Choosing a New DSLR

Decisions, decisions....

One of the leitmotifs of my days is that people frequently contact me asking for my advice as to what camera they should buy. I'm not saying I mind hearing from them; I don't, and it's probably helpful for them to write out their thoughts about their own needs when they write to me. My problem is that I just don't think I can really help. I know the camera market pretty well, and I've been shooting since I was 12 (38 years), but it's really tough to know what another person will like best.

It's actually really tough to know what I will like best, too. A commenter with the handle "RC" wrote the following comment in response to our news item about Nikon overtaking Canon in Japan:

I'm looking to replace my five-year old D60 Canon. With only one Canon lens to my name I'm not that committed yet. I'm looking closely at the Nikon options (between the D80 and the D200), but I do have hopes that by sometime this fall, Canon could put out an updated 30D or 5D that I would find more attractive than the Nikon offerings, so I'm tempted to wait for the next Canons before deciding. I read that the 1D Mk III has some impressive high ISO and dynamic range performance that I'd hope might somehow filter down to a 40D. Or how about a 6D that's more in the price range of the Nikon D200? Both the 5D and the 30D are long overdue for updating. But then, Canon doesn't have any really appealing lenses like the Nikon 18-200VR. But I do already have a Canon 24-85 that seems good enough for now. Decisions. I also really like the Zeiss 16-80 for the Sony, both for it's wide-angle reach and it's reported good quality, but find the Sony camera itself underwhelming compared to the D80, although the built-in steady-shot is a plus.

Whew—that's an awful lot of conflicting considerations, isn't it? Yet what struck me about this is how similar his situation is to mine. I bought my current-and-only DSLR, a Konica-Minolta 7D with a standard zoom, several years ago, used, for $1600 or thereabouts. I've been happy with it—especially in terms of results, which are, after all the point—but I've never particularly warmed to the camera itself. I don't find it particularly appealing to handle and I never take it out "just for fun" like I often used to find myself doing with my film cameras. The 7D has lost about $800 in value (remember that lens) below what I paid for it, but I sell prints from time to time and do a few portraits here and there, and just counting direct sales I've earned roughly $6,000 with it, so I can't complain there either. It has earned its keep.

Now, it's beginning to show age and wear. A number of little glitches have made it even less appealing to use: sometimes it resets itself without provocation, sometimes it tries to autofocus when set on manual focus mode, and—most annoyingly—sometimes it decides it doesn't have a lens attached and refuses to work, even though it does have a lens attached (and, yes, I have cleaned the contacts). I consider this to be direct penance from the mocking gods, since I'm always gassing on about the importance of responsiveness in a camera. I'd have it fixed, but apparently that might not be possible: the only person I know who's tried to have a K-M camera fixed had his 5D replaced by Sony with an A100, apparently in line with Sony policy. Nice of them, but I don't want an A100. I just want my old 7D to be put right. I'm not sure whether Sony's taking on that sort of repair challenge with the old K-M legacy gear.

Before and After: Earlier this summer, Zander volunteered for a haircut for the first time in six months, an event I thought was worthy of documenting. He has very little patience for this sort of thing, so I clicked off  six quick exposures before and after the event. Despite the fact that neither the scene nor the settings changed, there were exposure variations between the frames—and, as luck would have it, in both cases the best shots were a little overexposed, which you can best see in the skin of his neck above the collar.

But I'm entirely unclear about what my next move is going to be. K-M is out of the camera business, of course, the most prominent casualty of the digital evolution. Sony's picked up the fallen battle-standard, but I've got to be honest with you—I'm just not convinced yet of Sony's commitment to the DSLR business. (Hearing Sony's chairman on the cool new TV show "CEO Exchange" was not encouraging either.) And, like "RC" above, I only have one lens, so it's not like I'm so committed to the lensmount that I can't wander off and attach myself to another marque.

I also have a lifelong tendency to favor the underdog. In terms of consumerism, this translates to a tendency to shun the leading brands. But would life be simpler if I just went with one of the "Big Two"? As you can see from the numbers in that Nikon-Overtakes-Canon post, Nikon and Canon dominate the DSLR market. Perhaps it's high time to stop complicating my life unnecessarily where cameras are concerned and buy a 30D or D200.

How far should I go toward finding a camera that I really enjoy using? Historically I've preferred small carry-around cameras that I can wear all the time—Contax 139Q, Leica M6, Olympus OM-4T. The gestalt doesn't really transfer to digital, since digital cameras are so dependent on frequent pit stops at the computer and the battery charger—you can't just hang the camera on a peg by the door and grab it every time you leave the house; you have to prepare to go shoot digital. Moreover, the two small cameras that appeal to me most on paper, the Nikon D40x and the Olympus E-510, are both severely crippled in terms of the lenses they'll accept. Either one with a small, moderate-wide prime lens would make a great complement to the bigger 7D and its zoom, but alas, there ain't no such lenses.

Pentax has the lenses, all right. Canikon has the best selection of the big, dedicated pro lenses—the kind I never use—but Pentax laps the field when it comes to flexibility with a whole assortment of various kinds and vintages of primes. (By the way, in case you're unfamiliar with the term, a "prime" lens is a single-focal-length lens, the opposite of a zoom.) So maybe a Pentax. But then again, Sony has Zeiss in its corner now, and there are some mouth-watering Zeiss lenses trickling out in the K-M, now Sony, bayonet mount.

I think you can definitely look at the digital camera dilemma the other way around, too. There just isn't really that much difference between digital SLR results, at least until you reach the rarefied strata of the giant professional überkameras and the ultraexpensive medium-format backs. No one's going to look at a nice 10x15" inkjet print and say, "Oh, obviously you used a Canon/Nikon/Pentax/Olympus/Sony," or "Oh, obviously your camera has six/eight/ten/twelve megapixels." It's even less of an issue online. The picture file is really only the rawest of raw material for the print—even if you don't shoot RAW! So in some respects, the choice of a DSLR doesn't even really have to be any sort of contest. Just pick one, and use it. They're all the same anyway.

What's to Choose? Zander as a tough character, Halloween 2006, a self-portait in the bathroom mirror using my 7D. A digital picture is a digital picture is a digital picture. 

Then there's the Siren Song of film that still rings in my ears. I love black-and-white, and the idea of finding some workable method of creating high-quality black-and-white prints with some of the ease-of-use of digital still dogs my thoughts. I did just get a scanner that supposedly handles film well (the Epson V700), and the HP B9180 produces nice B&W prints, so, often enough, my thoughts turn to antiquated film cameras with big negatives that I could scan...augh, shake it off, Johnston, shake it off.

Also a temptation, believe it or not, is to spring for one of the aforementioned überkameras. Nikon's D2xs replacement is imminent—I think we'll see it by the fall. It will probably have an 18- or 22 -MP, 1.1x sensor. That means a nice big viewfinder. If it has an add-on battery pack instead of one that's built-in (the latter has, admittedly, been Nikon's tendency since the F5), it might even be small enough without the battery pack that I wouldn't hate carrying it. I'd have to take out a bank loan, but maybe that would make me work harder to earn money with the thing.

I have to admit, I feel like a dork when I use big, fancy cameras. They don't suit the modest situations in which I most often shoot. They make me feel like an overdressed and overequipped skier on the bunny hill.

The big Sony, the one with the funky pyramidal prism—which I like—will probably use the same sensor as the new Nikon flagship, and from what I hear Sony will allow Nikon to have the sensor for itself for some agreed-upon period of time before bringing out its own version. So waiting for the biggest Sony is going to be a long slog. I've put that out of my mind. Tried to, that is.

Anyway, in the meantime, here I sit, generally not wanting to take the 7D out for exercise, telling myself that I'm waiting for the Sony 7D replacement. Am I really? Dunno. If I were really, truly committed to Sony and the old K-M lensmount, I'd probably be planning to buy that delicious Zeiss 16-80mm. But I don't think about that very much.

So what's it gonna be? Switch to Nikon or Canon? Go with Pentax and collect lenses? Buy a tiny Olympus and hope a small, moderate-wide 4/3rds prime comes out before I end up in a wheelchair? (It could be that long, too.) Stick with my current lensmount and wait for the suspiciously vaporous Sonys? Embark on the odyssey of having the 7D restored?

And people come to me for camera-buying advice!

_______________

Mike

Comments

[RobinP]

A great summary of the confusion many must be suffering Mike!

I think the answer (for B&W at least) lies in your text--just spend a little time practicing with that scanner and some chromogenic C41 film. A good starting point with the Epsons is to scan as Color Negative at 3200dpi, 16 bit Grayscale, unsharp mask and grain reduction set "low" and the DIGITAL ICE technology set to "speed".

For a small DSLR with prime my vote would be for any of the Pentaxes and an old 28 or 30mm.

Cheers, Robin

[Ernest Theisen]

Well you are perplexed. I went to you for camera advice, although you didn't know it. Your review, months ago sent me after my Pentax K100 D. I had a K mount 50mm 1.7 from my K1000 days. I bought the kit lens and a 50-200 zoom. It is all I need. It takes as good a picture as I will let it take. So go get the K10 D. And don't look back.Carl Weese loves his. E.

[Adam Isler]

Mike,
I'm in the same boat as you. I too started taking pictures seriously 38 years ago when I was 12 (with a 2nd-hand Voigtlander Vito C; my only DSLR is my KM 7D and it's getting a little long in the tooth and beginning to do slightly unexpected things now and then. My commitment's a little bigger - I have 3 K-M lenses: an 11-18, 24-105 and 100-300 and I have a Minolta flash (I was hoping these would keep me set for life).

I'd love to shoot Canon but lenses are so expensive if you want IS and since I'm not a pro - do I really need the full frame quality I crave?

If I were choosing today without the burden of my existing equipment and continued to be budget constrained I think Pentax seems to offer the best overall value all things considered (on paper, anyway) - but at the end of the day all that matters is that I keep taking pictures. - I haven't yet found myself in the position of not being able to take a picture I wanted to because I lacked a Canon 5D though after cropping I have often wished I had that magnificent sensor compared to my much noisier, smaller 6 MP and I have sometime coveted what I believe is faster more accurate autofocus.

In the meantime, I keep taking pictures (see some at http://aisler.photosite.com)

[Player]

Mike, I was going to ask you a question about cameras. Nevermind. ;)

[Donovan Rieger]

Mike: Like you I have a K-M 7D, but also a Maxxum 7 film camera with several lenses that I prefer to the digital. B&W film, I feel, makes for prints which I prefer over digital images converted to black and white. However, the camera I use the most is a K-M A2. Perfect size and weight for taking hiking every week and good external controls. With the Upstrap it stays on my shoulder. Plus nobody has made a better electronic viewfinder. I plan to use these three for as long as possible (of course the Maxxum 7 will outlast the digitals). I should add that the 7D is used primarily for some sports photography and macro work.

[Ed Z]

I too was a KM shooter, and faced your same dilemma when my 7d died.

after carefully weighing my options (price was a factor) I wound up going with pentax for a couple of reasons.

1. the lenses. I firmly believe that you should always buy into a system based on the lenses, and I am in love with Pentax's limited primes (both "pancake" and non-pancake.) simply some of the best lenses I've ever used. Bodies come and go, but the lenses will always be there...

2. in body antishake. stabilized primes, nuff said.

3. weather sealing on the k10d. I've got the 16-50/2.8 on order, which should ship in the next few weeks which will give an awesome kit to shoot in inclement weather (a situation I find myself in frequently)

3. supercompact kit of the k100d+pancake primes. I carry around the k100d with the 21mm and 40mm "pancakes" and the whole kit weighs around 2lbs total. fantastic "street shooting" kit.

surprisingly I don't find the k100d and k10d to be redundant, both bodies actually compliment each other nicely. The k100 is small, light very low noise and makes a great "street" camera, and a lightweight backup for the k10, while the k10d is higher rez and fuller featured at the expense of size and weight. Both are awesome cameras, and I know I will catch flak from the Nikonians, but I think the k10d is every bit the photographic tool that the d200 is, in terms of being fully featured and producing great images. plus you can't beat it for price/performance.

[Tim Bray]

Here's another voice in the Pentax camp. I bought the original *ist D back in 2004, it ain't perfect but it's nice and light and quick and gets out of the way. Now I have the 40mm pancake on it probably 75% of the time, can't beat that lens for people and flowers and so on. And it's a conversation piece too, some photo-intensive event and there's all the photojocks with their monster zooms and me with this little flattie. I shoot *way* faster than they do. And I think the ergonomics are a little better than the Canikons, what with the superprogram mode and the little green button for asking the camera's opinion of the shot.

[Joel]

Mike,
Let me add to the Pentax chorus. I'm with everyone that adores the DA 21mm. I have a K100D and the 21mm, and I'm never encumbered by the camera. I love it, and if I ever want more pixels I can get them.
To be honest, I'm surprised you have trouble leaving the camera "on the door". I leave my camera with an empty card, and I can always just grab it. I have some PowerEX 2700mAh batteries in there, and they last just about forever on a charge if my shooting is of the grab-and-go variety. I'm no shooting-every-day pro, but I've charged them perhaps once a month at my shooting rate. Very impressive.

Joel

[psu]

The D80 is most of a D200 (nice viewfinder and all) in a smaller package. I admit to having bought the D200, but I usually think I should have bought the 80.

Also, don't discount the D40 + 18-70 kit lens. The kit lens is sometimes disparaged but it should not be. It is usually fast enough and usually sharp enough and not that big, esp. on the little D40 body.

[Bruce McL]

"you can't just hang the camera on a peg by the door and grab it every time you leave the house; you have to prepare to go shoot digital."
Prepare before you go to bed at night. Take the camera down from the peg and swap the battery with the one that's been charging all day in the charger. Swap the memory card for one that's empty and big enough for a few hours of photography.

[Chris]

My current dDSLR lust item is the Panasonic Lumix DMC-L1, both for the styling and for the lenses. To me it looks like a fun camera to use.

[Matt]

Another consideration is software - if you shoot RAW, it might be worthwhile to consider how well your chosen brand is supported. Unfortunately, it seems that Nikon/Canon get picked up first and then Pentax a bit later, and sometimes not as well supported.

I went Nikon, but I have to say that I don't really love my D70s the way I loved my Pentax MX. But, buying/renting/borrowing gear is easier and I do love the Nikon flash system. OTOH, I do miss the PDML...

[Dickon Whitehead]

Hi Mike, my 7D fell 4 feet onto concrete so not surprisingly stopped working,no visible damage though so a fairly robust body,I sent it to the sony repair center in the Uk which replaced/repaired the antishake mechanism or so they say, but in any case it is now working fine so yes they will repair 7Ds,flat rate repair cost and shipping worked out around 150 sterling pounds.
I had since bought the sony as a stop gap measure but really don't like it as a camera.It does focus much faster and auto white balance is much better but I find the noise from the ten pixel sensor is more irritating and more softening than that from the more grainy 7d.
In good lighting at 100 or 200asa it can produce wonderful results.Another good point for the sony is battery life is extremely inpressive compared to the 7d,the 7d I would not dream of bringing out without a spare battery, I don't feel a need to own one for the Sony.

[Claire Senft]

In the morning you will wake up and realize that what you really need is a Contax G2.

[Stephen Best]

The problem isn't so much choosing, it's getting excited about any of them. Make up a list of all your must-have features then play with a number of cameras (and lens combinations) and go with the one you feel you'll use the most ... likely one missing half the features on your list.

Or just get a 4x5 ... or bigger!

[Gordon Lewis]

Same as it ever was, Mike. Don't you remember agonizing over camera and lens choices back in the heyday of film? Did you ever find the "perfect" camera and lens combo even then? If you did, you're one of the lucky few--those who prefer what they do have to what they could have.

It's also funny how we (yes, I'm including myself in this neuroris) judge one camera system by standards that we don't always apply to another. For example, you criticize the Nikon D40/x for being "severely crippled in the lenses it will accept." But isn't that even more true of M-series Leicas? Then again, maybe that's why Leica isn't on your list either.

The bottom line here, IMHO, is that we've all taken great photographs with cameras far worse than the choices you're considering. Choose whatever you like--and I emphasize the words "YOU LIKE." You'll enjoy using it, you'll take more pictures, and odds are, you'll like more of them.

[Winsor Crosby]

I sort of gravitate toward the school that that there is not much to choose between them if you are talking about images. It really comes down to how you feel about it taking pictures. Is it easy to use its features without carrying the manual? Do you not mind the awful mirror clack of some of them or are you really pleased when even the sound of the shutter impresses you with its refinement. You can work around particular missing features if you really like the camera.

[Al Benas]

"the two small cameras that appeal to me most ... the Nikon D40x ... are ... severely crippled in terms of the lenses they'll accept. ... with a small, moderate-wide prime lens would make a great complement to the bigger 7D and its zoom, but alas, there ain't no such lenses."

If I understand you correctly, you can use the Sigma 30mm f1.4 on the D40X. It has it's own focusing motor, and is a sorta wide prime. And, in keeping with the spirit of your post and the many comments, regardless of tech ratings, mine takes good pictures - if I aim it at the right subject ;)

[Ken Sky]

I'm in the same boat with my K-M 7D: except mine still works well. Over the years with various Maxxum film cameras up to the 9xi and 9, I've accumulated 10 lenses - so I'm committed. As a stop gap, I'm getting a Sony A100 on my wife's affinity points but the true test will come with Sony's " advanced amateur" model. Can it replace the 7D in ergonomics as well as features. I would not fall for the Canikon hegemony. Canon in particular exhibits such corporate arrogance that I cannot bring myself to support them.

[Craig]

Mike,

You can't always get what you want.
But if you try sometime
you just might find
you get what you need
whooooo whooooooo
whooooo whooooooo

:-)

[John]

I know the real reason you don't just go ahead and buy a Pentax. It's because you know you'll start collecting those primes again. Well, the first step to recovery is admitting you have a problem ;-)

[Don Bishop]

I went through all of this just recently when I decided to purchase my first DSLR.

I looked at all the cameras out there, Sony, Pentax, Cannon, Nikon D40x. I got all sorts of "helpful" advice from the "experts" at the camera shops. This one loved Pentax, that one loved Nikon, and another thought anyone that didn't choose Cannon had to be out of his mind. Yet photo quality seems to be pretty much equal between the brands.

In the end, since I wasn't locked into a lens system I just decided what features were important for me (IS, compact, and price) and I bought an Olympus E-510.

And do you know what? Five minutes after I placed my order I noticed that I wasn't struggling over the decision anymore. Now I've had my camera for almost a month and I'm taking some of the best pictures I think I've ever taken.

So my advice just pick a camera and go with it. You won't regret any of the models out there.

[Mike]

I don't mean to imply that I don't shoot. I shoot frequently.

Mike

[Dwight Jones]

Mike,
I like my Olympus e-410 a lot more than I expected to. The kit lens makes all the right compromises for this to be small, all-around camera that takes very nice pictures.

The cost is low enough that you can look at the same way people used to look at digicams- get one as a second camera even if you are invested in another system. The only difference is that this camera is nice enough to be your first camera.

[mlmd]

I own a canon 5D and a few primes. Like you, I hate the big cameras and, even more, the big heavy lenses (those 'L" things). A few weeks ago I bought the Olympus 510. It's very sweet. True there is no prime yet in normal to wide but the 11-22mm zoom is almost as good. As you have pointed out the short (2x) range is preferable to the uberzooms that try to do it all. The 11-22 has great quality, reasonable speed and is relatively small (the total weight of it and the 510 being far less than comparable Canikons). I hope they do introduce a pancake or two. We'll see.
best,
MLMD

[Paul Amyes]

If I were starting again I'd plump for the Pentax. I never liked Canon or Nikon cameras, they always felt so clunky.

For 20 years I used an OM4 with a 35-105 Zuiko. It was a beautiful camera and felt just right. The metering was superb. Then a while ago while photographing a wedding I dropped it. First time I'd ever dropped a camera, and even though I had it repaired it became extremely erratic. At that time I was extremely hard up and so a replacement was not going to viable. My father-in -law had just gone digital with the Canon EOS D30 and so gave me his unused EOS3 and a couple of lenses. So suddenly I have found myself in the Canon camp. I now have a 300D and a 5D but they just don't feel right. I don't even like the results they give...too plastic..too digital.

What I want is a digital OM4 with some nice prime lenses, the Pentax offerings look the closest with their lens line up. If Olympus came out out with some nice primes the E410 might fit the bill.

Oh I'll admit it I suffer from a chronic case of photographic equipment dysthymia. I'm just damned to the eternal quest.

[Eddy]

What would Mike like?

* weight
* good primes
* anti-shake

Come to think of it, I don't think Mike would be happy with a camera lacking the above features after the 7D. Start from there, I would say.

[Matt Miller]

K10D, a couple of the Limited primes, a couple of the classic primes, and a katz eye split prism focusing screen = sheer joy again

[Wilhelm]

The one "pancake" lens that Pentax DOESN'T have is the standard focal length. They have a 20=30mm, and a 40=60mm. Where the hell's their 30=45mm?
Well, just how good is the 30mm Signa? Do it have problems?

[David Teo Boon Hwee]

Hi Mike,

It sounds like the Canon 5D is exactly what you need - full frame sensor for all the primes you'll be shooting - and the non-L Canon primes are no slouches either!

I've reduced my kit to just a 5D with a 24mm f2.8 and a 35mm f2, and having a great blast. My M6 with 28, 35, 50 fast primes are currently on vacation :) It's great to be able to finally use a 35mm as a 35mm in digital photography!

[Mitch Alland]

The camera I've always liked the best is the Leica-M6, but, like one of the posters above, cannot find any DSLR that I can get excited about, and the same goes for the M8, on which my views are similare to those of Mike. My solution for the time being has been to use two small-sensor cameras, the Ricoh GR-D and the Leica D-Lux 3, although I recently bought a Leica V-Lux 1 as well, not being able to resist the idea of a 420-equivalent lens with the DOF of a 90mm lens.

The small-sensor cameras give me the 35mm-film look that I want because I like the "35mm aesthetic". Mind you, I don't try to get a film look as such but, as I process files, I find that the tones I like and end up with are those of fast 35mm film of 400-1600 speed. To me the look produced by DSLRs at low ISOs are those of scanned medium-format film, and this is particulalry the case of the Leica M8. That means that I would have to shoot the DSLRs or the M8 at very high ISOs, like 1600, to get the look that I want: that is too fast for bright places like Bangkok where I live.

So far the small-sensor cameras give me what I want as you can see in my Bangkok series of 113 photos, of which 48 were taken with the M6 and the remainder with the GR-D except for a dozen taken with the D-Lux 3, and there is one portrait taken with the V-Lux 1. For mosy of the pictures you'll be hard-pressed to figure out which are digital and which are film:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/sets/72157594271568487/show/

If I were to get a DSLR perhaps it would be the Olympus E510, but the primes available, like the Leica 25mm f/1.4 are huge and heavy, and the wide primes are non-existent.

—Mitch/Potomac, MD

[Richard Alan Fox]

My advice is to wait for the passion of the new model, that not yet released, dreamed about beauty, she will renew your desire, put her on your shoulder, cup her lens in your left hand and press her button with your right.
When we were younger we bought into a system thinking it would last forever, now in our fifties we think about the few productive years we have left and understand that it is passion not hardware that drives us.
The beautiful Maria Muldaur sang “It ain’t the meat, it’s the motion, that makes your momma want to rock”, good advice for the photographer seeking rejuvenation, wait for the passion to take hold and then use your credit card wisely.

[aizan]

to make the most of your new scanner and printer, i'd recommend a fuji gw690iii and a sekonic l-308s. you know you want to.

[Mike]

Richard,
I thought that was Southside Johnny and the Ashbury Jukes?

Mike

[Richard Alan Fox]

Mike,

When I previsualize Maria Muldaur singing that song I am in the zone and ready to shoot, a little pull processing maybe?

[Tim Gray]

I just started shooting Tri-X again. Got an M6, a Canon 1V, and a scanner for less than the price of getting a Canon 5D. Am a happy happy man too...

[David Mayer]

First I should disclose that I am heavily biased towards Nikon, and wholeheartedly recommend to most people one of their new DSLR's. And I have nothing against Canon really, but I dislike Sony (always trying to ram proprietary formats down the consumer's throat).

However, Mike, you have chosen the camera for yourself if you look at your criteria, and a Pentax is the obvious choice: compact, nicely built, lots of primes available, in camera stabilization, works like a camera because it's built by a camera company (sorry, Sony). If it weren't for the prime issue, I'd still recommend the D40(x).

Just remember, it's the camera that chooses you, Harry I mean Mike.

[ShadZee]

Mike,
Like some others, your article on the original Pentax *ist DS made me get back to Pentax again. For over two years and over 35,000 clicks, the Pentax DS was my companion. It is a pure joy to use. I believe the Pentax K100D (super) has the same feel.
Well, after two years, I picked up the K10D on the first day it became available here in US. However, I still use the old DS and "enjoy" the way it feels in my hands ;-)

My suggestion: Pentax K100D super, and a 3-pack of 21mm-pancake, 43mm-Limited, & 70mm-pancake. All three are about the same physical size (very small), and have outstanding image quality.

.Sam.

[hhl]

I wonder if it helps: I'm also using a Contax 139Q that I like a lot and picked a D80 (instead of the D200 which is too heavy and expensive for my taste). The other choice was the K10D (of course) but since I already had several Nikon lenses, the move to Pentax would've been too expensive and time-consuming. The D80 suits me very well, I'm very happy with my pick. I'm using it with a 24 mm prime, mainly for (color) street photography (b&w is done on film) and for everything else that's not worth shooting on film (concerts and other events for instance).

[Dierk Haasis]

Mike, get a Nikon D200, 1-3 lenses you like [Nikon and Sigma] and take pictures.

[Andre]

Mike I don't know if this helps or not, but I just can't help tooting Pentax's horn. Here is their lens roadmap for the next 6 to 12 months.

http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/en/lens/roadmap.pdf

[Chris]

Mike, I'm also in the Pentax camp, with a K10D (and semi-retired *istDS), and some of those lovely primes. I would say go Pentax, and to satisfy that urge to play with real B&W, get an LX body as well to use with those same lenses. Sure, you'll have to have it serviced properly, but once that is done you will have the best of all worlds; a modern digital body, a film body (that you can leave hanging on the peg by the door) and those lovely prime lenses. Good luck!

[giulienk]

When you say you start thinking about "antiquated film cameras with big negatives", you just reminded me of myself: I just bought my new "pockatable" camera, a Mamiya 6 Automat from the '50.
http://www.mamiya-op.co.jp/home/camera/museum/saishu-page/1950/mamiya6-automat.htm
And I'm really happy with that, so much that I'm gonna buy soon the Epson scanner in fact :)

[Hugh Alison]

"you can't just hang the camera on a peg by the door and grab it every time you leave the house; you have to prepare to go shoot digital"

Can't agree Mike. My Canon 5D battery is good for about 600 shots (not using IS lenses) and lasts for a week or two. A 4GB CF card holds 250 RAW shots. I just change the card and battery any time there's less than 100 spare shots on the camera.

35/2.0 on the camera, 85/1.8 in my pocket and I'm out the door in seconds.

You could do the same with the Nikon D80, 24mm and 50mm lenses.

[Ade]

Mike, apologies if I'm presuming too much here but from everything you've previously written, I'd always pictured you going for the Pentax K10D without hesitation - anti-shake, plenty of old & new prime/pancake lenses, brand history, etc. In fact, if I weren't already tied into Nikon and Pentax had a few more (affordable) f/1.4 options, I'd be going that way myself for the features.

[Art Buesing]

I sure you have a friend with a D200. Borrow it for a day or two and see if it fits. If not, move along to the next choice.

[Peter Lindner]

5D/35mm/1.4, nothing more nothing less

[Eudoro Lemos, Jr.]

Well, my the digital side started with a Fujifilm 9000, which was nice, practical but very noisy at high ISOs, and the lens had some distortion and purple fringing. It's command dial died after 3000 shots. Last november, I bought a Canon 400D (Rebel XTI). Fantastic up to 800-1600 ISO shots, lousy kit lens.
Bought a Sigma 18-50 (28-80 equiv.)f2.8. Mag-ni-fi-scent lens,(see photodo.com test) but the combo became indecently nose heavy. Bought the battery grip. Very happy with my photos, and with the handling... But now my rig is too heavy and clumsy for my shooting style. No more buys... I'm stuck for some time with this system... I get very good results, but surprised myself shooting again also with my 28 year old, trusty, small, light, ever ready, delicious Olympus OM-1N, 24mm f2.8 and 50mm f1.4 Zuikos, and "high tech" Ilford Delta 400/Microphen, instead of TRI-X and D-76, and getting surprisingly good results... IMO, B&W and film are inseparable...
ELJr./ Rio, Brazil

[DrDom]

As always an interesting discussion and synopsis of the market and photographer's needs - actually with very little disagreement. The recent announcement here about Zeiss primes in Pentax mount would appear to bolster the Pentax camp. Regarding the comment on Raw support, Pentax has this covered (K10)with DNG - something I suspect we may wait a long time for from Canikon. As Mike I tend to favour the underdog! Now a 20D user but with a MZ3 and 645 languishing in a cupboard and depreciating heavily...
Dominic

[Colin Work]

I'm a Canon person (almost from birth!) so I won't even attempt to suggest a camera. IMHO any of the big names will have periods of strength and times they'd rather forget. I've always resisted the temptation to jump ship (even when Canon changed lens mounts on me) because I think I have come to work in a style which matches the Canon design philosophy (be it good or bad) - I can pick up any Canon and it feels familiar. I may not know all the features, but I will know what to expect, and how well or otherwise it will work.

A nice feeling.

One other point is that I think too many worry about what's coming down the pipe - there will ALWAYS be a better DSLR in the near future (usually announced shortly after you part with a large wad of cash). I would look at what is available now. Do any meet your requirements? If not, then wait. If any do, why hesitate?

Pictures taken with today's camera are generally better than pictures not taken because you were waiting for the camera that might have done a better job!

Cheers,

Colin