What brand of DSLR do you use?

What brand of DSLR do you use?

  • Total voters
    625
  • Poll closed .
All Canon's. Currently use 5D, 5D mk2, 1D mk2n, 1Ds mk2. Prefer the 1 series bodies. Funny when I am working I like a big heavy camera, but when I go out for me I like them small and light, go figure.
 
celluloidprop said:
Sold my D700, currently X100 only.

I miss the quality of the D700 and good glass, but I can't remember ever being excited to haul it out on its big BlackRapid strap or wander around with six pounds of D700/24-70 for an afternoon.
Click to expand...

Lazy bazztard!

Just kidding moved away from DSLR with the selling of my 5D kit a while back and much prefer a light weight kit such as a film M or an X100.
 
Fujifilm S5 Pro

Fujifilm S5 Pro

Fuji digital sensor running on the Nikon D200 body. Testament to the Nikon D200 shutter as the camer has over 287,000 shutter actuations and has required no service. All the excellent color characteristics and flesh tones of the Fuji sensor and still running strong. Best portrait digital I have ever used.

I've shot Canon and Nikon DSLR and nothing touches this Fuji for color rendition, although my Kodak sensor Olympus E-400 is close.

Yes, that's three zeros after the three digits on the shutter clicks... 287,000 plus.
 
I'm also shooting with an S3, my first DSLR. I bought it this year for $200. It's color rendition and dynamic range were the deciding factors to go with a Fuji, and I'm now a Fuji fanboy having just bought an X100.
 
I just won a Rebel T3 kit in a contest, and immediately bought the Fotodiox adapter for my Olympus glass and will getting one for the wife's Nikon glass. I've never used a DSLR before. I'm finding it very fun, and really enjoying the video option.
 
Well, I picked Neither....
But, things change, and I acquired a nice Nikon 24mm f/2.8 AiS, and I own a Micro Nikkor 55mm f/3.5 Ai'd. and a Nikkor 135 f/2.8 Pre-Ai, I use on my Panasonic G3, but, that is nice range of primes in 35mm, so I see a Nikon Body in my future.
 
I think often - especially amateurs like myself, put the "cart before the horse" in terms of "what DSLR to buy". Look at the available lenses. DSLRs? Fairly generic, especially in the APS-C sensor size. Quibbles over noise at ISO 68 bazillion and other pixel peeping concerns and nonsense over menus are over-weighted and subjective. How good are the lenses? What focal lengths are available? How much do said lenses cost? Therein is where the real product differentiation exists. I often lamented that an affordable, fast "nift-fifty" equivalent with stellar IQ that didn't require a kluge adapter, that is - was designed for their modern camera line-updidn't seem to exist in the APS-C DSLR lens spectrum, regardless of who manufactured the camera body. Once I get the camera, I'm gonna do a set-up and shoot APS-C 99% of the time anyway with auto-ISO up to 1600 and leave it the hell alone for the most part anyway. When Nikon came out with the $200 35/f1.8 AF-S. Done. That was it. Had Pentax or Canon or any of the others come out with such a lens in this price-range, I'd be shooting a Pentax or a Canon or a Sony or whatever...
 
NickTrop said:
When Nikon came out with the $200 35/f1.8 AF-S. Done. That was it. Had Pentax or Canon or any of the others come out with such a lens in this price-range, I'd be shooting a Pentax or a Canon or a Sony or whatever...
Click to expand...

I'm still waiting for someone to come out with a very good 35/2 equivalent for their APS-C line (ala the Zeiss 24/1.8 for Sony's NEX line). I guess it's not going to happen, especially if EVILs eat away at the budget dSLRs.

That's where all the wonders of the Pentax dSLR line fail for me - their prime lenses are generally pretty slow. Or, in the case of the 31/1.8, very expensive when combined with a body.
 
I have Olympus DSLRs at present. Although I haven't used them much in the past three quarters of a year - the Ricoh GXR and Leica M4-2 have eclipsed my SLR use.

The ancient E-1 is my favorite, although the current E-5 is lightyears of it technically. Olympus' higher end lenses are second to none in the SLR world, imo, and I use some favorite old Nikkors with these bodies too.

In DSLRs: had Canon, had Pentax, had Panasonic, used Nikons. I'd rather put my money into an M9 at this point, but I still need an SLR for certain types of shooting. Less and less, though.
 
I'd suggest waiting for the 5D Mk III at this point.
Also, the 50mm f1.4 or the 85mm f1.2L.
I wasn't too thrilled with the 50mm f1.2L

GeorgeH said:
Wife "borrowed" my Canon 50D so, I bought a Nikon D7000 with 35mm f/1.8 and SB-900. Preferring Canon, I will likely swap the Nikon kit for a 5D mk II and 50L. A single prime seems to work best for me when out and about.
Click to expand...
 
What about the Sigma 30mm f1.4?

celluloidprop said:
I'm still waiting for someone to come out with a very good 35/2 equivalent for their APS-C line (ala the Zeiss 24/1.8 for Sony's NEX line). I guess it's not going to happen, especially if EVILs eat away at the budget dSLRs.

That's where all the wonders of the Pentax dSLR line fail for me - their prime lenses are generally pretty slow. Or, in the case of the 31/1.8, very expensive when combined with a body.
Click to expand...
 
celluloidprop said:
Sold my D700, currently X100 only.

I miss the quality of the D700 and good glass, but I can't remember ever being excited to haul it out on its big BlackRapid strap or wander around with six pounds of D700/24-70 for an afternoon.
Click to expand...

D5100 + Nikon 35/1.8 AF-S would seem to be your answer, to me. It's a cheap lens - $200, but it's a damned good one and the D5100 is a heck of an APS-C camera - by all accounts, and compact. (I have the D5000 - no complaints...) It's not as small as the X100, but honestly it's the same size as the D5000, which I throw in a cheap-azz $15 sling bag with only the Nikon 35/1.8 - good to go. Size/weight is simply not a concern, and I can't imagine anyone complaining about the images coming out of that thing. While full frame is wonderful - the camera bodies are pro-sized monstrosities. They're for event or studio photographers, imo. No thanks. Might as well be walking around with a Kiev 60. If you want to go cheap, cheap I've seen refurbed 5000's here and there still for around $450. I have no issues whatsoever with this camera. That Nikon 35/1.8 is truly a steal. - One of the best deals in photography right now, imo.

Like I said in my initial post - available lenses far and away - first consideration, whatever camera body second, doesn't matter - they're practically the same cameras, really... minor differences. Advantage with Nikon is the ability to attach practically all their lenses to their DSLRs without kluge adapters. Done with those stupid things. Sorry. Others welcome to disagree... But I don't even want to use Nikon legacy glass, since you lose most functionality - the fab metering capabilities, auto focusing, etc. Plenty of stuff in the AF-S line for their entry-level cameras. Eventually my line-up will be a legacy 24/2.8 AF (will have to focus manually - but it's chipped), their ultra-cheap 50mm 1.8 as a portrait lens (another super bargain lens by all accounts...) So, I'll have 35, 50, and a short tele portrait lens (little shorter than I'd like but I can live with it...) - all good quality lenses, all readily available, all very inexpensive in relative terms. Focal length bases covered without squandering silly dollars - the Nikon advantage... And also, in the case of the 24mm ("35" lens) - Hey! I can focus manually "properly". (I laugh, really, when people complain about how hard it is to use the kluge "manual focus" feature on lenses designed for auto focus only... Just get an old "designed for manual focus" lens. This is another advantage over cameras like the X100 - absolutely NO issues with maunal focus. Just grab the ring and focus the lens like normal.)

But truthfully, I'm in no rush, as I was, am, always will be a 50mm shooter. I'll be patient and pick these up when I can "steal" them (figuratively, of course) used somewhere.
 
Started with a Nikon D80, but didn't like the meter (or the lens selection at that time). Switched to a Canon EOS 40D soon after, but now happy with a Canon EOS 5D Mark II. On a side note, I find that Canon viewfinders provide better eye relief for eyeglass wearers than Nikon viewfinders.
 
it may be crazy , but I still love my 4/3rds Leica Digilux 3 and Pansonic L1 body , both now fitted with lightweight Panasonic zooms plus adapted Rokkors .

The Pansonic G1 is a kind of almost-compact with CV 35 f2.5 [ 70mm equ ] borrowed from the M8 . The Rokkors get pressed into service too .

Ultimately ? All electronic Sony A35 with 35mm prime , which returns me to my Minoltas with 50mm/45mm way back when .
The sensor will provide all that I need , and I have MInolta AF zooms from the old days .
 
dee said:
it may be crazy , but I still love my 4/3rds Leica Digilux 3 and Pansonic L1 body , both now fitted with lightweight Panasonic zooms plus adapted Rokkors [...]
Click to expand...

I always found them to look quite as rangefinders with conventional controls, which is nice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom