35/1.2, which is why I say 'most or all...')

And what's Canon done? Dropped out of the RF market in the early 60s to concentrate (very successfully) on SLRs.

Sony? Great electronics company. I'll judge their cameras better when they have Leica's track record.

Cheers,

R.
 
Personally I would pick Cosina Voigtlander, but looking at the big picture I voted Pentax.
They have the best values in the DSLR market, have the coolest lens lineup and offer the best warranty for Canadians.
Panasonic would be second except I had such an awful repair experience with my LC1 I doubt I will ever buy one of their cameras again.
I own more Leicas than any other brand but I don't think they're such a hot company right now because most of their gear is way over-priced. I was only able to afford a new 28mm Elmarit because of the rebate program they offered and good deal on a trade-in at my local Leica dealer.
 
photogdave said:
Personally I would pick Cosina Voigtlander, but looking at the big picture I voted Pentax.
They have the best values in the DSLR market, have the coolest lens lineup and offer the best warranty for Canadians.
Panasonic would be second except I had such an awful repair experience with my LC1 I doubt I will ever buy one of their cameras again.
I own more Leicas than any other brand but I don't think they're such a hot company right now because most of their gear is way over-priced. I was only able to afford a new 28mm Elmarit because of the rebate program they offered and good deal on a trade-in at my local Leica dealer.
Click to expand...

If it's so over-priced, why do you own so much of it? You must have a VERY high opinion of it, in order to pay what you regard as an unreasonably premium.

Cheers,

R.
 
Roger Hicks said:
If it's so over-priced, why do you own so much of it? You must have a VERY high opinion of it, in order to pay what you regard as an unreasonably premium.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...
There's this crazy new concept called buying second hand. I can buy well-made equipment in good shape for much less than the equivalent costs new.
I highly recommend it.
 
Cosina Voigtlander for going against economy and army of high tech digital cameras, and energizing RF culture once again.
 
Hi,

I vote for :

- Pentax (Best price/Quality ratio)
- Olympus (Superb line of lenses)
- Ricoh (Innovative company and the best small camera "GRD")
- Nikon (Best pro/advanced camera)

Sorry cannot vote for just one.

Yvan
 
photogdave said:
There's this crazy new concept called buying second hand. I can buy well-made equipment in good shape for much less than the equivalent costs new.
I highly recommend it.
Click to expand...

...and unless someone buys it new, the company will cease to exist. Not such a crazy new concept. And you were boasting about your new 28 too. Another crazy new concept?

What you mean is, it's the best; it's very expensive; and you usually can't afford it new.

No shame in that. Most of my Leica gear was bought second hand. But the reason it's so expensive new is because it's so good. Not because it's overpriced. Quality costs money -- a point that is all too often forgotten.

Cheers,

R.
 
I think a Graflex beats a Practika, but htat's just my personal opinion; neither, to the best of my knowledge, are in current production though.
 
I favor my Nikons if I do not use Leica. Leica`s prices have gone obscene although I don`t believe it is totally their fault. German labor laws make business difficult, so does the the falling dollar, and the low volumn they are being forced into.

Been happy pretty much with three Nikons including the D700.

Canon makes a decent camera also and would be my second choice.


Probably would get a Sony with Zeiss optics as a third.
 
Roger Hicks said:
...and unless someone buys it new, the company will cease to exist. Not such a crazy new concept. And you were boasting about your new 28 too. Another crazy new concept?

What you mean is, it's the best; it's very expensive; and you usually can't afford it new.

No shame in that. Most of my Leica gear was bought second hand. But the reason it's so expensive new is because it's so good. Not because it's overpriced. Quality costs money -- a point that is all too often forgotten.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

I wasn't boasting about my 28. I only said I bought one.
All I'm saying is I didn't vote for Leica as the best CURRENT camera maker because it's over priced. I the 60s and 70s the price gap between Leica and the Japanese companies was smaller.
I know quality costs money and Leica makes some high quality stuff. I love their stuff. You really read my first post the wrong way.
 
Well made equipment is worth the extra up front cost. Paying for features you don't need is money down the drain. When was the last time you used the self timer? At one time Leitz offered the self timer as an option on the M2. With a self timer it was $250 but only $200 without it. Could Leica sell an M today for 20% less if the self timer was left off? Probably, and they'd sell a lot more cameras if they were 20% cheaper.

Paying for impecable finish is money down the drain, at least for a serious shooter or pro. For a camera with limited production and sales, offering silver chrome, black chrome, and black paint ups the cost for all three of them. Oh well, maybe I'm just not a fondler at heart.

http://thepriceofsilver.blogspot.com
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom