DSLR Camera Brands?

[Victorious Secret]

Whichever brand you pick, get a 70-200 2.8 lens with it.

I didn't take my 70-200 off all weekend and I had a lot to pick from. These really are the golden gems of any camera bag.

[DoubleY]

Sigma for a body? Eh...

Sigma for glass? They've really stepped up their game lately. The 35mm was a beauty to use and this 18-35 seriously craps on Canon's 16-35 in so many ways.

They aren't playing around these days with their glass

I've been watching tons of videos about that 18-35mm. From what I've heard, it's on par or better than prime lenses in terms of quality. The downsides are

• Super wide angle lens. Not sure what's it's ideal for.
• $800

Overall though, it might be the next lens I purchase

 

Whichever brand you pick, get a 70-200 2.8 lens with it.

I didn't take my 70-200 off all weekend and I had a lot to pick from. These really are the golden gems of any camera bag.

Well, you shouldn't tell everybody to get it. If you do indoor photography, use something like the 14-24 f/2.8 or 24-70 f/2.8

Outdoor photography though... that 70-200 f/2.8 is a BEAUTY. That background compression is  :wub:  :wub:  :wub:  :wub:  :wub:  :wub:

 

Off topic:

This picture was the advertisement on the bottom of the LTT page while typing this post

. 

[Timmyfox]

If you're buying a Sigma camera then you seriously need to reevaluate some life choices...Sigma/Tamron make some good glass, but terrible (*linus voice*) cameras. 

Eh, their Foveon tech is really darn good though, better resolution and color reproduction than anything with a bayer filter.

 

For photos: Nikon >>>>> Canon >>>>>>>>>Sony >>/>>other

I beg to differ. I shoot Sony and I love some of the things they are doing so much I find it hard to shoot other more traditional DSLR-systems.

 

---

Either way it doesn't matter, what brand/model you shoot is essentially the least important factor in taking a good shot. Canon and Nikon are the mainstream ones, I suppose one could say they are the Windows and OSX of cameras and everyone else are all the different variations of Linux. Although the difference isn't that dramatic.

 

Each manufacturer has their own appeal but ultimatelty they all do essentially the same basic things. Canon to me seems to be the more "hip" and popular one of the two currently although Nikon is still very strong, although their appeal seem to be more to more for those wanting a more no-nonsense high performance camera. Nikon currently seem to have the better sensor tech with much nicer low-light performance and a dynamic range.

 

Sony is usually said to be the 3rd largest brand and seem to be one of the biggest innovators. They quickly established a strong name in the mirrorless market, an area where "Canikon" is still struggling in and have approached very carefully. I suppose in that regard to you compare the intergrated graphics between AMD and Intel where Intel dominates the high-end market but AMD's APUs dominate more value/low-end solutions. That's not saying Sony's only appeal is in the mirrorless market, they have established a quite good range of everything from entry-level to professional level stuff both in terms of mirrorless and more traditional DSLR-style cameras. Sony also is the OEM for the majority of nearly all sensors used in Nikon cameras, although as of late it seems Nikon seems to want to pull away from Sony.

 

Another big name when talking mirrorless is Olympus which, like Sony, have built their own appeal very nicely by doing their own things.

 

Panasonic is also one that has been growing quickly, especially for videographers. Note that both Olympus' and Panasonic's cameras share the same lens mount (Micro 4/3), meaning the lenses can be used interchangibly between these two brands.

 

Then there's also Pentax which probably offers some of the best value you can find, having features like weather sealing (something that's usually reserved for the top-tier models in other brands) in a much more affordable package and also some serious high-end stuff (more on that in a moment), Sigma which has some interesting sensor tech although not much beyond that (and is better known for their lenses for other systems), Fuji and Samsung.

 

If you wanna look at the more premium stuff there's also Leica, which is more of a prestige-filled premium brand than something too conventional. That said their lenses are top-notch and they have a reputation for producing razor sharp images, think of them as the Rolls Royce of photography.

 

And finally there's the medium format cameras from the likes of Pentax, Phase one and Hasselblad which are a step above even the best cameras Canikon produce to date using an even larger Sensor, usually with top-notch CCD-tech and 50+ megapixel resolution. If Canikon is Geforce, then these are Quadro and Tesla.

[Rubenis]

Oh well. My one and the half euro about this.

 

Go to shop, take some cameras into your hands. Write down witch ones fit your hand nice and is in to your price range.

 

Go home, read in dpreview about camera (pros, cons etc), decide wich fits you, then order where you can get it cheaper. That is it.

 

As few very smart photographers have told me - they can not tell this video or photo has been taken with what camera, just because mostly there is very little to none difference. From top three manufacturers there are none, who has no good glass. Canon, Nikon, Sony has great cameras and glass, Sigma and Tamron makes great glass too.

[Mark_Mckessock]

Out of Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, and Sony, I would have to say the Canon is the best mainly because of it's higher bit-rates and better video feature but most third party video accessories are designed for Canon models such as the 5D Mark III or 7D. But Panasonic has made some waves in the video industry with the release of the GH4 with it's headlining feature being 4K video recording, which rivals that of the RED EPIC. And many users have switched from Canon or Nikon to pick up a GH4.

[ZacDaMan72]

Canon is better for video with the higher bitrates.

[GamerPatriot]

i think everyone always forget about Pentax. They are wonderful bodies that aren't over priced. The K-5iis and the K-3 are wonderful bodies and the lens are also very nice. The thing about Pentax is that the lens don't really require you to sell organs. People only know Nikon or Canon. Look at reviews on the Pentax camera and at the images they take. You couldn't tell which camera took it. 

[connorpiper]

Nikon, Sony, or Cannon lenses. But Sony or Nikon for the sensor, since Nikon uses Exmor sensors, which are made by Sony.

[d3sl91]

As other have said, Go with a Cannon if your focus is video. If your focus is an all-around camera or mainly photos, go with a Nikon. Most crop sensor bodies (unless you are buying used, anything under $1500 is usually a crop sensor), will take very similar photos, and it depends on the glass much more. I purchased a sub-$1k, because for the price I was able to get more video features than a canon, but if I was to spend a few hundred more, the canon's video on that would demolish mine. In a few years I will probably pick up a ful frame camera, as they are starting to become more affordable. 

 

If you plan on tons of low-light indoor stuff, maybe look at a $700+ 5200/5300 or T5i, as the higher-end the body, generally the better they are at low light/clarity etc (but not always). But again, $1k body with $100 lens = photo taken with a $100 lens. 

 

Bottom line, you will be able to take amazing photos no matter what you get. Buy what meets your needs and budget, get some better glass, and enjoy the challenge for a few years. Then upgrade.