Your most used, robust and advanced digital camera

[olakiril]

I remember that soon after I got the Fuji X10, I was really stressed out about the "blooming issue". Sold it soon after.
Then it was the GXR-M mount. When I started seeing hot pixels, got stressed out again and sold that one as well.
Then it was time for R-D1. The scare about rangefinder misalignment and old sensor potentially failing, made me sell that as well.
Then it was Ricoh GR. Sensor dust? Camera gone.

These were my favorite cameras out many that I have used, and I regret selling them to this day. I bet they would still work fine today.

My point is that cameras are not that sensitive but even if they fail they will have been enjoyed. Also, each of them have their own "advanced" mode. Whether that being the zooming OVF of the X10, the M-Mount with the tilting viewfinder of the GXR or the 1:1 viewfinder with the retro design of the R-D1, or the tiny size with amazing quality of the GR.

After this experience I have learned to use my cameras to the limit, not being afraid of them braking down which has allowed me to focus on my photography. Whether that is the D800, the sony A7rIII or the Fuji X-Pro.

 

[sojournerphoto]

I remember that soon after I got the Fuji X10, I was really stressed out about the "blooming issue". Sold it soon after.
Then it was the GXR-M mount. When I started seeing hot pixels, got stressed out again and sold that one as well.
Then it was time for R-D1. The scare about rangefinder misalignment and old sensor potentially failing, made me sell that as well.
Then it was Ricoh GR. Sensor dust? Camera gone.

These were my favorite cameras out many that I have used, and I regret selling them to this day. I bet they would still work fine today.

My point is that cameras are not that sensitive but even if they fail they will have been enjoyed. Also, each of them have their own "advanced" mode. Whether that being the zooming OVF of the X10, the M-Mount with the tilting viewfinder of the GXR or the 1:1 viewfinder with the retro design of the R-D1, or the tiny size with amazing quality of the GR.

After this experience I have learned to use my cameras to the limit, not being afraid of them braking down which has allowed me to focus on my photography. Whether that is the D800, the sony A7rIII or the Fuji X-Pro.

Yes, my M9 and M9m went after a free sensor replacement with the original type sensor. Mine just crept into the free period - I reported the issue and sent them in while it was free and they came back with an invoice that Leica waived! I lost confidence in them and knew that further failure was inevitable with that sensor, quite possibly at a time I couldn’t afford to replace it/them. So I stuck with film rangefinders.

I agree with the view that it’s best to use them and not worry, but the M9 had faults that meant it’s useful service life was unpredictably too short for its cost. The Panasonic S1r has very quickly become a favourite and, bought lightly used, is much lower investment.

 

[sojournerphoto]

And the Pentax has gone - via the auction site in a couple of hours. So now the Panasonic will be my most used robust digital camera, even though I'm still very much learning.

Here are a couple from today - the first time out properly for a day with my wife. Both made with the S1r and a Zeiss ZF.2 Distagon 1.4/35. The second was shot at iso6400

Mike

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Latest new camera for Kai W.
https://youtu.be/XHM6Wk2OLYc
Not just reviewed, but actually purchased.

I'm on second camera as his. It is huge and heavy.
But after getting myself introduced to the latest tryout on market from same manufacturer, I have a feeling what Kai W's camera represents last true made in Japan quality for this brand.

Yes, my latest Canon has to be sent to Canon for bad power switch after two years of moderate use. While Kai's camera just works.

Cheap 22-55 USM AF lens on it:

 

[Rick Waldroup]

For years I shot a Nikon D1x and D2H. They were built like a tank and took a lot of abuse. Great cameras, but they are primitive by today's standards. Still, some of my more memorable photos were shot with those cameras. Today, I shoot a pair of Panasonic GX-9s with multiple lenses. I am not sure the Panasonic cameras will hold up as well as the Nikons did, but so far they are doing just fine.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

For years I shot a Nikon D1x and D2H. They were built like a tank and took a lot of abuse. Great cameras, but they are primitive by today's standards. Still, some of my more memorable photos were shot with those cameras. Today, I shoot a pair of Panasonic GX-9s with multiple lenses. I am not sure the Panasonic cameras will hold up as well as the Nikons did, but so far they are doing just fine.

Most "primitive" digital cameras (not cameras in mobile phones) are sold for nearly 10K USD these days.
Known as Leica M11.

My 5D MKII gives no outdated feel in rendering. I have read comments from those who learned photography on EVF, mirrorless, they like 5D MKII rendering, no outdated is mentioned.

 

[Dogman]

Agreed, Kostya. Modern mirrorless cameras are geared more toward video than still photographs. I've never been interested in video so I'm not interested in the camera designs. I still like old Nikon digitals and the OVF of the Fuji X-Pro. My most used Nikons are D700 bodies. Big fat 12 megapixels and they make some nice photos.

 

[hap]

Most "primitive" digital cameras (not cameras in mobile phones) are sold for nearly 10K USD these days.
Known as Leica M11.

My 5D MKII gives no outdated feel in rendering. I have read comments from those who learned photography on EVF, mirrorless, they like 5D MKII rendering, no outdated is mentioned.

Is mK III a better a better choice

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Agreed, Kostya. Modern mirrorless cameras are geared more toward video than still photographs. I've never been interested in video so I'm not interested in the camera designs. I still like old Nikon digitals and the OVF of the Fuji X-Pro. My most used Nikons are D700 bodies. Big fat 12 megapixels and they make some nice photos.

For me something was obviously lost with megapixels war after 12 MP and it went double down with high ISO war.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Is mK III a better a better choice

I would not hesitate to go to the end, IV.
Same old, good .CR2 files. Same and last made in Japan quality bodies.

5DSR is III with cancelation of AA (AA is where Canon sucks), new for 1.5K USD at BH.
I would try to swap my 5D MKII and RP for it, but Canon is not allowing them to ship it to Canuckistan.

 

[Godfrey]

"Built like a tank" describes my Olympus E-1 as well. Superb camera ... zero video crap (much as I fantasize about it, I never use the video capture stuff enough worth having it), superb controls, incredibly good lenses, a bit skint on pixel resolution by modern standards (5 Mpixel). But it makes superbly beautiful photographs and I've won more exhibition notice with photos that I've made with it than with any other single camera in my kit.

Mine is now 19 years old, still looks and works like new, and still makes great photos. Batteries remain easily available, new. I think you can hammer nails with it and it wouldn't even notice. And modern raw conversion technology allow its ancient Kodak CCD sensor to perform amazingly well at ISO 1600 (3200 for B&W). There's a reason why I still find it hard to contemplate selling it and its lenses.

G

 

[Out to Lunch]

Another vote for the 5DMII: great colors!

 

[peterm1]

My most advanced / slightly older digital camera is a Sony A7s. Now objectively an "old" camera by digital camera standards (I think the A7s series is up to version 3 now) it never the less does me nicely in terms of features and reliability. The slightly odd thing about this camera as many might know is that it only has a 12 megapixel sensor. This trade off in megapixels buys the benefit of excellent dynamic range. The camera is also able to take acceptable pictures at insane ISO levels, not that this is something I want or expect to use, but I do like the fact that I no longer have to worry overly much about blown highlights - the bane of my photographic life. And neither do I need to worry much about ISO - for most shooting I can simply set auto ISO in the menu, setting the minimum range to 100 and the maximum to say 12800 and the camera takes care of that. I then shoot in aperture priority or full manual and have the luxury of seldom having to think much about what ISO is to be used as within the above range there is not a hell of a lot of difference in terms of digital noise. Of course I shoot in RAW, deliberately under expose by up to one stop and correct everything in post. Happy days. I should confess that I am not a "spray and pray" kind of shooter ( a hang over from my film shooting days). So while this camera is a daily carry and gets used pretty frequently I cannot say it gets a "hammering". Never the less I think of it as being a dependable weapon of choice.
My other older camera is a Nikon D700 which I also still use quite a bit. It is still the excellent camera it was when I bought it near on 10 years ago. Still going strong. But I must say the Sony camera being a mirrorless camera has the distinct advantage that it allows me to experiment with just about any lens that takes my fancy. For me this is a huge benefit and ensures that it is this camera which now takes 80% of my images.

 

[Archiver]

Is mK III a better a better choice

I have a 5D Mark II, bought new in 2009, and I still use it for paid and personal work, although much less in later years. There is a dreadful problem is shadow banding and noise when shooting underexposed, the autofocus can be awfully inaccurate, and the shutter is as loud as DSLR shutters can get.

"Why shoot underexposed?" one might ask. Try bracketing exposures for exposure fusion for real estate/interior design/architectural photography or landscape and you'll soon find out. The 5D has ruined many such images with heavy banding and cross hatching in the shadows. It's fine for well exposed images, and it may never be an issue depending on the kind of photography you do. The shadow and AF issues were what were propelling me to look at Nikon for a lower cost solution. Eventually I just went to a modern camera.

Right now, I will shoot with my Panasonic S5 any day over the 5D Mark II. The sensor is just so much better, image quality is better, barely any shadow noise and zero banding, AF is more accurate, smaller and lighter, the list goes on. But you would hope this would be the case with a camera made 12 years later.

Is the Mark III a better choice? I think the shadow noise wasn't as bad, and they improved the AF somewhat, but I don't think it was to the extent that I would choose a Mark III over the Mark II. The 6D Mark II actually looked like a better option in these matters, but the dynamic range of this sensor wasn't up to the Sony sensors in contemporary Nikons or later Panasonics/Sonys.

 

[raid]

I went from a Leica M8 to M9 and then to M10.
i stayed consistently with Leica.

 

[Archiver]

Yes, my M9 and M9m went after a free sensor replacement with the original type sensor. Mine just crept into the free period - I reported the issue and sent them in while it was free and they came back with an invoice that Leica waived! I lost confidence in them and knew that further failure was inevitable with that sensor, quite possibly at a time I couldn’t afford to replace it/them. So I stuck with film rangefinders.

I agree with the view that it’s best to use them and not worry, but the M9 had faults that meant it’s useful service life was unpredictably too short for its cost. The Panasonic S1r has very quickly become a favourite and, bought lightly used, is much lower investment.

Not to be all anedotal here, but I bought my M9 new in 2010 and had the sensor replaced during the free period with the upgraded cover glass in about 2017. It has been perfect ever since, touch wood.

The S1R is on my radar at the moment as a complementary camera to my S5, which I'm still really enjoying. A second body with higher resolution and burst rate would be helpful for what I shoot. Do you have any other lenses for your S1R apart from the Distagon 35 ZF?

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I have a 5D Mark II, bought new in 2009, and I still use it for paid and personal work, although much less in later years. There is a dreadful problem is shadow banding and noise when shooting underexposed, the autofocus can be awfully inaccurate, and the shutter is as loud as DSLR shutters can get.

"Why shoot underexposed?" one might ask. Try bracketing exposures for exposure fusion for real estate/interior design/architectural photography or landscape and you'll soon find out. The 5D has ruined many such images with heavy banding and cross hatching in the shadows. It's fine for well exposed images, and it may never be an issue depending on the kind of photography you do. The shadow and AF issues were what were propelling me to look at Nikon for a lower cost solution. Eventually I just went to a modern camera.

Right now, I will shoot with my Panasonic S5 any day over the 5D Mark II. The sensor is just so much better, image quality is better, barely any shadow noise and zero banding, AF is more accurate, smaller and lighter, the list goes on. But you would hope this would be the case with a camera made 12 years later.

Is the Mark III a better choice? I think the shadow noise wasn't as bad, and they improved the AF somewhat, but I don't think it was to the extent that I would choose a Mark III over the Mark II. The 6D Mark II actually looked like a better option in these matters, but the dynamic range of this sensor wasn't up to the Sony sensors in contemporary Nikons or later Panasonics/Sonys.

5D MKII shutter is not loud. I know it after switching to it from 5D. This one was true loud shutter camera.

Real estate photography, I did it only few times and not with 5D MKII, but with RP.
HDR (normal level) makes it next to no brainer for me. I forgot to close aperture once, 16mm focal length saved me from trouble 🙂.
5D MKII high ISO is laughable with under exposure or not. 500D is usable @128000, 5D MKII is not.
I cut it at ISO 4000 and bounce the flash. This is how our daughter used it professionally for night clubs photography.

I use 5D MKII mostly for people and still objects. Never had a problem with AF after I got help with AF settings which worked for me. Before this, it was just stopping to focus. I only use Canon lenses, Sigma and even Tamron are the common AF inaccuracy sources.

My RP is about the same as S5 for EVF. I don't like it for anything serious. Prefer 5D MKII for OVF and easy to deal with AF.

Mark III has AF implemented from 1D series camera, which is superior to 6D MKII AF, which was from something like 80D.

I'm finding S5 sensor to be close to Canon, Leica colors which makes it very attractive as less heavy all weather camera with matching Sigma lenses.

Canon holds me tight for its service been close to home. They are not letting us in still due to Covid, but regular parcel made it within one day so close they are.

 

[hap]

"Built like a tank" describes my Olympus E-1 as well. Superb camera ... zero video crap (much as I fantasize about it, I never use the video capture stuff enough worth having it), superb controls, incredibly good lenses, a bit skint on pixel resolution by modern standards (5 Mpixel). But it makes superbly beautiful photographs and I've won more exhibition notice with photos that I've made with it than with any other single camera in my kit.

Mine is now 19 years old, still looks and works like new, and still makes great photos. Batteries remain easily available, new. I think you can hammer nails with it and it wouldn't even notice. And modern raw conversion technology allow its ancient Kodak CCD sensor to perform amazingly well at ISO 1600 (3200 for B&W). There's a reason why I still find it hard to contemplate selling it and its lenses.

G

That's how I feel about my 10MP Nikon 1 V1 with the few excellent Nikon 1 lenses. Add the M/CX adapter and the M lenses do very well as do the LTM/M/CX combos. Unfortunately, it lays mostly fallow.

 

[bcostin]

My Sony A7RII is my most "advanced" model, I guess, purchased new. The paint is scuffed up and it's developed a hairline crack in the plastic part of the viewfinder, but it works perfectly despite a lot of travel and daily-carry use.

But I've been lucky with my digital cameras so far. I have a well-loved secondhand M8.2 (purchased via the classifieds here) which I use all the time, working perfectly. Olympus Pen models also seem pretty long-lived. My previous daily-carry camera, an Olympus E-P1, is still one of my favorites and has never given me a moment of trouble.

 

[sojournerphoto]

Not to be all anedotal here, but I bought my M9 new in 2010 and had the sensor replaced during the free period with the upgraded cover glass in about 2017. It has been perfect ever since, touch wood.

The S1R is on my radar at the moment as a complementary camera to my S5, which I'm still really enjoying. A second body with higher resolution and burst rate would be helpful for what I shoot. Do you have any other lenses for your S1R apart from the Distagon 35 ZF?

I’m glad your M9 has been good - and hope it stays that way.

I’ve got several Zeiss ZF lenses that I now use on the S1r. 21, 35, 85 and the astounding 135. I’ve also got an old Pentax 1.2/50 and can adapt my rf lenses of course.

In native auto focus I picked up a sigma 2/35 and 2/65. These are actually lovely lenses and shockingly sharp.

it’s all been bought secondhand and the S1r was the first mirrorless body that really seemed to meet my wants and price point! It’s very much a stills camera, although I believe it is video competent. But I don’t really do video so that doesn’t concern me.