Sometimes I get bored at work and do things I'm not supposed to, like read/listen up on camera stuff. Like many people, I often have regret about the camera system I bought into and feel that maybe I could have gotten something better to make my pictures look even better. So I'll get a couple things out of the way real quick, if you want to improve your photos you should try to improve your technique and learn how to use the camera the best, or learn how to photoshop.
With that out of the way, what's the best camera to buy?
I want to lump sensor size discussion as well as lens selection together, because they are very closely related! I also want to emphasize that they're not quite as important as you may think!
What size sensor: 1inch CX, Micro 4/3, APS-C, Full Frame, or Medium Format?
What brand: Nikon, Canon, Fuji, Sony, Pentax, Samsung (RIP), Olympus, Panasonic, Xiaoyi, Hasselblad?
On one hand, there is a big difference between formats, and yet on the other hand they can all perform remarkably similar. You will often read that “Full Frame” is the end-all be-all of cameras but that’s not exactly accurate. For one, “full frame” and “Crop sensor” is itself misleading. Crop sensors are not a crop of a full frame sensor, they’re sensors of a different size. For example, the Sony A7m2 is a 24MP full frame sensor, so if the A6300 is a “crop sensor” it shouldn’t also be 24MP right? What it does mean, is the A6300 is going to have more pixels packed into a smaller sensor, and will have more detail but also more noise. Depending on what you prefer, the full frame could offer benefits while the A6300 can also offer benefits.
I don’t want to go into too much information about the additional differences among sensor sizes, except to say that if you want a lot of detail you should check out Tony Northrops videos on this:
They’re quite detailed and complicated, but to get the final results of a camera you should apply the crop factor of your camera sensor (with Full Frame = 1.0) by the focal length of the lens you want to buy and the aperture of that lens. Technically, this is not the correct methodology but if you want to find out what the final image will look like, this will help you do It quickly. ISO is also not the same between full frame and other formats, as a smaller sensor is not capable of absorbing as much light as larger ones.
After comparing systems you’ll find a few things:
Smaller format cameras can often get the same “equivalent” aperture as larger format cameras. So getting shallow depth of field is not impossible or even that difficult on smaller format cameras.
Lenses usually end up being about the same size if the “equivalent” is the same. M43 advertises that it gives you smaller lenses. Their logic is that a Panasonic 12-35mm (offers 24-70mm) f/2.8 lens is much smaller than a 24-70mm f/2.8 full frame lens. However you’d need to multiple the aperture by 2 as well (as mentioned in Tony’s videos) which gives you a 24-70 f/5.6 equivalent lens. To compare equivalent results you could compare a Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 with Metabones speed booster, which gives you a 25-50mm f/2.6 equivalent on full frame. This lens will be about the same size and weight as a 24-70mm f/2.8 full frame lens however.
The advantage of Full Frame is generally improved dynamic range, lower ISO setting, and larger pixels. This gives it moderately improved image quality, but don’t think that a full frame will absolutely crush an APS-C or M43 camera even though its sensor is 2-4x larger. Here is another comparison to show: http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2016/...7rii-and-55-1-8-vs-olympus-pen-f-and-25-f1-2/
So what camera should you buy? Well it depends. I think the best thing is to try the cameras you are interested in. To offer an example, the Sony systems usually have the best ratings for modern cameras, but I did not buy Sony because I have difficulty using their menu system, and find the Olympus E-M1 to have generally better ergonomics. Panasonic offers touch screens with a good amount of functionality, and 4K video in most of their cameras. Fuji offers classic control layouts on theirs. Find what is best for you. Also consider what your needs are. Just by having 4K video doesn’t mean the video is automatically superior. A lot more goes into video than just specs, so check out more detailed reviews online, I think you’ll find that the resolution alone does not have a major impact on the video quality.
I think the important things to focus on for a camera, where real difference can be found:
Autofocus performance (Stills and Video AF will not always be the same)
Buffer size and frame rate ( important if shooting sports/action)
Ergonomics, menu, and controls – how is the grip, does the screen fold-out/flip like you want, are the buttons
Dynamic Range for Video and Stills (may not always be the same) - You can see a good comparison of sensors at DxOmark.com
Image stabilization – how does the camera achieve it? Electronic, Lens, Body? How good is it? Max Yuryev on Youtube does a great job of comparing some of the more recent cameras.
Some other things:
What about gimbals?
This is related to the camera you choose. Do you need a gymbal for video work? Possibly. If you have a newer Olympus or Panasonic you will probably find that the in-body image stabilization is good enough for most hand-held video. If you have a Sony or Fuji and plan on doing a run-and-gun video setup, a gymbal would be a good idea. Batteries are also a nice extra accessory, especially on most mirrorless cameras which don’t have the greatest battery life.
What about SD Cards?
Which SD card is also heavily dependent on what camera you have. Simply buying the fastest card won’t give you the fastest speeds. If you have a Panasonic GX85 or Sony A6000, the write speed is limited to around 32-35 mb/s. This means a UHS-2 card would not have any advantage over a UHS-1 card, and most UHS-1 cards will perform about the same. Check out this site for more detailed comparisons of SD cards on various cameras: https://alikgriffin.com/
With that out of the way, what's the best camera to buy?
I want to lump sensor size discussion as well as lens selection together, because they are very closely related! I also want to emphasize that they're not quite as important as you may think!
What size sensor: 1inch CX, Micro 4/3, APS-C, Full Frame, or Medium Format?
What brand: Nikon, Canon, Fuji, Sony, Pentax, Samsung (RIP), Olympus, Panasonic, Xiaoyi, Hasselblad?
On one hand, there is a big difference between formats, and yet on the other hand they can all perform remarkably similar. You will often read that “Full Frame” is the end-all be-all of cameras but that’s not exactly accurate. For one, “full frame” and “Crop sensor” is itself misleading. Crop sensors are not a crop of a full frame sensor, they’re sensors of a different size. For example, the Sony A7m2 is a 24MP full frame sensor, so if the A6300 is a “crop sensor” it shouldn’t also be 24MP right? What it does mean, is the A6300 is going to have more pixels packed into a smaller sensor, and will have more detail but also more noise. Depending on what you prefer, the full frame could offer benefits while the A6300 can also offer benefits.
I don’t want to go into too much information about the additional differences among sensor sizes, except to say that if you want a lot of detail you should check out Tony Northrops videos on this:
They’re quite detailed and complicated, but to get the final results of a camera you should apply the crop factor of your camera sensor (with Full Frame = 1.0) by the focal length of the lens you want to buy and the aperture of that lens. Technically, this is not the correct methodology but if you want to find out what the final image will look like, this will help you do It quickly. ISO is also not the same between full frame and other formats, as a smaller sensor is not capable of absorbing as much light as larger ones.
After comparing systems you’ll find a few things:
Smaller format cameras can often get the same “equivalent” aperture as larger format cameras. So getting shallow depth of field is not impossible or even that difficult on smaller format cameras.
Lenses usually end up being about the same size if the “equivalent” is the same. M43 advertises that it gives you smaller lenses. Their logic is that a Panasonic 12-35mm (offers 24-70mm) f/2.8 lens is much smaller than a 24-70mm f/2.8 full frame lens. However you’d need to multiple the aperture by 2 as well (as mentioned in Tony’s videos) which gives you a 24-70 f/5.6 equivalent lens. To compare equivalent results you could compare a Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 with Metabones speed booster, which gives you a 25-50mm f/2.6 equivalent on full frame. This lens will be about the same size and weight as a 24-70mm f/2.8 full frame lens however.
The advantage of Full Frame is generally improved dynamic range, lower ISO setting, and larger pixels. This gives it moderately improved image quality, but don’t think that a full frame will absolutely crush an APS-C or M43 camera even though its sensor is 2-4x larger. Here is another comparison to show: http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2016/...7rii-and-55-1-8-vs-olympus-pen-f-and-25-f1-2/
So what camera should you buy? Well it depends. I think the best thing is to try the cameras you are interested in. To offer an example, the Sony systems usually have the best ratings for modern cameras, but I did not buy Sony because I have difficulty using their menu system, and find the Olympus E-M1 to have generally better ergonomics. Panasonic offers touch screens with a good amount of functionality, and 4K video in most of their cameras. Fuji offers classic control layouts on theirs. Find what is best for you. Also consider what your needs are. Just by having 4K video doesn’t mean the video is automatically superior. A lot more goes into video than just specs, so check out more detailed reviews online, I think you’ll find that the resolution alone does not have a major impact on the video quality.
I think the important things to focus on for a camera, where real difference can be found:
Autofocus performance (Stills and Video AF will not always be the same)
Buffer size and frame rate ( important if shooting sports/action)
Ergonomics, menu, and controls – how is the grip, does the screen fold-out/flip like you want, are the buttons
Dynamic Range for Video and Stills (may not always be the same) - You can see a good comparison of sensors at DxOmark.com
Image stabilization – how does the camera achieve it? Electronic, Lens, Body? How good is it? Max Yuryev on Youtube does a great job of comparing some of the more recent cameras.
Some other things:
What about gimbals?
This is related to the camera you choose. Do you need a gymbal for video work? Possibly. If you have a newer Olympus or Panasonic you will probably find that the in-body image stabilization is good enough for most hand-held video. If you have a Sony or Fuji and plan on doing a run-and-gun video setup, a gymbal would be a good idea. Batteries are also a nice extra accessory, especially on most mirrorless cameras which don’t have the greatest battery life.
What about SD Cards?
Which SD card is also heavily dependent on what camera you have. Simply buying the fastest card won’t give you the fastest speeds. If you have a Panasonic GX85 or Sony A6000, the write speed is limited to around 32-35 mb/s. This means a UHS-2 card would not have any advantage over a UHS-1 card, and most UHS-1 cards will perform about the same. Check out this site for more detailed comparisons of SD cards on various cameras: https://alikgriffin.com/
Last edited:
