2009 Camera Of The Year?

[Photo-John]

Let's get a discussion going about what camera was the best of 2009. Last year it was the Panasonic G1 - at least that's what I thought. It was the first Micro Four Thirds camera and had the potential to be a real game-changer. I think the popularity and success of the Micro Four Thirds format this year validates that camera as the 2009 Camera Of The Year. Now, how about 2009?

The cameras that immediately come to mind for me are the Olympus E-P1 Micro Four Thirds camera, the Canon EOS 7D, the Panasonic Kumix GH1 and the Nikon D3S. What cameras caught your attention in 2009 and why? Do you think there is a clear standout that should be recognized as Camera Of The Year?

[Greg McCary]

John I have been pretty impressed with the pictures I have seen from the Nikon D3S due to the low noise at high iso's. But look at the price difference between it and the EP1. It is almost not a fair fight. Although I do see a lot of promise in the m4/3rd system. I think the M9 should be on the list too. Even though there probably not to many Leica shooters here at PR.

[Photo-John]

John I have been pretty impressed with the pictures I have seen from the Nikon D3S due to the low noise at high iso's. But look at the price difference between it and the EP1. It is almost not a fair fight. Although I do see a lot of promise in the m4/3rd system. I think the M9 should be on the list too. Even though there probably not to many Leica shooters here at PR.

I don't really think of price as a consideration - unless a camera was incredibly good and also incredibly cheap. And I don't think we have anything like that this year. It's more a question of which new camera advanced camera tech or useability the most. I don't know enough about the M9 to judge. Maybe you can tell us why you think it should be included? I didn't forget about Leica, though. After I posted I I wondered if I shouldn't have included the Leica S2. And there's the Leica X1, too...

[mjs1973]

It's a tuff call for me since I haven't used any of the new gearl. The micro 4/3 system doesn't really appeal to me at all. I'm a Canon guy so I'm a little biased towards the brand but I think the new Nikons have outdone anything that Canon came out with this year. The 7D looks good on paper, but I don't think it matches anything Nikon did this year as far as a still camera goes. I think Nikon made the right choice by keeping things in the 12mp range and focusing on image quality rather than resolution. For a still camera the D3S gets my vote.

It sounds like Canon has the upper hand when it comes to video so in that case, the 7D would get a pretty high mark. I'm not all that interested in shooting video, so the D3S still gets my vote.

[Greg McCary]

Ok maybe the M9 really doesn't qualify since it really isn't anything new. New for Leica maybe having a full frame sensor. To me it is between the EP1 and the Nikon. I really am impressed with the low noise levels Nikon has achieved. I haven't seen enough pictures from the S2 to judge it. Only Jetrim's picture. Are you going to get a list of cameras up and post a poll?

[w.slayman]

I assume that the Canon A1 would not qualify. :lol:

Actually I was impressed enough with the size of the camera, and the quality of the images from your night shoot that I am considering saving for one, it is a worthy decendent of the Olympus Pen FT that I had years ago. So for what it is worth this Canon guy votes for the E-P1.

[gahspidy]

It's a tuff call for me since I haven't used any of the new gearl. The micro 4/3 system doesn't really appeal to me at all. I'm a Canon guy so I'm a little biased towards the brand but I think the new Nikons have outdone anything that Canon came out with this year. The 7D looks good on paper, but I don't think it matches anything Nikon did this year as far as a still camera goes. I think Nikon made the right choice by keeping things in the 12mp range and focusing on image quality rather than resolution. For a still camera the D3S gets my vote.

It sounds like Canon has the upper hand when it comes to video so in that case, the 7D would get a pretty high mark. I'm not all that interested in shooting video, so the D3S still gets my vote.

I pretty much feel exactly the same about it. I think the 5D mkll is a lot of bang for the buck and is a great piece of equipment but I would give up MP for better IQ and high ISO performance. A great camera worthy of consideration (although I think it was released in 2008?) but I do think that Nikon had the best year ever.

[Photo-John]

Are you going to get a list of cameras up and post a poll?

Yes, I will be posting a poll. I thought it would be a good idea to get a discussion going first to see if people brought up stuff that I didn't think of. You call this thread the nomination process

[OldClicker]

I know this is going to be way off every one else's thinking, but I see the Camera of the Year as something showing the future. The cameras mentioned so far are just a better version of the same old thing - the past at its best.

Last year it was the micro 4/3 showing us the future, smaller solution.

I see this year's as the $2000 Full Frame Sony A850. Though APS sensors will not disappear any time soon, with EVF 4/3 type coming from the bottom and cheaper FF coming from the top, the days of APS sensors as predominant are numbered.

TF

[Photo-John]

the days of APS sensors as predominant are numbered.

Interesting thoughts, OldClicker. I will take a closer look at the Sony A850. I do agree that the Camera Of The Year should probably be looking to the future. I don't know if I agree about the APS-C sensor disappearing. At least I hope it doesn't. I love the smaller camera size and longer reach it allows. I made a commitment to it a few years ago because it fits my needs the best. I would hate to be forced to move to ful frame or Micro Four Thirds - unless Micro Four Thirds gets a whole lot better in the speed, auto focus and image quality departments.

[Shebang]

I'm off the porch and in the yard only long enough to ask: "In a nutshell, what is a 4/3 camera?"

[drg]

A camera that should be on the list is the Sony a850. The sub $2000 price for a Full Frame and 24+ Megapixels is nearly as revolutionary as the price and features of the original Digital Rebel from Canon. Leaving various weaknesses and compromises aside that were made to sell this camera, it is worth consideration or at least as a reference point.

If the DSLR's are not the only contenders, Fuji had three possible cameras that should be looked at because of the sensor technology and the implementation. The F200EXR, the F70EXR, and the S200EXR all sport variations on the same tech in different packages. Even though I got a bad copy of the F200EXR and haven't replaced it yet I believe they have great potential. The F70EXR I borrowed for a weekend made good snapshots.

The entry level/beginner DSLR offerings from Canon, Nikon, Olympus, and possibly Sony deserve some thought for price/features and the built in processing-post-processing tools and the interactive manuals. These cameras offer various levels of help and 'guides' as to what to do to get a good photo. Truly computers that also can make photographs.

Looking at the micro4/3rds cameras is intriguing and they are slick. But they don't have viewfinders that aren't outboard and in a little camera I still want that feature. There's the small size high pixel count sensor. I'd be happier with a lot less pixels. Cameras in this range are incredibly expensive for what you get. Short of using the pancake or the other fixed focal length 30mm lens they are still less than completely 'pocket-able'. This concept borders on what just a few years ago were called the posh compacts in film point and shoots. Rollei and Leica were the leaders in that realm and even with great products they weren't that much better than cameras costing a fraction of the deluxe units.

Micro4/3rds is a different concept I'll agree and that alone makes new entries worth consideration. So far I'm not real sold. If I was a 4/3rds shooter it would be entirely different. But I'm not. And Olympus has always been one of my favorite camera companies!

The Canon 7D. This is a winner on several counts and must be on the list. Canon has new G series offerings that are close to my personal needs but not industry leading by any means

Nikon has the D3000 and the D5000 that fit in the beginner/entry level class that break some new ground in cost, performance, functionality, etc. but the rest of the cameras seem to be settling in to a nice stable phase. The D300s is a nicely upgraded version of a previous 'winner'. The D3S is a variation on one of the greatest cameras Nikon has ever made. Certainly for me the D3 and variants are the best DSLR cameras Nikon has produced. Revolutionary product at the top end is not the news from Nikon this year.

I am undecided at the moment. I'm must admit that I am feeling the need again for two cameras much of the time. Partially because I see video as being a part of the trade now.

Great hopes are still lingering for a little camera. But I'm afraid I face another year or two of disappointment or at least just not complete satisfaction.

[drg]

Paula,

4/3rds refers to the sensor size and is a multi-manufacturer consortium that designed their cameras from the ground up to be compatible. The Micro 4/3rds is a new smaller design variation.

Check the Olympus and Four Thirds System Forum for more details!

[Franglais]

Think back over the posts in 2009. For me there was only one really stand-out event concerning a new camera. It was when Liz bought her Olympus E-P1, and she started posting with it and the results were good. Plus Smartwombat's winter posts last week. It made me take an interest.

There have been lots of other good cameras come out but that's what I've noticed on this site.

BTW I think that 4/3 refers to the aspect ratio, not the size of the sensor. The image shape is 4 long by 3 high, not 3 long by 2 high as is the case with APS-C and FF (24x36)

[OldClicker]

John - I don't see the APS-C dissappearing, just losing it's dominance. EDIT: Lighter/smaller, yes; but longer reach???? - TF

Paula - 4/3 is the cross-brand lens system used mostly by Olympus (also Panasonic and Leica) for their 2x (vs 1.5x crop for most others) cropped sensor DSLRs. Smaller and lighter than the others. Micro-4/3 is a standard for an even smaller/lighter lens that can be used in bodies without the mirror which makes it an 'SLR'.

TF

[Photo-John]

longer reach???? - TF

Yeah - longer reach because of the crop factor. That;s a big deal for me when I'm on the bike or skis. It means I can carry less volume and weight and shoot from farther away. It's true that it's not actually a longer focal lenght. But for all practical purposes, the crap factor means my lenses are longer.

[drg]

I know this is going to be way off every one else's thinking, but I see the Camera of the Year as something showing the future. The cameras mentioned so far are just a better version of the same old thing - the past at its best.

Last year it was the micro 4/3 showing us the future, smaller solution.

I see this year's as the $2000 Full Frame Sony A850. Though APS sensors will not disappear any time soon, with EVF 4/3 type coming from the bottom and cheaper FF coming from the top, the days of APS sensors as predominant are numbered.

TF

APS days numbered? I seriously doubt it.

First they provide the ability for a camera maker to produce a lower cost camera, i.e. the vast majority of sales. Almost everyone I know who has bought a 'good' camera this past year has bought an APS or not Full Frame camera. The 'only' people I know personally who have bought a Full Frame camera in the past year either are buying their second or greater Full Frame or are working professional photographers.

Secondly. Full Frame cameras require serious glass to work up to even close to their potential. Yes, their are few low cost good alternatives and eventually (like tomorrow!) a better lens will be needed. There goes money in thousand dollar plus increments. The economy won't support that as the major player for several years.

Third. Full Frame sensors are by design lower yield than APS no matter how many you make! They are bigger! They are more complex to integrate into a camera and work reliably.

Fourth. I hand a full frame Canon MkII to someone with a 70-200mm f/2.8 or even just a f/1.4 50mm that isn't prepared and they always comment on how big and heavy it is! The APS models don't ever illicit that commentary.

APS has come a long way in a very short time. If all the manufacturers get smart and quit trying to win the pixel arms race they will have a long term winner and APS isn't going away any time soon! It may not get the continued development that other formats do, but it will be around.

Remember, once upon a time 35mm was a passing fad! Once the post war production was shifted back to civilian priority, 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 would once again rule!! Right, that happened??

For some smaller is a lot better. I use both and like the big cameras. I will admit I have had an increasing relationship with APS sensor this past year but that is a processing issue. I can sure process those smaller files a lot quicker with a lot more efficient hardware than those monster files that some of the newer cameras are cranking out.

I had some images on the side of semi-trailers that came off a 12 mp FF Nikon this past year. But also some that came off an 8mp Canon. At normal viewing distance . . . well my hairdresser doesn't even know

[drg]

Yeah - longer reach because of the crop factor. That;s a big deal for me when I'm on the bike or skis. It means I can carry less volume and weight and shoot from farther away. It's true that it's not actually a longer focal lenght. But for all practical purposes, the crap factor means my lenses are longer.

I agree, one does have to consider that factor! There has been many a time when my lens wasn't long enough and I said "Oh, ____" !

[OldClicker]

Yeah - longer reach because of the crop factor. That;s a big deal for me when I'm on the bike or skis. It means I can carry less volume and weight and shoot from farther away. It's true that it's not actually a longer focal lenght. But for all practical purposes, the crap factor means my lenses are longer.

When you want less field of view, set the A850 to Cropped Mode and you will get the center 1/2 area of your FF lens (or all of a DT lens) on a 11 MP image. - TF

[draymorton]

Nikon D3s, definitely. Canon's farther behind than ever.

[Photo-John]

When you want less field of view, set the A850 to Cropped Mode and you will get the center 1/2 area of your FF lens (or all of a DT lens) on a 11 MP image. - TF

I was waiting for someone to day that. Someone always does. But then I'm packing a bigger, heavier camera than I need. The EOS 5D Mk II is a great camera and I can crop for an "effective" zoom. But then I'm carrying a lot of extra mass that I'd rather not have on my back. Better to just have a smaller camera with a nice crop factor. Size and reach-wise, the Olympus E-620 is my favorite backcountry camera. But it doesn't have the image quality or performance of the hihg-end Canon APS-C cameras.

[EOSThree]

Nobody's mentioned it, but I think the Panasonic GF-1 is the equal if not a little better than the Olympus E-P1. I am torn between the GF-1 and the Canon 7D.

[OldClicker]

APS days numbered? I seriously doubt it.

First, I said that the days of APS sensors as predominant are numbered.

First they provide the ability for a camera maker to produce a lower cost camera, i.e. the vast majority of sales. I agree. The APS sensor will remain as the low cost (<$1k), new buyer solution for quite some time. Almost everyone I know who has bought a 'good' camera this past year has bought an APS or not Full Frame camera. The 'only' people I know personally who have bought a Full Frame camera in the past year either are buying their second or greater Full Frame or are working professional photographers. Last year is the past. One criteria of Camera of the Year could be pointing to the future.

Secondly. Full Frame cameras require serious glass to work up to even close to their potential. Most of those posting on this forum have serious - very serious glass. Those with >$1000 bodies generally have serious glass. Yes, their are few low cost good alternatives and eventually (like tomorrow!) a better lens will be needed. There goes money in thousand dollar plus increments. The economy won't support that as the major player for several years. Several years isn’t that far away.

Third. Full Frame sensors are by design lower yield than APS no matter how many you make! They are bigger! They are more complex to integrate into a camera and work reliably. And APS is bigger than a 4/3. Canon once said that an FF sensor camera could not be made with in body stabilization. A way was found.

Fourth. I hand a full frame Canon MkII to someone with a 70-200mm f/2.8 or even just a f/1.4 50mm that isn't prepared and they always comment on how big and heavy it is! The APS models don't ever illicit that commentary. A850 (FF)= 30oz. D700 (APS)= 35 oz. It ain’t the sensor.

APS has come a long way in a very short time. If all the manufacturers get smart and quit trying to win the pixel arms race they will have a long term winner and APS isn't going away any time soon! It may not get the continued development that other formats do, but it will be around. In other words, not the future? Not where the ‘wonders’ will come from? Not something that a Camera of the Year should foretell?

Remember, once upon a time 35mm was a passing fad! Once the post war production was shifted back to civilian priority, 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 would once again rule!! Right, that happened??

For some smaller is a lot better. I use both and like the big cameras. I will admit I have had an increasing relationship with APS sensor this past year but that is a processing issue. I can sure process those smaller files a lot quicker with a lot more efficient hardware than those monster files that some of the newer cameras are cranking out. Then choose the ‘cropped’ mode, but the point is – you would have a choice for every shot.

I had some images on the side of semi-trailers that came off a 12 mp FF Nikon this past year. But also some that came off an 8mp Canon. At normal viewing distance . . . well my hairdresser doesn't even know

I certainly have no inside info and really don’t have a feel on how video will influence sensor size. But when we start seeing <$1500 FF bodies, I think they will become the predominant sensor for the $1k to $3k market. If I was in that market (and I’m far from it), I would have an FF.

TF

[Greg McCary]

I guess right now I am more leaning to the EP-1. I know it is very popular and like Liz for people looking for lighter with excellent quality that is the way to go. I know I will probably be getting a m4/3rd camera sooner or later.

[Photo-John]

Nobody's mentioned it, but I think the Panasonic GF-1 is the equal if not a little better than the Olympus E-P1. I am torn between the GF-1 and the Canon 7D.

The reason I listed the E-P1 and not the GF1 is that the Olympus came first and had a very positive and surprising response. I think it was the first Micro Four Thirds camera that photographers reacted passionately to. Whether or not the GF1 is better, since it followed the E-P1, for me it's not in the race. I'm putting all this out there for everyone, though. I haven't made a list yet and if a whole bunch of people jump in and tell me the GF1 should be on the list, that's fine with me