"A camera is a tool" - you made the point! I had tried different Sony cameras in a store but they didn't feel right. A camera has to feel comfortable in your hand, no matter what great features it has. I am using Olympus/OM since a couple of years now, but I still love my old Nikon F4, especially with the DW-20 waist level viewfinder.
Interesting take on brands. I don't care whether or not a brand is for young or older, though I know that influences many people. I think a better way is to look at the emphasis each company places on the type of photography you do. For example, Sony and Panasonic seem to me to really appeal to those who want to do a lot of video, Olympus is big with outdoor and wildlife photographers, Nikon and Canon still appeal to pros that require enormous systems with all the lenses and the capability to do anything. Pentax/Ricoh seems to mostly appeal to the art/prosumer/creative crowd. Fuji also seems to go for the art/prosumer/creative/street crowd. Personally, I have very little interest in shooting video and hate paying for all sorts of video functions and features that just get in the way of shooting stills. Maybe Leica still caters to us, but who can afford them? Wish there were more still-centric cameras that ignored video.
I seem to be drawn to Nikon. My uncle had a Nikon F Photomic, which I later inherited and getting it ready to do some black & white film photography. I should probably create a RUclips video on that 🤔 I still have a roll of color film in it that I have to use up first. I also remember those National Geographic magazines, whose photographers mostly used Nikon cameras. And Nikon DSLRS are good, the colors are always just right straight out of the camera. The blues, greens, reds, and flesh tones seem to be always on tap. And Nikon F lenses. So far, I haven’t made the switch to mirrorless. Even with the Z9 there are reports of purple fringing, AF issues, and sounds like mirrorless is not quite in par with their DSLRS and F lenses. I like Canon’s new mirrorless selection. The OM-5 interests me. But for some reason I haven’t been drawn to Sony. The ergonomics aren’t there and I’m always reminded of a Sony point and shoot camera that was too complicated. So the menu system on the Sonys are pretty complicated. Well, I’m looking for a new camera too, but it looks like my Nikon DSLR has no competition bye👋
Being from the Nikon/Kodachrome generation, I am somewhat disapointed by all current brands. Canon and Nikon rode the dslr wave much too long, now it is "full frame" (actually 35 mm, for me "full frame" still means 9x12cm²), which they stick to although it will not be the future. Fujifilm and OM System are most modern, but both don't incorporate computational photography and video to the current state of technology, which can be seen only in smartphones. All these companies are driven by marketing experts and don't understand that they always need to stay ahead of the majority of their customers to be future-proof.
With all my respect, personally the manufacturer that I like the least is Sony. He is undoubtedly powerful and knows how to make a market policy to introduce his products, but... (years ago there was nobody in photography and he owes much to MINOLTA). Personally I will never buy a Sony (it hurts me to have an image sensor made by him in my equipment...). It is a totally personal opinion and assessment. A cordial greeting,
I like having both Fuji and Olympus just because the way they handle suits the photography I use them for. OM is wonderful at longer ranges and for hikes, while I like the fuji for sub-100mm photography like when I'm walking around a town or at a family gathering. Tactile experience is a big thing for me and both have plenty of fun dials and stuff to turn. Though I will admit that I wish the M Zuiko lenses added that sweet aperture ring Fujinons have because I love that.
When I started as a rookie local newspaper reporter in Norway back in the late eighties, the camera choice was influenced by what brand that supplied the newspaper's staff photographers. I started in a Nikon newspaper, and we competed against a Canon newspaper. What camera you had around your neck was therefore a strong, tribal identity mark. I continued in a Canon newspaper and found myself in an identity crisis. Yes, I know. Childish, but we were young men trying to find a place in a brutal world. Fun fact: The most independent, individualistic and cool dudes with Domke bags and Khaki shirts used Olympus even back then.
I started with a Leica (Ilford and Agfa film), then moved to a digital point and shoot from .... HP. Then upgraded to Nikon APS-C, downsized to Ricoh GR (because lugging all that Nikon gear was cumbersome) , then downsized even more to iPhone for many years (currently 13 mini), and now started with OM-5. I loved the Ricoh GR (sharp images, pocketable, discreet, snap focus) but couldn't stand the dust on sensor and within the lens issues. The OM-5 is now my travel camera, together with iPhone.
Hi Peter, interesting topic, I was late to Olympus and wanted to buy a Pen F but it was too late. Since then I have missed x 5 times trying to buy second hand. The Pen F seems to hold good value. Anyway, I gave up and just yesterday bought a great condition used silver EM-1 mk 1. I use it with 3 primes (12, 25, 45) and this is all I need. Cheers
The Mark II goes pretty cheaply on eBay (I think). I am not clear on the improvements, I never owned the original, but it has a newer 20 megapixels sensor, IBIS, focus bracketting/stacking, 80 megapixels high resolution and some other features I have yet to try. The Mark III and E-M1x add live ND, useful for getting motion blur without using filters. The latter weights 1 Kg and looks at home beside a Canon 1D III.
I currently use Olympus, Panasonic, Fuji and Nikon cameras, MFT, APS-C and FF! Of all these, the one that I like best, ergonomically and simply a joy to use is the E-M5ii, closely followed by my Nikon D200. I do not like the Fuji X-T3's handling and ergonomically it is actually bad for street photography (which is what I do). Perhaps it is my style, but I find that the dials controlling aperture, ISO, shutter speed and exposure bracketing are all inconsistent and all over the place! With the E-M5ii, I simply use the front and back control dials! The Nikon D200 and D750 are simply ergonomic masterpieces, very tactile and intuitive to use.
Back in film days I used Ilford and Agfa for film and paper and Topcon for my camera. When all my Topcon equipment was stolen I replaced it with Contax because I found great deals at the camera show I was at. When I finally switched to digital I went with Olympus because it had the features I wanted. Six months later all cameras had the features.
Thank you. I started with a Pentax SV 35mm file (1964) moved to Nikon in 1969. I still use Nikon, same lenes can be used on the latest nikon cameras, good reason to keep good qauiliy lenses.. For micro 43, use Panasonic Lumix. happy with what I have, the M43 lesnes are great for carrying around.
My first SLR was a Pentax K1000, to shoot the newly-arrived daughter, so about 1976. My second was a Canon EOS 630. I joined a camera club and my eyes don't match well with MF and wide apertures. I also bought a used Mamiya C330 and bag of lenses. Odd, eh, MF again. I used a digital Pentax compact for a while, it was all I could afford. Better than the EOS 630 which I still have? No, probably not, but cheaper to run. Canon EOS 30D and a succession of Canons until I started to move away in 2019, weight becoming a concern. Since then, mostly a mix of Lumix G and OM-D E-M1 successors. A Lumix S1R and adaptor, mostly for my TS-E lenses. I still one a 6F Mark II and 80D, but they don't get much use. The 6D has GPS built in, I wish the Lumix S did. Today, for video, I would use Lumix FH5, G9 or Olympus that I own. For FF video, it's highly improbably, the S5 II would be my choice. It seems Panasonic has invented PD, at last. For me, it's important first with the company. There have been incidences by Sony of poor support and poor weather sealing. When I googled, the problems with support seemed across the whole Sony group. LensRentals writes its own maintenance manual, and that involve completely disassembling and reassembling a camera. A sony, maybe an A7R II, came back from a client, not working. Roger the Writer disassembled it and found lots of salt and not a lot of sealing. I gather Sony has improved since then, but.... My photography evolved to that TS-E lenses became important. Nikon has nothing to offer me, I am sceptical about "better dynamic range," and its DSLR AF in Live View sucks so much that Nikon photographers turned to Canon for their vlogging cameras, 100D and M50. Pentax? Not really. I have a Fujifilm X-T10, couldn't really fall in like with it. I started seriously to go lightweight mirrorless in 2019 and now use a mix of Lumix G and OM-D 1 series cameras for most things. I have a Lumix S1R for my TS-E lenses. The S1R is not a light camera, it's heavier than the 5Ds it replaced. However, I rarely take it anywhere without clear idea of why it's the best camera for the job.
I think Pentax is good for video. I don't do video and I still in the Nikon F-system as D700, D800E and D850. I will not switch to Zed. I got Fuji X-Pro 1 and X-T1 got them 2nd hand from a friend, but I don't think they are good at video... I use them for light traveling and trekking
Peter ; a tour de force of camera brands and their pluses and minuses !.I have tried Panasonic. Nikon and now settled on my OMSytem OM5 as a great all round camera with good features . I am probably in a minority of not wanting too much gear and instead prefer some standardisation .It serves me very well !!
Been shooting with Nikon DSLRs for the last 2 decades. Now using D500 and D850 with pro glass and happy with it. HOWEVER, as a system it is heavy and bulky. It performs but it also demands more from me physically. I just got into Olympus MFT gear. It is: FUN, PORTABLE, LESS EXPENSIVE, and has great COMPUTATIONAL FEATURES.
Hello Peter last week I needed to travel to Los Angeles . However , I was fortunate to an invite to Universal Studios complex/. When I travel I take my Oly OM D 10 or 5 First Generation !!! My observation maybe there were two or three other folks with thousands of visitors in the amusement park with a camera . The go to tool for photographing was the smart phone . When I was “ on the road” years ago many folks had cameras mostly Canon , Nikon , but lonesome me Minolta ! The point … There are those that consider M43 Dead .. they only want Full frame or you have the APC group ( For the record in have all non Mirrorless are Oly / Lumix . ) The point that the Japanese manufacturers have missed the entry market was decimated w/ smart phones it’s software , uploading . Yes !!! You are absolutely correct ..a camera is a tool that has specific applications for what one must accomplish! For me I was killed when Minolta was KIA and Sony purchased them . I decided Nikon would be my DSLR . I still use my D300s a dinosaur and I love it . The reason I chose Olympus / Lumix mirrorless was the price point on used market . If you are not a working professional get over the equipment go out and photograph , learn and grow .. Have a good time . For the Japanese manufacturers start thinking outside the box your piece of the pie is much smaller today .. you need to draw new folks . Thus Olympus mistake w/ you and fellow M43 former Ambassador in Pennsylvania..
Thanks Peter: I enjoyed the memories. I have an Epson PC 3000z on my desk, the first digital camera I ever bought. Olympus was my second, the one with pelical mirror and fixed lens. In my Leica bag I have an M-4 and M-6 with 5 lenses including the 50 MM F1.0 Noctilux, I occasionally shoot some film. Yesterday I was shooting some video on my OM-1, my wife was using the EM1 MK2. Focusing was a bit difficult, sometimes I switched to manual. I was thinking about you then. Mike
A bit of an unusual perspective on camera brands, and I don't understand the logic behind it. Canon is for older people, and because you are an older man, you don't like Canon?! Oh, and by the way: Sony is actually among the oldest still existing camera manufacturers. Their camera division is a continuation of Minolta's camera business, and Minolta was founded in 1928.
It is a bit different approach to camera brands. Sony is quite new as a big player in the market. Yes it's roots are in Konica-Minolta brand. Still Sony is in my mind a fresh new brand that has made Canon and Nikon on its toes. Especially younger generation is drawn to Sony. Canon and Nikon are nowadays more towards older generation what it comes to pros. There was a time when Canon was the camera to buy, that was in around 2007-2012. When I say that Canon is mostly bought by older generation and older people like it, does not mean that all older people will buy it. I have my own preferences. besides I might totally wrong about the brands. As I said in the video all of it was my own opinion and impressions.
Because the video specs are so good, I feel Panasonic full frame cameras are overlooked by photographers. However, they are typically 50% to 100% less expensive than comparable models by other manufacturers, turn out very nice files from the "low" 24 megapixel sensor, and if you must have lots of definition there's pixel shift technology with 96mp images as long as the subject isn't moving too quickly. The S-series also feel like real cameras, not a lens platform with technical specifications.
I think you should try Lumix m4/3 cameras for video - since you have lot of m4/3 lenses. And speaking about S5II - it's incfredible camera. Best money/value I guess.
Zurab K. 0 seconds ago The video is called the good and bad of camera brands but up to Olympus (I only lasted that long) all it talks about is this brand is for old people, that one is for young people and third one is for bold people. What an insight… jävla 😂
Wow! Thank you for the video. I am amazed that you have have used so many camera brands. Have you ever tried to work out how much you have spent on cameras and lenses? Thank you, it was a great summary.
Great video! I started with digital photography with NIkon, mainly because I liked the ergonomics and image quality, and I could borrow lenses. I sticked with Nikon for a long time, I never really wanted to switch to any other brand. Nevertheless, I switched to a Panasonic S1 a year ago. The L mount lenses are really, really good. When the S1 was announced, there were only three pro-level Panasonic lenses. At current time, both Panasonic and Sigma have enough lenses to choose from, although they will never be cheap. The S1 performs like a $5000 camera, but in reality it costs half of that. The Lumix ecosystem has only two cons: weight, and autofocus. My S1 with a 50mm 1.4 weigs 40% more than a comparable Canon camera. The autofocus on the S1 works well enough for photography, and the S5 mark II solved the AF issues for video. If the Lumix system gets more popular and Panasonic makes AF even better, then Sony and especially Nikon have to watch out. As a second camera, I have a Lumix LX100 since 2015. It is really versatile, is relatively small and lightweight and gives the same image quality as any other Lumix G camera will do.
Thanks Peter. Enjoyed listening to your points. New video camera guess: likely Sony or if more serious video tools needed, the Panny. In truth, likely all the brands make the best camera. Just need to match your preferences.
Peter, if you are wishing to spend more time doing street photography, while using the MFT lenses you already own, my guess is that you would love using the GX-9 Lumix as your go-to camera for the street. Am I right? What I do like about Canon and Nikon is their understanding of ergonomics in making cameras which are not awkward. Maybe Sony has improved over the years in that regard. Sony menu systems, do we go there? I will say Sony sensors, with great dynamic range, and great focusing on their cameras, is rather tempting. Of course, in APS-C, Fujifilm is the hip thing. I have no idea as to quality - durability and such on Fujifilm, having never owned one. Will the RAW files work with any editor? Ricoh GR IIIx sound interesting, but I like being able to change lenses, have a EVF when needed, and the tilt screen comes in very handy. Not sure what a person gains in street shooting with the GR over the GX-9 or even the Olympus PEN PL-8, which is fun and light in weight. And yes, Canon needs to get more interesting looking cameras to market. A Canonet rangefinder in digital would be a good selling camera. Use the guts of the R10 or even RP. They also need appropriate lenses for street in RF. Take care, Loren
@@oneeyedphotographer GX-9 is a rangefinder style, fairly small, and I got it for $799 with a 12-60mm zoom lens. Think of the GX-9 as a PEN F, but with faster focusing, and a lower price. The cameras you own fine, and I assume render images which are pretty similar. The G9 is at a low-low price. The OM-D E-M1 mk II is no longer found new -- at least I think so???
I'm in my sixties, so of course, I use Nikon due to my collections of lenses over the decades. Adapters for the C/Y mount lenses of the 1970s and early 80s are still used on my Nikon cameras, both film and digital. I've even bought into the Z system. That said, Panasonic MFT is my most used brand these days due to the ease of use with video, and the size and weight of the cameras. If I lost my lifetime collection, I'd get the Panasonic S5II. Although they don't have a huge offering of lenses, the ones they have are excellent.
Back in the film days i used all brands but always consudered myself being a Pentaxian 😂 Loved Z-1p, ME Super, K 1000. Loved using m42 lenses with them 😅. And don't forget Minolta...
Minolta and Konica merged in 2003. Sony bought Konica-Minolta's camera business in 2006. EBI (Elite Brands Inc.) bought the rights to the name Minolta and is still making some cameras.
Thanks for that Peter! I'd be interested in your thoughts on the Fujifilm x10 if you give it another try. It was a great traveling camera for me and I still use it from time to time.
I learned to shoot film on an older Topcon, a fairly unknown Japanese brand that seemed popular with journalists who required a rugged system. I also had a Pentax ME Super, and loved shooting things like concerts or live performances with it. Topcon was outdoor, Pentax was indoor. This was in the late 90s (I was pretty late to film). Now, much later I switch between Canon and Olympus, depending on the application. Even though I have quite a lot of Canon gear, I find I use Olympus for just about everything. You took on a pretty hot topic, trying to categorise by brand, but I think your views were perfectly reasonable. There are always exceptions, but that was a decent summary of the main popular brands.
not really good or bad, more like 'what generation I think use this' But what about real advantages/disadvantages? Or real specialisation of a brand? Yes, your mention street photo but what about everything else? Wildlife and sport advantages of Canon with high speed sequential speed, but worse color accuracy and dynamic range than other brands? Nikons advantages for sport/wildlife with precapture and global electronic shutter, which is unfortunatelly somewhat counterweighted by worse autofocus compared to Canon/Sony? Fuji advantage of color accuracy and more long term support for their camera? Sony with quite a good focus on landscape photography with their great dynamic range and high resolution FF camera and their long standing focus on video, but compared to competition very slow sequential speeds and still sticking to CFExpress type A that nobody else uses? Pentax and their dedication to DSLRs? Olympus disadvantage of their m4/3 format? (what are their advantages except size and weight thanks to 2x crop factor? Not familiar with their camera) Also Sony is not really new player, its successor of Minolta who had history since film era, they made quite good DSLRs too, they were doing in body stabilisation when (except I think 1 other brand, forgot which it was, I dont count Minolta who I think started it, but was bought by Sony) everyone prefered in lens stabilisation (now basically everyone agrees in body stabilisation is the way to go).
Great video. They all take great shots so it's down to weight and look and personal needs. I've always gone for smaller and good looking and there's always been something about the name Olympus, I've had an OM1 and now an EM5. Now I'm toying with what you say is the 'old man's' brand, Nikon, the Zfc. An attractive and small camera. Out of fashion suits me. Simon and Garfunkel - I got a Nikon camera, give me that Kodachrome, those nice bright colours....... No I'm digital only, wouldn't dream of film.😄
Before falling in love with a Nikon Zfc, look closely at the lenses you might want. The Zfc might be lighter than a Z7 (I am assuming much here), but if you find yourself wanting FX lenses, any weight saving is largely illusory.
I only watched the Pentax section, but man... really? Is that all you can tell about that brand. Who cares what camera you used 30 years ago. Get to the point or skip the section. You really can't sum up some of it's strengths or weaknesses?
As a long-time Ex-Canon user, I agree they are a bit boring. I think boring in a good way - the menu system, the ergonomics just feel familiar when you switch between Canon models. At some point I wanted to try out something new and jumped ship, ending up with Panasonic both full frame and MFT. Yes, the autofocus of the Panasonic S5 Mark 1 was bad, and so is the AF of the GH6, compared to the last Canon I bought (the EOS 90D). But overall, I find the image quality really good, the lenses, especially the Leica lenses for MFT, are excellent. And as for street photography, the Panasonic GX9 combined with the Leica 15mm 1.7 is a better option in my view than the Fujifilm X100V in my opinion. About the same size, but you get a better lens, better autofocus in single mode, and you get it cheaper. If you don't like the 15mm lens, get another one, there is plenty of choice.
I have the GX9. I wouldn't agree that it's a better combo for street than the Fuji X100V because ironically the Fuji can focus better particularly in lower light. I am not sure the lens is better, I would say both lenses are good. The AF on the X100V not only I find it better overall but has also better usability- faster slow focus points to use. The Fuji also has the OVF option, which allows you to know when something is entering the frame and the overall camera is smaller than the GX9 combined with the Leica 15mm F1.7. The X100V also has better image quality. That said, I think the GX9 is overall pretty good- I agree the lens you mention is pretty good and my only real deal breaker with the GX9 is that the rear wheel went stuttery/bad within 4 months of use. This is the 2nd camera Panasonic makes I see that (the other being the Lumix GX850)- I wish they did a "mark II" with better DFD or phase detect, much better IBIS and better robusticity in that rear wheel. I like it's also pretty non descript which is good for street.
@Raist3db Thanks for the warning! Guess I'll stick with my GX7. I found a GX1 on sale for $80 in a secondhand store. My GX7 has been super solid. It's the ergonomics and the JPEG settings that make it fun for me.
Love Love Love this video 🙂Great Job 🙂 You are always very objective and that is greatly appreciated 🙂I totally identify with the Fuji failures part of the video as well 🙂The only three that I've purchased that have not failed me are the S1, X-T2, and X-E1 (which I currently use for daily shooting). 🙂
An interesting round up. Cant agree or disagree as all the points are valid, and as you say we all have past bagage if we have used a lot of brands. Especially if we grew up in the film area.
I had an SFX too! I never really got on with it either but i only used it as a second body (with MF lenses) to my P30. Eventually i sold both and moved to Canon AF.
Hi Peter! I do consider Sony the most efficient company selling Cameras, next to Canon. But Sony's strategy involves too frequent launches, few FW updates, Cameras with characteristics very well divided between the models, which prevents the experienced photographer, or who transits through many photographic disciplines, from having only one model (which naturally interests Sony) and suggests more models and more exchanges. It seems to me the ideal brand for beginners or for those who want efficiency and image quality as priorities above the fun and pleasure of photography itself, giving more focus to the equipment. Just like you Peter, I've worked professionally and I've used for Hobby, many brands of Cameras, including Sony. And just like you, I try not to change equipment frequently, as I consider it unnecessary. Being very sincere, I believe that for your work on RUclips, Sony could make a lot of sense and would open up many possibilities for equipment and videos to be produced and a lot of viewing. For my professional use, with comercial Videos for the web, and journalistic videos and short documentaries, and in Real Estate and Food photography, and for personal use, Wildlife, Travel, Macro and Lanscape, the MFT system is still the best. The MFT system, in addition to being, in my opinion, the most fun, makes the best bridge between my professional work and my Hobbies: Photography, climbing and (very) long walks in the Mountains (mostly Europe and South America)! Professionally I use the GH6 for video and the em-1iii for stills. I rarely use my Nikon and my old Sony remains in the drawer! The OM-1 is my personal use camera! I will probably buy the S5ii X to complement my professional video setup. I consider the Lumix to be the best for video, but I don't rely on AF in my work. The Lumix system is the best for the MFT FF integration and that's also a very important point for you beyond YT work! I’m very curious about your future Camera. Because I’m seeing more and more people migrating from Canon, Nikon and Sony to OM, but for Wildlife and “Adventure Photography”. And I’m talking here about experienced Photographers, like Mike Lane, Daniel J Cox, and many others. I’m asking my self if wait is not the best choice for you. I believe in new and interesting models with all you need in the MFT LUMIX line. And you can complement your equipment with a S5ii someday for those rarely situations where you will need more than theMFT f1.2 DoF for you video work.
Sony makes cameras for different niches, but they have also cameras for general use like A7IV. This model since his release is the nr 1 sold camera at Yodobashi Japan.
You really glossed over NIkon, but I can forgive you because I have been looking for a second body/lightweight travel camera to supplement my Nikon Z9 and Nikon has nothing competitive to offer. I looked at Fujifilm X-pro and the Leica CL. I am most interested in the Sony A7c (full frame and IBIS) and may get to shoot one this weekend, but it would require buying new lenses (or using a converter for my Nikon lenses, which would nullify its autofocus advantage). I will probably just try to patiently wait for Nikon to get a Z6iii out, but I can imagine they are losing a lot of customers like me to Sony or Canon or Fujifilm.
It is painful to see they dont have z6iii or z500 (equivalent to D500 or canon r7) I have waited long enough but I am losing patience now. May switch sides.
@@Ad-eq3cu Zfc is without grip, dont like it. For Z50 - little less resolution, No IBIS, no real AF for birds. Again, it is not that there is something wrong with it, It is just that I dont think it is the best tool for wildlife.
@@me4jas "A little less resolution" is probably of no actual consequence. Canon's 1Dx II, 1Dx III, 7D II, 6D, 70D cameras were all 20 megapixels, I think the Nikon D5 and D6 too, amongst those are four first-choice cameras for the Olympics. a 50 megapixels FF camera crops to about 18 megapixels at APS-C, and in post you can crop to a lot of sizes and shoes between. Me, I am uncomfortable going back to no IBIS, so I agree with you there. Take a look at what wildlife (and particularly bird) photographers are accomplishing with the OM 1 camera body and lenses, particularly the 150-400 and 300 mm lenses. One I follow chose the OM 1 and 150-400 above Sony, he sold his A9.
Thanks for your video. I have enjoy it. Beware that many will not like this video as you are discussing brands and explain who is using them. I like it much as many impression you have talked about is something I also see. For example Nikon has a very old audience who like big heavy cameras and many of them does not know anything about video or even dislike it. Look how Nikon does not put a fully articulated screen in their cameras. In a Facbook forum about Nikon someone said that Nikon should not focus i=on certain market such as those Nikormate days. I said to him that I never heard of Nikkormate and needed to search in the history of cameras and read that those were sold in the seventies for young and general people. I said to this persons that this cameras were released before I was born. I checked on his Facebook profile and ask his age then he replied that he is in his seventees. This is typical Nikon user above the 50 year old. Chuck Talks of AP Studios said in one of his live views discussing Nikon, that we have only a bunch of old people discussing or caring for this brand. He sees no young people discussing about Nikon. I think Nikon has also lost many users to Sony. Your impression of Sony I agree with it simply by seeing what most You Tubers uses. They are mostly young people using their cameras. The older generation complain of complicated menu and bad argonomics. But as you said Sony is the only one taking vloging seroiusly. When Panasonic introduced S5 II with Phase Detect AF, many of You Tubers were in Japan at Panasonic. Most of them left Panasonic to Sony and said during the review of this camera that they will not come back due different motives. Panasonic had during the early days of MFT a lot of street photographers, which now is dominated by Fuji. Fuji and Sony have the most younger audience. That is why this 2 brands keep releasing bodies as their higher management have confidence that they will grow. I think Panasonic with MFT and L-mount is targetting to much the video market which was Film oriented then more wedding and event videographers, which are the audience who use video the most. Panasonic biggest rival in video is BlackMagic Design. Regarding Canon I think in 10 years they will be second after Sony but they will still be a big player as they focus very much on the entry market with new technologies and not recycle old technologies at those entry price points.
I was absolutely horrified when you mentioned how bad your Pentax SFX was as I still have mine. I got a Canon TX camera in 1976 and used it until my house was robbed in 1987 and it was stolen and never recovered. I remember being seduced by the thought of AF so wanted one of those cameras. A lot of people I met on a trip through Europe in 1975 used Asahi Pentax SLR's so I think that is what convinced me to go Pentax. So I bought a Pentax SFX and used it until I went digital with Pentax's *istD in 2005 eventually getting a K10D. It's ironic that I eventually left Pentax because of its poor AF considering that I first got Pentax because of AF.
@@ForsgardPeter Fair enough, however, I had no great expectation of what AF could do at that stage and it was just for personal use so I guess it didn't affect me too much. One aspect that I did like was 1.8 fps continuous shooting as my old camera couldn't have a motor drive. That plus Fuji ASA 400 film. Those were the days.😳
I've used a lot of systems. Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic, Nikon, Sony, Canon.... NO Pentax and Ricoh. If you need fast action continuous AF in low light, than Olympus, Panasonic, Fuji will not provide for you... Fuji is for street and good light AF and hipster... For people who love the camera more than the outcome... Sincerely in good light Sony RX 100 V+ is king... for street and action... Olympus is a dead system... they rule only in image stabilization, but this is not enough... Otherwise forget it... AF can not be compared with Sony and Canon... Panasonic is only for movies... Mediocre AF-C, a dead Micro4/3... This is the market position - a player for filming...Pentax is DSLR... niche product in the future... Ricoh only with zone focusing... Heard AF-C is too slow... And than there is Sony Nikon Canon... This is the future... With Sony as momentary leader (although they have the least performant Software, body build and ergonomics) with good AF and good sensor, but 3rd place color science. Than second we have Canon - excellent AF and ergonomics, but 3rd place dynamic range sensor - just weaker than Sony and Nikon (also Sony). And 3rd we have Nikon. Excellent handling and sensor (dynamic range) but slightly slower AF (Z6/Z7) or too complex (Z8/Z9) than Sony and Canon, but it is working great in AF-C mode... For me the outcome counts... So there are only 3 systems that I can take seriously Sony, Canon and Nikon... I have Sony (RX) and Nikon (Z6/Z8) for the superior sensor (to Canon)... For creative, low light, fast action, non flash photography these are the only options. If you don't need this, than other brands are good too. From all I dislike Fuji the most - too hipster for me, not enough technology... a 2000 Euro camera Fuji x100V with no image stabilization? Are we still in 2010? XE4 the same.... This cameras are good only if you don't compare them with Sony Canon Nikon... everything else is marketing and youtube influencing... For photography: Compare a XT5 with Sony A74... It's a joke... Compare Sony A7R5 and Nikon Z8 with the top of the line Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic (for filming is good)... no comment.
I like when we all have options. I really like Fuji. Great quality and good over all cameras. Yes they have a few models that do not have stabilizers. Most likely they will update those camera sin the future. Until there are other choices. For photography is much more than image quality. In a photograph there are so many other things that matter more. All modern digital camera can give you excellent images if you know what you are doing.
@@ForsgardPeter In 2022, the number of cameras shipped had decreased to about eight million units compared to over 115 million in 2011... So the next chapter in the strategy is called... SURVIVAL.. I think that the mobile phone will kill everything up to APSC... So the professional market, I think, will be focused on Full Frame. APSC will be for enthusiasts/hipsters (who will not give in to the mobile phone dominance), but percentage wise it will be up to max 10% (See Fuji + Olympus + Pentax market share)... So the logical market evolution will be in the FF Environment. The others will have little CASH for R&D... That's why I think that Sony, Canon, Nikon (+some market share for Panasonic on filming - but this is debatable how big this will be) will be the future...When the market in 2011 was 115 million Units - there was hope, for everyone... But now, the name is called ... survival... They hope to increase the market to +50% (income numbers, not units sold) by 2028... We will see....
I really like Fuji X100V, but it's overestimated, it has some negatives. It's not versatile and if you want camera as a tool, then ... yeah it's a bit useless. But you can take it anywhere without much thinking about it's weigth, space and which lenses to add. I don't think everything up to APSC will die because of phones. There's a huuuge gap between phone and even my 7 years old Panasonic G80 with 10 years old sensor. Phone (Zenfone8) can take quite good photos with actually very good colors, HDR which looks nice and not overdone as in the past, it has awesome screen. But handling is awful (on every phone), setting it to "pro" mode just to change white balance takes time, you can't put zoom lens, you can't take many pictures with it (milky way, fireworks, aurora, high iso or long exposure in general (old MFT camera are not enough sometimes), ...) and it suffers indoor. Plus you can't play with RAW files. I think camera manufacturers are harming themselves. There is nothing like entry level cameras. If there are, they are not reviewed by youtubers, because most of reviews is not from photographers or hobbists, but from professional nerds who rarely take camera out from their basement youtube recording room. There are really no cameras just for casual hobbists who are not rich enough. On the other hand I think professional market is actually niche thing and for Panasonic, entering this as last might be a fatal mistake, because I don't see any specific reason why to chose Panasonic over Sony, Nikon or Canon. I don't believe that MFT is dead, there are many people travelling around the world and many of them can afford 1000EUR camera and they don't want to put 3kg of photo gear into backpack or suitcase and they don't want just a phone neither. But yeah, Sony RX100 is a huge step up from a phone, I had maybe 2nd version briefly, but ergonomy was not good for me, I used it only on a few bike trips and skiing.
What’s completely obvious from this video is there are simply too many separate brands, all using minor variations on the same technologies, chasing a small, shrinking market. Once upon a time there were two major companies, along with a few specialty brands. Now this small, shrinking market is saturated. Don’t believe me? Here’s a thought experiment. Imagine you want to take up photography, have a reasonable budget for a camera - and lenses - and don’t know which brand to choose. Put all the brands on a dial and spin the dial. Go to the store and buy the brand it lands on. Unless you are highly specialized, you won’t be disappointed.
My first SLR was Praktica L, basic but functional. Then I wanted/needed something with a winder. Nikon and Canon were out of the question as they were too expensive (this was pre AE1), so I settled on a Topcon. Excellent, but limited, lenses, and it was massive. Then I came a cross the OM-1, and a lifetime love affair began. Although, back then, Canon and Nikon were way out of my price league, Nikon was always the unattainable pro camera, but never ever appealed. There was something about Canon that had more appeal, but (for me) it was even close to the compact and affordable Olympus. Pentax was Pentax, trustworthy and stable. Mamiya, Minolta and Fuji all made interesting 35mm SLRs with some great lenses. And lenses were a bigger determining factor back then than what they were attached to, unless you needed specific accessories such as a winder, and Zuiko lenses were superb. Fast forward to the digital age, I initially continued with Olympus, but I found that FourThirds didn't suit the work I was doing, so I went for Canon. A friend had a Nikon DSLR and I found that Nikon still didn't appeal to me. I also bought a FujiFilm XE-1, the idea of them was attractive, but I found they didn't suit the way and what I was shooting. So I stuck with Canon for over a decade. It was only a post-pandemic decision to finally switch to mirrorless that made me look at the alternatives. Bear in mind that I have very little interest in video. Canon was obviously my first choice, but the size and price of the RF lenses put me off. On paper, Sony seemed like a good choice, and I tried my friends' ones, but they had no appeal. Pentax wasn't a consideration, neither was Fuji from previous experience. So I tried an Olympus EM-1, and it felt right to me almost immediately, and the economics also made practical sense too. With no interest in video, Lumix weren't of much interest, and they seemed awfully big for M4/3. Another thing that bugged me about Sony and Panasonic was they were giant electronics corporations with no heritage in cameras or lenses, even if digital cameras are computer driven imaging devices. They were appealing to the head of photographers and not the heart. They were specs driven, not creativity driven. Your observation about generational differences was interesting. I was a Kodak transparency for colour (mostly K64) and Ilford for B&W guy, but with my trusty OM-1. I did try Fuji slide film but found it too green. I did try colour neg for a couple of years when Kodachrome stopped, but switched back to Ektachrome, before going full digital. I started shooting a bit of film again a few years back, mostly B&W. In fact, I shot more B&W film in the last two years than I did in the entire 40 years before that. I digress. Nowadays, most people agree that nearly all digital cameras, with a decent lens, of the last 5 to 10 years will deliver good results. So in the end, it's just down to what feels right in your hands and does what you want it to do. And people who continuously (as in every year or two) switch brands and systems either have too much money, are suckers for marketing or are trying to compensate for something they lack. And while video features can be handy in a stills camera, using anything hybrid is never going to deliver as well as single dedicated solution. If you look at nature, most hybrids are incapable of reproducing.
Look at the demographics of camera clubs and there ALL over 40, perhaps even 50 with disposable cash. Maybe thats why they target the older generation?
Only made it thru Fuji. Pointless video. “This brand is for old people, this brand is for young people, this brand is boring”. At least he mentioned Fuji’s film sims.
You barely mentioned the Fuji MF Especially for people and landscapes You can buy 2 lenses with my 110S instead of of 10 different lenses with my Olympus stuff and crop all you want and the results exceed in every aspect. Yes they are heavier with some of the GF lenses but shooting such a camera it is hard to go back to anything else.
"A camera is a tool" - you made the point!
I had tried different Sony cameras in a store but they didn't feel right. A camera has to feel comfortable in your hand, no matter what great features it has.
I am using Olympus/OM since a couple of years now, but I still love my old Nikon F4, especially with the DW-20 waist level viewfinder.
Interesting take on brands. I don't care whether or not a brand is for young or older, though I know that influences many people. I think a better way is to look at the emphasis each company places on the type of photography you do. For example, Sony and Panasonic seem to me to really appeal to those who want to do a lot of video, Olympus is big with outdoor and wildlife photographers, Nikon and Canon still appeal to pros that require enormous systems with all the lenses and the capability to do anything. Pentax/Ricoh seems to mostly appeal to the art/prosumer/creative crowd. Fuji also seems to go for the art/prosumer/creative/street crowd. Personally, I have very little interest in shooting video and hate paying for all sorts of video functions and features that just get in the way of shooting stills. Maybe Leica still caters to us, but who can afford them? Wish there were more still-centric cameras that ignored video.
I would be interesting if any of the big brands made a camera with no video features at all.
I seem to be drawn to Nikon. My uncle had a Nikon F Photomic, which I later inherited and getting it ready to do some black & white film photography. I should probably create a RUclips video on that 🤔 I still have a roll of color film in it that I have to use up first. I also remember those National Geographic magazines, whose photographers mostly used Nikon cameras. And Nikon DSLRS are good, the colors are always just right straight out of the camera. The blues, greens, reds, and flesh tones seem to be always on tap. And Nikon F lenses. So far, I haven’t made the switch to mirrorless. Even with the Z9 there are reports of purple fringing, AF issues, and sounds like mirrorless is not quite in par with their DSLRS and F lenses. I like Canon’s new mirrorless selection. The OM-5 interests me. But for some reason I haven’t been drawn to Sony. The ergonomics aren’t there and I’m always reminded of a Sony point and shoot camera that was too complicated. So the menu system on the Sonys are pretty complicated. Well, I’m looking for a new camera too, but it looks like my Nikon DSLR has no competition bye👋
Being from the Nikon/Kodachrome generation, I am somewhat disapointed by all current brands. Canon and Nikon rode the dslr wave much too long, now it is "full frame" (actually 35 mm, for me "full frame" still means 9x12cm²), which they stick to although it will not be the future. Fujifilm and OM System are most modern, but both don't incorporate computational photography and video to the current state of technology, which can be seen only in smartphones. All these companies are driven by marketing experts and don't understand that they always need to stay ahead of the majority of their customers to be future-proof.
With all my respect, personally the manufacturer that I like the least is Sony. He is undoubtedly powerful and knows how to make a market policy to introduce his products, but... (years ago there was nobody in photography and he owes much to MINOLTA). Personally I will never buy a Sony (it hurts me to have an image sensor made by him in my equipment...).
It is a totally personal opinion and assessment.
A cordial greeting,
I like having both Fuji and Olympus just because the way they handle suits the photography I use them for. OM is wonderful at longer ranges and for hikes, while I like the fuji for sub-100mm photography like when I'm walking around a town or at a family gathering. Tactile experience is a big thing for me and both have plenty of fun dials and stuff to turn. Though I will admit that I wish the M Zuiko lenses added that sweet aperture ring Fujinons have because I love that.
When I started as a rookie local newspaper reporter in Norway back in the late eighties, the camera choice was influenced by what brand that supplied the newspaper's staff photographers. I started in a Nikon newspaper, and we competed against a Canon newspaper. What camera you had around your neck was therefore a strong, tribal identity mark. I continued in a Canon newspaper and found myself in an identity crisis. Yes, I know. Childish, but we were young men trying to find a place in a brutal world. Fun fact: The most independent, individualistic and cool dudes with Domke bags and Khaki shirts used Olympus even back then.
Olympus was a hip camera back then. I totally understand your point about Canon and Nikon. That how it was back then.
I started with a Leica (Ilford and Agfa film), then moved to a digital point and shoot from .... HP. Then upgraded to Nikon APS-C, downsized to Ricoh GR (because lugging all that Nikon gear was cumbersome) , then downsized even more to iPhone for many years (currently 13 mini), and now started with OM-5. I loved the Ricoh GR (sharp images, pocketable, discreet, snap focus) but couldn't stand the dust on sensor and within the lens issues. The OM-5 is now my travel camera, together with iPhone.
forgot that I also owned various Canon IXUS digital cameras, but they bricked themselves after about two years (software failure). Never again Canon!
Hi Peter, interesting topic, I was late to Olympus and wanted to buy a Pen F but it was too late. Since then I have missed x 5 times trying to buy second hand. The Pen F seems to hold good value. Anyway, I gave up and just yesterday bought a great condition used silver EM-1 mk 1. I use it with 3 primes (12, 25, 45) and this is all I need. Cheers
The Mark II goes pretty cheaply on eBay (I think). I am not clear on the improvements, I never owned the original, but it has a newer 20 megapixels sensor, IBIS, focus bracketting/stacking, 80 megapixels high resolution and some other features I have yet to try. The Mark III and E-M1x add live ND, useful for getting motion blur without using filters. The latter weights 1 Kg and looks at home beside a Canon 1D III.
MPB has Pen Fs As well as KEH. I bought an excellent used one. You have to be patient and set up e-mail notifications when new stock comes in.
I currently use Olympus, Panasonic, Fuji and Nikon cameras, MFT, APS-C and FF! Of all these, the one that I like best, ergonomically and simply a joy to use is the E-M5ii, closely followed by my Nikon D200. I do not like the Fuji X-T3's handling and ergonomically it is actually bad for street photography (which is what I do). Perhaps it is my style, but I find that the dials controlling aperture, ISO, shutter speed and exposure bracketing are all inconsistent and all over the place! With the E-M5ii, I simply use the front and back control dials! The Nikon D200 and D750 are simply ergonomic masterpieces, very tactile and intuitive to use.
Back in film days I used Ilford and Agfa for film and paper and Topcon for my camera. When all my Topcon equipment was stolen I replaced it with Contax because I found great deals at the camera show I was at. When I finally switched to digital I went with Olympus because it had the features I wanted. Six months later all cameras had the features.
Thank you.
I started with a Pentax SV 35mm file (1964) moved to Nikon in 1969.
I still use Nikon, same lenes can be used on the latest nikon cameras, good reason to keep good qauiliy lenses.. For micro 43, use Panasonic Lumix. happy with what I have, the M43 lesnes are great for carrying around.
Thanks for sharing.
My first SLR was a Pentax K1000, to shoot the newly-arrived daughter, so about 1976.
My second was a Canon EOS 630. I joined a camera club and my eyes don't match well with MF and wide apertures. I also bought a used Mamiya C330 and bag of lenses. Odd, eh, MF again.
I used a digital Pentax compact for a while, it was all I could afford. Better than the EOS 630 which I still have? No, probably not, but cheaper to run.
Canon EOS 30D and a succession of Canons until I started to move away in 2019, weight becoming a concern.
Since then, mostly a mix of Lumix G and OM-D E-M1 successors. A Lumix S1R and adaptor, mostly for my TS-E lenses. I still one a 6F Mark II and 80D, but they don't get much use. The 6D has GPS built in, I wish the Lumix S did.
Today, for video, I would use Lumix FH5, G9 or Olympus that I own. For FF video, it's highly improbably, the S5 II would be my choice. It seems Panasonic has invented PD, at last.
For me, it's important first with the company. There have been incidences by Sony of poor support and poor weather sealing. When I googled, the problems with support seemed across the whole Sony group. LensRentals writes its own maintenance manual, and that involve completely disassembling and reassembling a camera. A sony, maybe an A7R II, came back from a client, not working. Roger the Writer disassembled it and found lots of salt and not a lot of sealing. I gather Sony has improved since then, but....
My photography evolved to that TS-E lenses became important. Nikon has nothing to offer me, I am sceptical about "better dynamic range," and its DSLR AF in Live View sucks so much that Nikon photographers turned to Canon for their vlogging cameras, 100D and M50.
Pentax? Not really.
I have a Fujifilm X-T10, couldn't really fall in like with it.
I started seriously to go lightweight mirrorless in 2019 and now use a mix of Lumix G and OM-D 1 series cameras for most things. I have a Lumix S1R for my TS-E lenses. The S1R is not a light camera, it's heavier than the 5Ds it replaced. However, I rarely take it anywhere without clear idea of why it's the best camera for the job.
Thanks for sharing.
Thanks for sharing your experiences.
How to not get to the point in 10,000 words.
I think Pentax is good for video. I don't do video and I still in the Nikon F-system as D700, D800E and D850. I will not switch to Zed. I got Fuji X-Pro 1 and X-T1 got them 2nd hand from a friend, but I don't think they are good at video... I use them for light traveling and trekking
Peter ; a tour de force of camera brands and their pluses and minuses !.I have tried Panasonic. Nikon and now settled on my OMSytem OM5 as a great all round camera with good features . I am probably in a minority of not wanting too much gear and instead prefer some standardisation .It serves me very well !!
Been shooting with Nikon DSLRs for the last 2 decades. Now using D500 and D850 with pro glass and happy with it. HOWEVER, as a system it is heavy and bulky. It performs but it also demands more from me physically.
I just got into Olympus MFT gear. It is: FUN, PORTABLE, LESS EXPENSIVE, and has great COMPUTATIONAL FEATURES.
Hello Peter last week I needed to travel to Los Angeles . However , I was fortunate to an invite to Universal Studios complex/. When I travel I take my Oly OM D 10 or 5 First Generation !!! My observation maybe there were two or three other folks with thousands of visitors in the amusement park with a camera . The go to tool for photographing was the smart phone .
When I was “ on the road” years ago many folks had cameras mostly Canon , Nikon , but lonesome me Minolta !
The point … There are those that consider M43 Dead .. they only want Full frame or you have the APC group ( For the record in have all non Mirrorless are Oly / Lumix . ) The point that the Japanese manufacturers have missed the entry market was decimated w/ smart phones it’s software , uploading .
Yes !!! You are absolutely correct ..a camera is a tool that has specific applications for what one must accomplish! For me I was killed when Minolta was KIA and Sony purchased them . I decided Nikon would be my DSLR . I still use my D300s a dinosaur and I love it . The reason I chose Olympus / Lumix mirrorless was the price point on used market . If you are not a working professional get over the equipment go out and photograph , learn and grow .. Have a good time . For the Japanese manufacturers start thinking outside the box your piece of the pie is much smaller today .. you need to draw new folks . Thus Olympus mistake w/ you and fellow M43 former Ambassador in Pennsylvania..
Thanks for sharing.
Thanks Peter: I enjoyed the memories. I have an Epson PC 3000z on my desk, the first digital camera I ever bought. Olympus was my second, the one with pelical mirror and fixed lens. In my Leica bag I have an M-4 and M-6 with 5 lenses including the 50 MM F1.0 Noctilux, I occasionally shoot some film. Yesterday I was shooting some video on my OM-1, my wife was using the EM1 MK2. Focusing was a bit difficult, sometimes I switched to manual. I was thinking about you then. Mike
A bit of an unusual perspective on camera brands, and I don't understand the logic behind it. Canon is for older people, and because you are an older man, you don't like Canon?! Oh, and by the way: Sony is actually among the oldest still existing camera manufacturers. Their camera division is a continuation of Minolta's camera business, and Minolta was founded in 1928.
It is a bit different approach to camera brands. Sony is quite new as a big player in the market. Yes it's roots are in Konica-Minolta brand. Still Sony is in my mind a fresh new brand that has made Canon and Nikon on its toes. Especially younger generation is drawn to Sony. Canon and Nikon are nowadays more towards older generation what it comes to pros. There was a time when Canon was the camera to buy, that was in around 2007-2012. When I say that Canon is mostly bought by older generation and older people like it, does not mean that all older people will buy it. I have my own preferences. besides I might totally wrong about the brands. As I said in the video all of it was my own opinion and impressions.
Because the video specs are so good, I feel Panasonic full frame cameras are overlooked by photographers. However, they are typically 50% to 100% less expensive than comparable models by other manufacturers, turn out very nice files from the "low" 24 megapixel sensor, and if you must have lots of definition there's pixel shift technology with 96mp images as long as the subject isn't moving too quickly. The S-series also feel like real cameras, not a lens platform with technical specifications.
the best camera ever i had used is lumix lx 100. the best give you controls and size unles the small sensor
I think you should try Lumix m4/3 cameras for video - since you have lot of m4/3 lenses. And speaking about S5II - it's incfredible camera. Best money/value I guess.
All those are options.
Zurab K.
0 seconds ago
The video is called the good and bad of camera brands but up to Olympus (I only lasted that long) all it talks about is this brand is for old people, that one is for young people and third one is for bold people. What an insight… jävla 😂
Wow! Thank you for the video. I am amazed that you have have used so many camera brands. Have you ever tried to work out how much you have spent on cameras and lenses? Thank you, it was a great summary.
If I counted the money I have spend on gear would make me cry... too much propably even though I am not a one that buys every new camera.
Great video! I started with digital photography with NIkon, mainly because I liked the ergonomics and image quality, and I could borrow lenses. I sticked with Nikon for a long time, I never really wanted to switch to any other brand. Nevertheless, I switched to a Panasonic S1 a year ago. The L mount lenses are really, really good. When the S1 was announced, there were only three pro-level Panasonic lenses. At current time, both Panasonic and Sigma have enough lenses to choose from, although they will never be cheap. The S1 performs like a $5000 camera, but in reality it costs half of that.
The Lumix ecosystem has only two cons: weight, and autofocus. My S1 with a 50mm 1.4 weigs 40% more than a comparable Canon camera. The autofocus on the S1 works well enough for photography, and the S5 mark II solved the AF issues for video. If the Lumix system gets more popular and Panasonic makes AF even better, then Sony and especially Nikon have to watch out.
As a second camera, I have a Lumix LX100 since 2015. It is really versatile, is relatively small and lightweight and gives the same image quality as any other Lumix G camera will do.
Thanks for sharing.
Thanks Peter. Enjoyed listening to your points. New video camera guess: likely Sony or if more serious video tools needed, the Panny. In truth, likely all the brands make the best camera. Just need to match your preferences.
I totally agree, it is all about to match the needs.
Peter, if you are wishing to spend more time doing street photography, while using the MFT lenses you already own, my guess is that you would love using the GX-9 Lumix as your go-to camera for the street. Am I right? What I do like about Canon and Nikon is their understanding of ergonomics in making cameras which are not awkward. Maybe Sony has improved over the years in that regard. Sony menu systems, do we go there? I will say Sony sensors, with great dynamic range, and great focusing on their cameras, is rather tempting. Of course, in APS-C, Fujifilm is the hip thing. I have no idea as to quality - durability and such on Fujifilm, having never owned one. Will the RAW files work with any editor? Ricoh GR IIIx sound interesting, but I like being able to change lenses, have a EVF when needed, and the tilt screen comes in very handy. Not sure what a person gains in street shooting with the GR over the GX-9 or even the Olympus PEN PL-8, which is fun and light in weight. And yes, Canon needs to get more interesting looking cameras to market. A Canonet rangefinder in digital would be a good selling camera. Use the guts of the R10 or even RP. They also need appropriate lenses for street in RF. Take care, Loren
What does the G9 offer over an OM-D E-M1 Mark II? I own both, I don't get it,
@@oneeyedphotographer GX-9 is a rangefinder style, fairly small, and I got it for $799 with a 12-60mm zoom lens. Think of the GX-9 as a PEN F, but with faster focusing, and a lower price. The cameras you own fine, and I assume render images which are pretty similar. The G9 is at a low-low price. The OM-D E-M1 mk II is no longer found new -- at least I think so???
In regards to Fujifilm raw processing, I believe they work the best with Capture One software.
I'm in my sixties, so of course, I use Nikon due to my collections of lenses over the decades. Adapters for the C/Y mount lenses of the 1970s and early 80s are still used on my Nikon cameras, both film and digital. I've even bought into the Z system. That said, Panasonic MFT is my most used brand these days due to the ease of use with video, and the size and weight of the cameras. If I lost my lifetime collection, I'd get the Panasonic S5II. Although they don't have a huge offering of lenses, the ones they have are excellent.
Thanks for sharing.
Back in the film days i used all brands but always consudered myself being a Pentaxian 😂 Loved Z-1p, ME Super, K 1000. Loved using m42 lenses with them 😅. And don't forget Minolta...
Loved the ME Super Program plus the lenses still work on the new Pentax cameras
Didn't Sony buy out Minolta?
Minolta and Konica merged in 2003. Sony bought Konica-Minolta's camera business in 2006. EBI (Elite Brands Inc.) bought the rights to the name Minolta and is still making some cameras.
@@ForsgardPeter Didn't know that someone is still making cameras with the Minolta brand. I need to research this.
Thanks Peter. The youtube ads are torturous.
I know the ads... It is not ideal, but making this free content needs to be payed.... It takes a lot of time.
I especially "love" how B&H bombards us with ads, but their website is constantly closed for holidays.
In the 90's I used Nikon with Fuji film. I must have been from a confused generation 😂
Thanks for that Peter! I'd be interested in your thoughts on the Fujifilm x10 if you give it another try. It was a great traveling camera for me and I still use it from time to time.
Good tio hear. I will give it a try in May/June.
Great video. Proud user of Panasonic Lumix cameras since 2009 . Never looked back!
I learned to shoot film on an older Topcon, a fairly unknown Japanese brand that seemed popular with journalists who required a rugged system. I also had a Pentax ME Super, and loved shooting things like concerts or live performances with it. Topcon was outdoor, Pentax was indoor. This was in the late 90s (I was pretty late to film).
Now, much later I switch between Canon and Olympus, depending on the application. Even though I have quite a lot of Canon gear, I find I use Olympus for just about everything.
You took on a pretty hot topic, trying to categorise by brand, but I think your views were perfectly reasonable. There are always exceptions, but that was a decent summary of the main popular brands.
Thanks for sharing.
To me Leica is the camera for the older established photographer more than Nikon . Thanks for your thoughts Peter.
Good point and is most likely that.
With buckets of cash.
not really good or bad, more like 'what generation I think use this'
But what about real advantages/disadvantages? Or real specialisation of a brand? Yes, your mention street photo but what about everything else? Wildlife and sport advantages of Canon with high speed sequential speed, but worse color accuracy and dynamic range than other brands? Nikons advantages for sport/wildlife with precapture and global electronic shutter, which is unfortunatelly somewhat counterweighted by worse autofocus compared to Canon/Sony? Fuji advantage of color accuracy and more long term support for their camera? Sony with quite a good focus on landscape photography with their great dynamic range and high resolution FF camera and their long standing focus on video, but compared to competition very slow sequential speeds and still sticking to CFExpress type A that nobody else uses? Pentax and their dedication to DSLRs? Olympus disadvantage of their m4/3 format? (what are their advantages except size and weight thanks to 2x crop factor? Not familiar with their camera)
Also Sony is not really new player, its successor of Minolta who had history since film era, they made quite good DSLRs too, they were doing in body stabilisation when (except I think 1 other brand, forgot which it was, I dont count Minolta who I think started it, but was bought by Sony) everyone prefered in lens stabilisation (now basically everyone agrees in body stabilisation is the way to go).
Great video. They all take great shots so it's down to weight and look and personal needs. I've always gone for smaller and good looking and there's always been something about the name Olympus, I've had an OM1 and now an EM5. Now I'm toying with what you say is the 'old man's' brand, Nikon, the Zfc. An attractive and small camera. Out of fashion suits me. Simon and Garfunkel - I got a Nikon camera, give me that Kodachrome, those nice bright colours....... No I'm digital only, wouldn't dream of film.😄
Before falling in love with a Nikon Zfc, look closely at the lenses you might want. The Zfc might be lighter than a Z7 (I am assuming much here), but if you find yourself wanting FX lenses, any weight saving is largely illusory.
Yes. I have a chart with the weight of all the 4/3rds I'm interested in. I'll need another if the temptation gets to that point.
@@peternumber19 Don't confuse four thirds with micro four thirds. The similarity ends with the sensor.
I only watched the Pentax section, but man... really? Is that all you can tell about that brand. Who cares what camera you used 30 years ago. Get to the point or skip the section. You really can't sum up some of it's strengths or weaknesses?
Yes it is. I have not used Pentax since the late 90s.
Great video. I still love my Oly Em1 Mkii, but I'm kind of happy that you are independent now.
As a long-time Ex-Canon user, I agree they are a bit boring. I think boring in a good way - the menu system, the ergonomics just feel familiar when you switch between Canon models. At some point I wanted to try out something new and jumped ship, ending up with Panasonic both full frame and MFT. Yes, the autofocus of the Panasonic S5 Mark 1 was bad, and so is the AF of the GH6, compared to the last Canon I bought (the EOS 90D). But overall, I find the image quality really good, the lenses, especially the Leica lenses for MFT, are excellent. And as for street photography, the Panasonic GX9 combined with the Leica 15mm 1.7 is a better option in my view than the Fujifilm X100V in my opinion. About the same size, but you get a better lens, better autofocus in single mode, and you get it cheaper. If you don't like the 15mm lens, get another one, there is plenty of choice.
GX forever!
Thanks for sharing.
I have the GX9. I wouldn't agree that it's a better combo for street than the Fuji X100V because ironically the Fuji can focus better particularly in lower light. I am not sure the lens is better, I would say both lenses are good.
The AF on the X100V not only I find it better overall but has also better usability- faster slow focus points to use. The Fuji also has the OVF option, which allows you to know when something is entering the frame and the overall camera is smaller than the GX9 combined with the Leica 15mm F1.7.
The X100V also has better image quality. That said, I think the GX9 is overall pretty good- I agree the lens you mention is pretty good and my only real deal breaker with the GX9 is that the rear wheel went stuttery/bad within 4 months of use. This is the 2nd camera Panasonic makes I see that (the other being the Lumix GX850)- I wish they did a "mark II" with better DFD or phase detect, much better IBIS and better robusticity in that rear wheel. I like it's also pretty non descript which is good for street.
@Raist3db Thanks for the warning! Guess I'll stick with my GX7. I found a GX1 on sale for $80 in a secondhand store. My GX7 has been super solid. It's the ergonomics and the JPEG settings that make it fun for me.
Love Love Love this video 🙂Great Job 🙂 You are always very objective and that is greatly appreciated 🙂I totally identify with the Fuji failures part of the video as well 🙂The only three that I've purchased that have not failed me are the S1, X-T2, and X-E1 (which I currently use for daily shooting). 🙂
Thank you.
An interesting round up.
Cant agree or disagree as all the points are valid, and as you say we all have past bagage if we have used a lot of brands. Especially if we grew up in the film area.
I had an SFX too! I never really got on with it either but i only used it as a second body (with MF lenses) to my P30. Eventually i sold both and moved to Canon AF.
Hi Peter! I do consider Sony the most efficient company selling Cameras, next to Canon. But Sony's strategy involves too frequent launches, few FW updates, Cameras with characteristics very well divided between the models, which prevents the experienced photographer, or who transits through many photographic disciplines, from having only one model (which naturally interests Sony) and suggests more models and more exchanges. It seems to me the ideal brand for beginners or for those who want efficiency and image quality as priorities above the fun and pleasure of photography itself, giving more focus to the equipment. Just like you Peter, I've worked professionally and I've used for Hobby, many brands of Cameras, including Sony. And just like you, I try not to change equipment frequently, as I consider it unnecessary. Being very sincere, I believe that for your work on RUclips, Sony could make a lot of sense and would open up many possibilities for equipment and videos to be produced and a lot of viewing. For my professional use, with comercial Videos for the web, and journalistic videos and short documentaries, and in Real Estate and Food photography, and for personal use, Wildlife, Travel, Macro and Lanscape, the MFT system is still the best. The MFT system, in addition to being, in my opinion, the most fun, makes the best bridge between my professional work and my Hobbies: Photography, climbing and (very) long walks in the Mountains (mostly Europe and South America)! Professionally I use the GH6 for video and the em-1iii for stills. I rarely use my Nikon and my old Sony remains in the drawer! The OM-1 is my personal use camera! I will probably buy the S5ii X to complement my professional video setup. I consider the Lumix to be the best for video, but I don't rely on AF in my work. The Lumix system is the best for the MFT FF integration and that's also a very important point for you beyond YT work! I’m very curious about your future Camera. Because I’m seeing more and more people migrating from Canon, Nikon and Sony to OM, but for Wildlife and “Adventure Photography”. And I’m talking here about experienced Photographers, like Mike Lane, Daniel J Cox, and many others. I’m asking my self if wait is not the best choice for you. I believe in new and interesting models with all you need in the MFT LUMIX line. And you can complement your equipment with a S5ii someday for those rarely situations where you will need more than theMFT f1.2 DoF for you video work.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts.
Sony makes cameras for different niches, but they have also cameras for general use like A7IV. This model since his release is the nr 1 sold camera at Yodobashi Japan.
The Sigma FPL is actually a perfect camera for nature and landscape photography.
Good to hear.
I just wonder if you still use OMD Olympus for photography?
Yes I do. I use OM-1 and OM-5.
cool clickbait, man.
Im using nikon. Im from the younger generation. its fine.
You really glossed over NIkon, but I can forgive you because I have been looking for a second body/lightweight travel camera to supplement my Nikon Z9 and Nikon has nothing competitive to offer. I looked at Fujifilm X-pro and the Leica CL. I am most interested in the Sony A7c (full frame and IBIS) and may get to shoot one this weekend, but it would require buying new lenses (or using a converter for my Nikon lenses, which would nullify its autofocus advantage). I will probably just try to patiently wait for Nikon to get a Z6iii out, but I can imagine they are losing a lot of customers like me to Sony or Canon or Fujifilm.
It is painful to see they dont have z6iii or z500 (equivalent to D500 or canon r7) I have waited long enough but I am losing patience now. May switch sides.
What is the problem with Z50 or Zfc?
@@Ad-eq3cu Zfc is without grip, dont like it. For Z50 - little less resolution, No IBIS, no real AF for birds. Again, it is not that there is something wrong with it, It is just that I dont think it is the best tool for wildlife.
@@me4jas I see thanks. I used the Z50 for holidays and it was excellent but as you say not good for birds, that is true.
@@me4jas "A little less resolution" is probably of no actual consequence. Canon's 1Dx II, 1Dx III, 7D II, 6D, 70D cameras were all 20 megapixels, I think the Nikon D5 and D6 too, amongst those are four first-choice cameras for the Olympics. a 50 megapixels FF camera crops to about 18 megapixels at APS-C, and in post you can crop to a lot of sizes and shoes between. Me, I am uncomfortable going back to no IBIS, so I agree with you there.
Take a look at what wildlife (and particularly bird) photographers are accomplishing with the OM 1 camera body and lenses, particularly the 150-400 and 300 mm lenses. One I follow chose the OM 1 and 150-400 above Sony, he sold his A9.
Panasonic Lumix S5II
That is one option.
Thanks for your video. I have enjoy it. Beware that many will not like this video as you are discussing brands and explain who is using them. I like it much as many impression you have talked about is something I also see. For example Nikon has a very old audience who like big heavy cameras and many of them does not know anything about video or even dislike it. Look how Nikon does not put a fully articulated screen in their cameras. In a Facbook forum about Nikon someone said that Nikon should not focus i=on certain market such as those Nikormate days. I said to him that I never heard of Nikkormate and needed to search in the history of cameras and read that those were sold in the seventies for young and general people. I said to this persons that this cameras were released before I was born. I checked on his Facebook profile and ask his age then he replied that he is in his seventees. This is typical Nikon user above the 50 year old. Chuck Talks of AP Studios said in one of his live views discussing Nikon, that we have only a bunch of old people discussing or caring for this brand. He sees no young people discussing about Nikon. I think Nikon has also lost many users to Sony. Your impression of Sony I agree with it simply by seeing what most You Tubers uses. They are mostly young people using their cameras. The older generation complain of complicated menu and bad argonomics. But as you said Sony is the only one taking vloging seroiusly. When Panasonic introduced S5 II with Phase Detect AF, many of You Tubers were in Japan at Panasonic. Most of them left Panasonic to Sony and said during the review of this camera that they will not come back due different motives. Panasonic had during the early days of MFT a lot of street photographers, which now is dominated by Fuji. Fuji and Sony have the most younger audience. That is why this 2 brands keep releasing bodies as their higher management have confidence that they will grow. I think Panasonic with MFT and L-mount is targetting to much the video market which was Film oriented then more wedding and event videographers, which are the audience who use video the most. Panasonic biggest rival in video is BlackMagic Design. Regarding Canon I think in 10 years they will be second after Sony but they will still be a big player as they focus very much on the entry market with new technologies and not recycle old technologies at those entry price points.
I am aware and that is why I tried to say that it is only about my stereotypes and might not be the case.
There's a glitch in one of the chapter markers - you put 12.26 instead of 12:26 so YT doesn't recognise it
Thanks, I will fix it.
I was absolutely horrified when you mentioned how bad your Pentax SFX was as I still have mine. I got a Canon TX camera in 1976 and used it until my house was robbed in 1987 and it was stolen and never recovered. I remember being seduced by the thought of AF so wanted one of those cameras. A lot of people I met on a trip through Europe in 1975 used Asahi Pentax SLR's so I think that is what convinced me to go Pentax. So I bought a Pentax SFX and used it until I went digital with Pentax's *istD in 2005 eventually getting a K10D. It's ironic that I eventually left Pentax because of its poor AF considering that I first got Pentax because of AF.
I own a Pentax SF1 and it was great! I no longer shoot film, thus it will be for display.
SFX did not meet the requirements that I had for AF.
@@ForsgardPeter Fair enough, however, I had no great expectation of what AF could do at that stage and it was just for personal use so I guess it didn't affect me too much. One aspect that I did like was 1.8 fps continuous shooting as my old camera couldn't have a motor drive. That plus Fuji ASA 400 film. Those were the days.😳
I’m going to go out on the limb and say it: you will get a Panasonic. Either S5 II or S5 X. :)
I've used a lot of systems. Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic, Nikon, Sony, Canon.... NO Pentax and Ricoh. If you need fast action continuous AF in low light, than Olympus, Panasonic, Fuji will not provide for you... Fuji is for street and good light AF and hipster... For people who love the camera more than the outcome... Sincerely in good light Sony RX 100 V+ is king... for street and action... Olympus is a dead system... they rule only in image stabilization, but this is not enough... Otherwise forget it... AF can not be compared with Sony and Canon... Panasonic is only for movies... Mediocre AF-C, a dead Micro4/3... This is the market position - a player for filming...Pentax is DSLR... niche product in the future... Ricoh only with zone focusing... Heard AF-C is too slow... And than there is Sony Nikon Canon... This is the future... With Sony as momentary leader (although they have the least performant Software, body build and ergonomics) with good AF and good sensor, but 3rd place color science. Than second we have Canon - excellent AF and ergonomics, but 3rd place dynamic range sensor - just weaker than Sony and Nikon (also Sony). And 3rd we have Nikon. Excellent handling and sensor (dynamic range) but slightly slower AF (Z6/Z7) or too complex (Z8/Z9) than Sony and Canon, but it is working great in AF-C mode... For me the outcome counts... So there are only 3 systems that I can take seriously Sony, Canon and Nikon... I have Sony (RX) and Nikon (Z6/Z8) for the superior sensor (to Canon)... For creative, low light, fast action, non flash photography these are the only options. If you don't need this, than other brands are good too. From all I dislike Fuji the most - too hipster for me, not enough technology... a 2000 Euro camera Fuji x100V with no image stabilization? Are we still in 2010? XE4 the same.... This cameras are good only if you don't compare them with Sony Canon Nikon... everything else is marketing and youtube influencing... For photography: Compare a XT5 with Sony A74... It's a joke... Compare Sony A7R5 and Nikon Z8 with the top of the line Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic (for filming is good)... no comment.
I like when we all have options. I really like Fuji. Great quality and good over all cameras. Yes they have a few models that do not have stabilizers. Most likely they will update those camera sin the future. Until there are other choices. For photography is much more than image quality. In a photograph there are so many other things that matter more. All modern digital camera can give you excellent images if you know what you are doing.
@@ForsgardPeter In 2022, the number of cameras shipped had decreased to about eight million units compared to over 115 million in 2011... So the next chapter in the strategy is called... SURVIVAL.. I think that the mobile phone will kill everything up to APSC... So the professional market, I think, will be focused on Full Frame. APSC will be for enthusiasts/hipsters (who will not give in to the mobile phone dominance), but percentage wise it will be up to max 10% (See Fuji + Olympus + Pentax market share)... So the logical market evolution will be in the FF Environment. The others will have little CASH for R&D... That's why I think that Sony, Canon, Nikon (+some market share for Panasonic on filming - but this is debatable how big this will be) will be the future...When the market in 2011 was 115 million Units - there was hope, for everyone... But now, the name is called ... survival... They hope to increase the market to +50% (income numbers, not units sold) by 2028... We will see....
I really like Fuji X100V, but it's overestimated, it has some negatives. It's not versatile and if you want camera as a tool, then ... yeah it's a bit useless. But you can take it anywhere without much thinking about it's weigth, space and which lenses to add. I don't think everything up to APSC will die because of phones. There's a huuuge gap between phone and even my 7 years old Panasonic G80 with 10 years old sensor. Phone (Zenfone8) can take quite good photos with actually very good colors, HDR which looks nice and not overdone as in the past, it has awesome screen. But handling is awful (on every phone), setting it to "pro" mode just to change white balance takes time, you can't put zoom lens, you can't take many pictures with it (milky way, fireworks, aurora, high iso or long exposure in general (old MFT camera are not enough sometimes), ...) and it suffers indoor. Plus you can't play with RAW files.
I think camera manufacturers are harming themselves. There is nothing like entry level cameras. If there are, they are not reviewed by youtubers, because most of reviews is not from photographers or hobbists, but from professional nerds who rarely take camera out from their basement youtube recording room. There are really no cameras just for casual hobbists who are not rich enough. On the other hand I think professional market is actually niche thing and for Panasonic, entering this as last might be a fatal mistake, because I don't see any specific reason why to chose Panasonic over Sony, Nikon or Canon. I don't believe that MFT is dead, there are many people travelling around the world and many of them can afford 1000EUR camera and they don't want to put 3kg of photo gear into backpack or suitcase and they don't want just a phone neither. But yeah, Sony RX100 is a huge step up from a phone, I had maybe 2nd version briefly, but ergonomy was not good for me, I used it only on a few bike trips and skiing.
What’s completely obvious from this video is there are simply too many separate brands, all using minor variations on the same technologies, chasing a small, shrinking market. Once upon a time there were two major companies, along with a few specialty brands. Now this small, shrinking market is saturated.
Don’t believe me? Here’s a thought experiment. Imagine you want to take up photography, have a reasonable budget for a camera - and lenses - and don’t know which brand to choose. Put all the brands on a dial and spin the dial. Go to the store and buy the brand it lands on. Unless you are highly specialized, you won’t be disappointed.
I agree. 99% of the cameras in the market will do the job for most of us.
My first SLR was Praktica L, basic but functional. Then I wanted/needed something with a winder. Nikon and Canon were out of the question as they were too expensive (this was pre AE1), so I settled on a Topcon. Excellent, but limited, lenses, and it was massive. Then I came a cross the OM-1, and a lifetime love affair began. Although, back then, Canon and Nikon were way out of my price league, Nikon was always the unattainable pro camera, but never ever appealed. There was something about Canon that had more appeal, but (for me) it was even close to the compact and affordable Olympus. Pentax was Pentax, trustworthy and stable. Mamiya, Minolta and Fuji all made interesting 35mm SLRs with some great lenses. And lenses were a bigger determining factor back then than what they were attached to, unless you needed specific accessories such as a winder, and Zuiko lenses were superb.
Fast forward to the digital age, I initially continued with Olympus, but I found that FourThirds didn't suit the work I was doing, so I went for Canon. A friend had a Nikon DSLR and I found that Nikon still didn't appeal to me. I also bought a FujiFilm XE-1, the idea of them was attractive, but I found they didn't suit the way and what I was shooting. So I stuck with Canon for over a decade. It was only a post-pandemic decision to finally switch to mirrorless that made me look at the alternatives. Bear in mind that I have very little interest in video. Canon was obviously my first choice, but the size and price of the RF lenses put me off. On paper, Sony seemed like a good choice, and I tried my friends' ones, but they had no appeal. Pentax wasn't a consideration, neither was Fuji from previous experience. So I tried an Olympus EM-1, and it felt right to me almost immediately, and the economics also made practical sense too. With no interest in video, Lumix weren't of much interest, and they seemed awfully big for M4/3. Another thing that bugged me about Sony and Panasonic was they were giant electronics corporations with no heritage in cameras or lenses, even if digital cameras are computer driven imaging devices. They were appealing to the head of photographers and not the heart. They were specs driven, not creativity driven.
Your observation about generational differences was interesting. I was a Kodak transparency for colour (mostly K64) and Ilford for B&W guy, but with my trusty OM-1. I did try Fuji slide film but found it too green. I did try colour neg for a couple of years when Kodachrome stopped, but switched back to Ektachrome, before going full digital. I started shooting a bit of film again a few years back, mostly B&W. In fact, I shot more B&W film in the last two years than I did in the entire 40 years before that. I digress. Nowadays, most people agree that nearly all digital cameras, with a decent lens, of the last 5 to 10 years will deliver good results. So in the end, it's just down to what feels right in your hands and does what you want it to do. And people who continuously (as in every year or two) switch brands and systems either have too much money, are suckers for marketing or are trying to compensate for something they lack.
And while video features can be handy in a stills camera, using anything hybrid is never going to deliver as well as single dedicated solution. If you look at nature, most hybrids are incapable of reproducing.
Thanks for sharing.
Joe Cornish, Phase One to Sigma!
Christian Fletcher Phase One to Leica Sl2. He uses (some) Sigma lenses.
Both are notable landscape photographers.
great
Look at the demographics of camera clubs and there ALL over 40, perhaps even 50 with disposable cash. Maybe thats why they target the older generation?
I agree, most likely it just that. Why wouldn't you target the ones that have the money.
Tell us you don't know anything about the Current Canon mirrorless system...without saying it....
I don't think the title reflects the content of this video.
Why?
Only made it thru Fuji. Pointless video. “This brand is for old people, this brand is for young people, this brand is boring”. At least he mentioned Fuji’s film sims.
You barely mentioned the Fuji MF Especially for people and landscapes You can buy 2 lenses with my 110S instead of of 10 different lenses with my Olympus stuff and crop all you want and the results exceed in every aspect. Yes they are heavier with some of the GF lenses but shooting such a camera it is hard to go back to anything else.