Why did you choose that make ?

Messages
17,535
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
#41
Nikon - simply because I knew a guy who was into photography on a car forum and he let me borrow his for a day - he'd had them for over 30yrs and said none gave him any problems and I liked his pictures (at the time). I was looking for a better camera so bought one very shortly after...

I've owned now 6 Nikon Bodies and countless Nikon lenses - none have been faulty or unreliable - and I hate stuff that doesn't just "work". I trust them and I like the bodies layout.
 
Messages
1,284
Name
Tim
Edit My Images
Yes
#42
My digital set-up is Canon and that is down to my local Curry's have a very good deal on the last few EOS 350D cameras they had left after the EOS 400D came out. Having bought a few EF fit lenses, it makes sense to stick with Canon.
Snap same for me it all started with a great deal on a canon 350D. Still with Canon as main cameras many years later.

Since added a few others apart from Sony, love the technology but just don’t get along with the cameras.
 
Messages
195
Name
jo
Edit My Images
Yes
#43
I used to do a lot of family research and got to the stage where upon the records I was looking at, weren't on microfilm nor could they be scanned or photocopied. And my humble digital compact couldn't get a single photo, and stitching was a nightmare, so I decided to get a DSRL ( most record offices do provide jigs for DSRL camera. so after best part of a month researching best entry level camera's. I decided on Nikon!

I then went to Curry's (I know I was naive) but luckily when I asked for help, they said could I wait for around 15 minutes for their colleague to return from lunch, as he was a semi-pro photographer and knew more about cameras than they did. So I waited.

He showed me the Nikon (can't remember which entry level I looked at) and he also showed me the Canon 1200d, he explained the menus and demoed how each work, letting me handle them and go through the menus. I walked out the shop with the Canon 1200d, purely because I found the menu more intuitive.

That was 4 years ago this month, apart from a couple of test shots I actually didn't use the camera until some annual leave the following May (didn't get a chance to get to the record office) I took my camera out with me, and thought I like this photography malarkey...

Didn't take long to out grown the 1200d, as I enjoy wildlife, so I up graded to a 7dm2, which I still use for wildlife photography. I brought 5ds 18months ago as I wanted full frame for Landscapes etc. And earlier this year I brought the R for a lighter kit for days out.


And I just starting on Film, a debate about Digital killing Photography made me realise that how can I debate when I've not shot with film. So obtained a Praktica at no cost, brought 5 ifford Hp5 films, started as a one off project of 5 films. But errr hum, I've found that I really enjoy B&W film photography so... Now going to attempt developing my own film...

Yes it may sound as though hubby spoils me, but considering that I spent over 20 years, fighting panic attacks and anxiety which at times would confie me to indoors, even on good periods I would still suffer high levels of anxiety going out, picking up the camera then going here there and everywhere, venturing to places I'd avoid big time, being totally comfortable and panic attacks/anxiety disappeared, he'd say every penny spent is worth it.
 
Messages
4,573
Edit My Images
Yes
#44
I caught the photography bug in my early teens, and after a couple of years I wanted to upgrade from the obsolete fully-manual East German SLR hand-me-down I was using, so I started saving up. My funds were much helped when I started work at 16 and eventually I had enough money to buy the camera I'd looked through so many camera shop windows at... a brand new Canon A1. This was the most advanced 35mm SLR on the market at the time (Nikon had no direct equivalent) and it gave me many years of trouble-free service (I still own it and it still works!). I've stayed with Canon ever since as my 'main' camera system and I've been happy enough with their SLR and DSLR systems.
 
Last edited:
Messages
100
Name
Damian
Edit My Images
Yes
#45
My first proper digital camera was a Nikon D90. At the time the Canon that was its rival had what I would describe as tipex buttons and that forever put me off.

However, I wish I had the Canon glass quality.
 
Messages
898
Name
Alistair
Edit My Images
No
#47
I got given a Practika SLR aged 14 as a present and used that until age 24ish when my future wife gave me a Minolta SLR which she'd decided on after discussing with my father who used Minolta.
Then when I wanted to get a DSLR it made sense to get a Sony A100 DSLR as it used the same A-mount lenses. That got upgraded to an A350 and I added some good quality Minolta glass to the kit.
At one point during my Sony ownership I did borrow a Nikon D60 kit for a week to try out, but just didn't like it, the camera didn't feel right in my hands and the menus didn't work for me, so I stuck with the Sony.
But then I got a chance to shoot with a Canon 50D and 5D2 and loved the images, the body/grip felt right and the menu/controls just worked. I also loved that I could borrow lenses from friends and from work. So I swapped all my Sony A-mount gear and just scraped enough together for a Canon 60D and 50mm lens. (Yes I lost money on the older gear).
When I wanted to upgrade, I sold the 60D and all my EFS lenses and again just about got enough for a Canon 6D.
Yes I'd like a lighter system, but with no extra money for purchasing, I'd have to sell everything and even then I'd only be able to get a body and one lens.
Would I go for Sony again, potentially, but it would have to be at least an A7 III to make it worth switching.
 
Messages
1,305
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
Yes
#48
My old Pentax K10-D was driving me a bit crazy, and I wanted a mirrorless camera, not least for the ease of adapting vintage lenses. Comparing Sony with Fuji, the two main choices at the time, Fuji owners seemed generally happy with their lot, some concerns about RAWs not withstanding. And the 18-55 kit zoom was both highly thought of and cheap as chips with an X-T10 body, which tipped the balance. Since then I've come to appreciate Fuji's controls and their high-quality native lenses, and have added an X-T2 to my bag. Very happy about it! I don't really think you can buy a bad camera these days, but I've no motivation to switch at the moment.
 
Messages
11,953
Name
Rich
Edit My Images
Yes
#49
Small, light, in body stabilisation, good range of lenses and excellent image quality.
The reasons I chose MFT and in particular the Panasonic GX9
 
Messages
958
Edit My Images
No
#50
I had a Polaroid 1000 (SX-70 film) and have been doing photography with it.

Then I asked for a Minolta X-700 35mm SLR for my birthday, but that was because my mother have a earlier Minolta SLR (something like STS100 or SR7), and I could borrow any of her lenses.

But when Minolta switched to auto-focus, they changed the lens mount. So did other companies like Canon and some others. However I found out that Nikon (along with one other company) chose to stick with the same mount design when switching from manual focus to auto-focus. I realised if only somehow I had Nikon 35mm camera instead of the Minolta, I could have switched body from manual focus to auto-focus, but keep the manual focus lenses until I save up for AF ones.

So when it was time to go for DSLR, I switched to a Nikon, hoping that maybe some day I could buy a Nikon 35mm, and have lenses suited for both. (That was like 10 years ago or thereabouts, when there was still film around.)

Between the Minolta X-700 and the Nikon D1, I had an Olympus Camedia C4040 but that was because at that time, when switching to my first digital camera, I was hoping for a DSLR but the girlfriend I lived with, wanted a compact camera, so we traded off for a bridge camera.

So there you go, I had Polaroid, Minolta, Olympus, and finally a Nikon.
 
Messages
7,664
Name
Raymond
Edit My Images
No
#51
Went with Canon because I was studying Architecture at the time and Canon makes the only Tilt Shift lens, Nikon only makes Tilt but not Shift I believe.

Switch to Sony because they have the best Eye-AF at the time, still do.

Bought a Fuji because it was cheap and I want a toy for some retro fun.
 
Messages
10,820
Name
Garry Edwards
Edit My Images
No
#52
Went with Canon because I was studying Architecture at the time and Canon makes the only Tilt Shift lens, Nikon only makes Tilt but not Shift I believe.

Switch to Sony because they have the best Eye-AF at the time, still do.

Bought a Fuji because it was cheap and I want a toy for some retro fun.
Valid points there, but tilt / shift is a poor substitute for full movements (rear standard as well as front) so personally I went the 5" x 4" monorail route for that.

I used the same setup for high end product shots too, but eventually moved to digital for that because of cost, got a 3rd party lens, perfectly adequate, available with both Canon and Nikon mounts at a fraction of the cost of the Canon alternative.
 
Messages
1,252
Name
Mike
Edit My Images
Yes
#53
I started off with a Chinon (Dixons brand at the time)
A neighbour of my parents was clearing out some old camera gear as he wasn't using it anymore, which just happened to be 2 Canon A1s and loads of half decent lenses.
I used the Canons for a few years and gradually traded the gear in when the EOS cameras came on the go.
I had been shooting with Canon for over 30 years when I tried m4/3 as the system was so small and light.
Traded some of my EOS gear for an Olympus kit.
After a couple of years I tried Sony FF and was really impressed.
Traded the rest of my Canon gear for Sony a7rii.
At that point I was shooting both Sony and Olympus when I got the offer of a used a6300 so it was bye bye Olympus, hello Sony APS-C.
Reason being that the Sonys share the same battery and lens mount.
For once in my photo life, I am one happy bunny.

HOWEVER
One regret I have is that I've never tried Fuji as they seem to get good reviews so would like to try them out for myself but that means buying into another system.
I could always trade my Sony APS-C kit :eek:
Where do I draw the line :LOL::LOL::LOL:
 
Messages
397
Name
Mike
Edit My Images
Yes
#54
I guess I'm far from brand loyal, but I don't keep changing my brands, just adding to them.
On the digital interchangeable lens front:

My DSLRs grew out of having Pentax SLRs (& lenses). I tried the K100d & liked the feel & features of it, apart from the price at the time. Several years later I brought one. Subsequent upgrades where due to new features, or to further expand my lenses. In this time I've assisted several friends with their consumer Nikon/Canon DSLRs & always been disappointed with them in comparison to my bodies.

At one point I wanted to try tilt, but the price of a proper lens was excessive. I spotted a tilt adapter was available to use my lenses on MFT, and that this + a used body was a tiny fraction of a tilt lens, so added MFT to my selection. Subsequently adding some native lenses to make the most of it's small size.

After years of using both these systems with an increasing hoard of adapted lenses I added a Sony NEX6, enabling me to adapt to a larger sensor, as well as giving other advantages my existing mirrorless bodies didn't offer. I've now added an A7ii but despite having 2 Sony bodies I haven't got any Sony lenses.

On the film front I have SLRs with at least 4 different mounts, several mounts having examples from multiple manufacturers , as well as medium & large format stuff. No brand loyalty there either.

The biggest surprise is how little of my gear is Canon or Nikon! I have a couple of lenses in each mount (pure chance they came as part of a job lot) & a fancy canon cable release (works with Pentax). other than that it's only adapter combinations that go via EF :whistle:
 
Last edited:
Messages
3,021
Name
Immo
Edit My Images
Yes
#55
Hi, the highlights of my long acquisition history:

-PORST (Practica) CX6 in 1973. I wanted a proper camera, bought this SLR. Really wanted a Pentax, but this was too expensive for me then.

-ROLLEI 35 in 75. A compact precision camera, more suitable for motorcycling. Bought several of these over the years.

-MINOLTA XD7 in 81. Thought it was "almost a LEITZ/Leica".

-ROLLEI 2.8 GX 6x6 in 88. Liked the mechanics, and its looks, did not use it much.

-LEICA M6 in 88. Always wanted a Leica. My father had one... I started earning serious money.

-MINOLTA F300 in 2003. My first digital camera, 5MP!

-OLYMPUS 5050. Originally bought for digitizing slides, but I gave this up, kept the camera.

-NIKON D70, followed by D200

-OLYMPUS Pen EP1. I wanted a camera to adapt my Leica lenses. The NIKONs were too cumbersome when taking them, walking the dog.

-SONY NEX3 - 5N - NEX6. Started taking pictures of birds/squirrels/dormice in my garden. The tilt screen was helpful.

-Leica M9 in 2010. Wanted a "FF" Kleinbild Leica.

-SONY A7, A7R2. Wanted "FF" Kleinbild to adapt my collection of Leica M mount lenses. Gave this up gradually, have many native lenses now.

-NIKON D800. Bought this used, because I was unhappy with SONY AF performance for motorsport.

These are my main purchases ...

Currently I use my M9, the D800, the A7 and the A7R2. Now and then I take one of the NEXes to have a "pocket-camera" ...

I am happy with my current equipment!

(I still have all the cameras mentioned above (somewhere ...). I never sell, only buy. The Nikon D70, D200 I gave to my wife. She has several NIKONs
now, some adapted for astrophotography, for travel she uses a D700 and a D750.)
 
Last edited:
Messages
16,182
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
Yes
#56
I started with a Pentax film camera in my teens which was an Xmas present. Then at the advent of digital I went with a Sony compact, then another Sony compact as I liked the look and liked Sony!!!

First proper camera was a Nikon D40, think it was because you got the kit lens and 55-200 for a decent price on offer. Could probably have been Canon on a different week but again, liked the look of it. Stayed with Nikon till this year and now Fuji (again based on looks initially).
 
Messages
23,469
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
#57
I had several different makes of film camera, but the one I enjoyed using most was a borrowed CanonAE1p, i invested in med format so I couldn’t afford the T90 I lusted after back in the 80s.
When I eventually decided to ‘modernise’ in 2001 and buy an AF camera, I tried a Pentax as I had loads of PK mount lenses, but in reality there was no ‘compatibility’, so when I realised I needed an entire new kit, my thoughts returned to that T90 and I bought Canon, the nearest I’ve got to changing my mind has been a brief flirtation with Fuji mirrorless, which I swapped for a Canon M5. Ive owned dozens of Canon cameras now.

The bottom line is that if I’d bought Nikon in 2001 I’d be just as happy now, though I’d possibly still have the Fuji mirrorless as Nikon don’t compete in the small mirrorless market.

I think we choose a brand based on the slimmest of margins, and in reality it isn’t important because they’re just cameras. No ones looking at your pictures and proclaiming they love your work based on the camera you chose.
 
Last edited:
Messages
82
Edit My Images
No
#58
I agree with Phil above completely. Choosing a camera is very much the same as choosing any other commodity such as a car or a microwave. If it has what you need, then it’s a good choice: if not, then it isn’t.

Having said that, I’m a died in the wool Canon shooter, simply because that’s where I started from and am now so heavily invested in the brand that a complete change would not be feasible financially. I own 4 canon bodies and 11 lenses, they do a great job, I enjoy using them and have no plans to look elsewhere. I did briefly flirt with my better half’s Fuji mirrorless but handed it back with no regrets and went back to what I know and trust.
 
Last edited:
Messages
23,469
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
#59
I’m a died in the wool Canon shooter, simply because that’s where I started from and am now so heavily invested in the brand that a complete change would not be feasible financially. I own 4 canon bodies and 11 lenses,
Also Too expensive to change now
7 bodies, 12 lenses and 4 flashguns off the top of my head.

And shot about 600 frames in the last 3 days using one camera and one lens:rolleyes::rolleyes: some with flash though.
 
Last edited:
Messages
172
Edit My Images
Yes
#61
I inherited a Pentax ME super when I first seriously got in to photography via the schools society when I was about 12 and got heavily in to playing in the dark room. I drifted off a bit when I got to uni and a few years after that bought an Olympus SP-500 UZ compact as my first digital camera but only really used it for holiday snaps and the like. My wife then got me a Canon 500d for my 30th which served me well for about 7 years until my 5 yr old daughter found it and carefully put it somewhere safe (aka left it on top of a hot radiator) and it was never quite the same again. I've had severe back problems for a few years now and before my last bout of major surgery I purchased a Canon Eos 80d and did a lot of shooting with it mainly to give me a backlog to work through processing while recovering from said surgery. The 80d has had a fair bit of use since but it got to the stage it was just too bulky for me to carry around as much as I'd like so I've now returned to Olympus with a EM1 mkII and to be honest I've been blown away with it. Counter intuitively I've found it seems to produce (in my hands at least) images that are at least as sharp and defined as the 80d but also with much less noise which seems odd given it has a smaller sensor as well as fewer MP. :):olympus::)
 
Messages
397
Name
Mike
Edit My Images
Yes
#62
Also Too expensive to change now
7 bodies, 12 lenses and 4 flashguns off the top of my head.

And shot about 600 frames in the last 3 days using one camera and one lens:rolleyes::rolleyes: some with flash though.
I have 3 Pentax DSLRs, with ~40 native lenses (not all AF)
3 MFT bodies with 5 native lenses
a NEX & an A7ii but no native lenses for either
together with over 100 other lenses in assorted mounts usable on the mirrorless bodies.

Yet still I've recently shot over 2000 frames in one day with one DSLR & one lens. The A7 did manage a few hundred on the same day (also using PK lenses). The previous day was fairly similar but several lenses were used on the DSLR. No flash on either day, but some tripod mounted long exposures on Day 1.

Most times I go out it'll be 1 or 2 mirrorless bodies coming with me, and the combined shooting will probably be less than 100 (It just topped 250 on the recent Cambridge meet-up, fairly evenly split between normal & IR bodies.)

The first addition to my DSLRs was because the body & adapter was significantly cheaper than a native lens to try the same technique (as well as more flexible). Diversifying rather than changing doesn't have to be the expensive option!
 
Messages
23,469
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
#64
If you were changing systems, would you need 7 bodies and 12 lenses though?
Not 7 bodies - and depending on the system, maybe a few less lenses. But it's not like the 7 bodies are all worth a great deal to sell (the reason I still own them)

If there was a perfect system - then 3 bodies would do, but the slowest lens I own (other than the crap kit lens on the M5) is a 2.8-4 zoom. I've never done a shopping list to check - but back to my original point - would it really be worth it, my cameras take pictures, I'm missing out on nothing.
 
Messages
5,764
Name
Lewis
Edit My Images
Yes
#65
I started with Canon as that was what my sports photographer friends were using, mainly because they had better "sports" lenses at the time.

After 11 years. I switched to Fuji, because I wanted something smaller/lighter and I like Fuji's high quality cropped sensor lenses and how their bodies handle.
 
Top