What gear to do you use? 2020 edition

[Darmok N Jalad]

The last time we started such a thread was almost a year ago. I know I’ve made a wholesale change in all my gear since then. Maybe you have too, so I’m reviving it! You can list as much or as little gear as you’d like, as I’m sure some shoot with various gear or have collections too vast for the internet’s fiber lines.

Primary gear:
Body: Olympus E-M5 mark III
Lenses: 9mm BCL, P14mm f2.5, O25mm f1.8, O45mm f1.8, and the O40-150mm f2.8 with MC-20 (2x) teleconverter
Hardware, edits, and DAM: 2020 iPad Pro 12.9” and iOS Photos with iCloud storage.

In a pinch:
iPhone XR or iPad Pro for photos. Mac mini 2012 for edits.

 

[ericgtr12]

All Canon gear here.

Body: 6D MKII
Lenses: 50mm F1.4 - 16/35 F4L - 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM
Various other accessories, external flashes, etc. Adobe PS and LR subscription for all my PP.

Of course, I never rule out the iPhone 11 Pro Max for anything non-photo shoot related.

 

[r.harris1]

A variety:
Travel: Fujifilm x100f

Swiss Army Knife: Nikon d850 with Tamron 150-600 (gen 2), Tamron 90mm macro (gen 1), Nikon 50 1.8 (D), 20mm (1.8), Rokinon 14mm. Saving for the Nikon trinity or maybe used older model 400 2.8. It will be a while.

Film: Nikon FM2N. Was taking BW film developing class just as the lockdowns started and hoping it will resume at some appropriate time.

Specialized Sashimi Knife: inherited older Mamiya Leaf Credo medium format back, Phase One XF body, older Schneider 80mm Lens - still very much learning to use this bit of kit. Of course, the same is true of all my kit

A brace of Profoto A1 lights that I can use across all digital bodies. Various filters, etc. And of course an iPhone (currently X).

Edit:

I post process in Capture One Pro, which I love. I use Photo Mechanic for ingest, metadata, culling and backup. Photoshop when needed.

Support: A ProMediaGear massive honker - I forget the model number - plus a lighter weight Feisol - I also forget the model number. BH-55 head, plus a head (I forget the model number ) from Feisol. I have a Custom Brackets gimbal that I love.

 

[stillcrazyman]

Same gear from last year’s thread:
Fuji XT3
Fuji XF23/f2
Fuji XF50/f2
Fuji XF55-200

I’d like more lenses, but I’m doing alright with what I have.

 

[Clix Pix]

I'm definitely one who has made a huge change in my gear since a year ago!

Sony A7R IV Full Frame with 61.0 MP

Lenses (All Sony):
200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS Zoom [AKA: "The Bazooka"]
100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 GM OSS Zoom
135mm f/1.8 GM Prime
100mm f/2.8 STF GM OSS Prime
90mm f/2.8 G Prime (macro)
85mm f/1.8 Prime
50mm f/2.8 Prime (macro)
35mm f/1.8 Prime

( ETA: Update, 09/05/2020: just got the 100mm f/2.8 STF yesterday after waiting for it to become available again after being on back-order!) There are a couple more lenses I want to get eventually -- something on the wider end of the spectrum.....

I still have my Sony RX10 IV, a "bridge superzoom" camera (24-600mm 35mm equivalent on a 1-inch sensor) and now use it mainly for shooting the birdies and squirrels on my deck, and/or if there's action happening and not enough time to set up the tripod on the deck and mount the Bazooka on it, I'll grab the RX10 and go out there and take aim at some of the lovely critters in and around the lake, as the flexibility of that amazing zoom works very well in that situation. The Zeiss lens on this camera is really surprisingly good, especially when the light is right.

In addition, I also am still using the Sony RX100 VII, a compact "enthusiast" sophisticated P&S which is great for travel when I only want to take a small camera, something which does more than my iPhone. It's a fun little camera and I really should take it out for a spin more often than I do.

At some point pretty soon I'll address my need for lighting, but I'm still mulling over the choices there. I've got a few small LED panels and a couple of large light boxes, and an old Photek lamp which all get pressed into service as needed, along with good old natural light. I don't like on-board flash and while both the RX10 and RX100 have onboard flash, I've never even tried them out.

Still using my 2018 15" MBP for editing, but shortly after I bought the new camera in November knew that I seriously needed a larger work surface/canvas, so bought an LG Thunderbolt 3 24" external monitor, which is now plugged into the MBP. Changed my post-processing a bit, too, starting with switching my editing program, too, to DXO Photolab 3, which I like very much. I still use Luminar 3, too, as I like their "erase" tool and a couple of other features. It's handy for just jumping in and doing a quickie edit on a single image, say something I've shot with the iPhone and air-dropped to the computer. Occasionally for B&W conversions I go into NIK Collection 3 and Silver Efex Pro. I use Topaz Sharpen AI on images which could benefit from it. Recently I bit the bullet and bought Photo Mechanic for culling, and it is a real time-saver.

In the past, when traveling, I have taken my 12" 2017 MacBook and a Samsung T5 so that I can review and back up any images shot on the trip. Most of my trips have not been photography-focused but when they are I like to at least check out the files, but I don't edit them on the MacBook. My iPad Mini 5 also goes along on trips. The larger 12.9 iPad Pro stays at home; I don't use it for photos, either shooting or editing. Been a while since I've traveled, though, and at this point, hard to predict when I will next hit the road....

For backup and archival and current storage and "supplementary" needs I have some older external HDD, and over the past year I have continued to transition and shift more and more into external SSD, with Samsung X5, T5 and T7 as well as a few G-Drive Mobile SSD. All works for me!

 

[kallisti]

I hesitate to write this (and I don't think I commented in the prior thread, though I was tempted).

I'm not sure how helpful a thread like this is. Why is it important to share a list of gear that you use? Why should anyone care?

I don't mean that to sound harsh. But photography is about the images, not about the gear.

There are exceptions, where choice of gear can be critical to obtaining an image. It is also possible that there are photographers who post in the POTD thread, you really like their images, and are thus curious about what gear they choose to use. I guess it can also be interesting to see how the market has changed over time as reflected in the gear used by forum "regulars".

But a list of what gear people are using, in isolation, isn't (or shouldn't be) of any real interest. It just strikes me as idle boasting.

More interesting would be explanations of why you chose that gear or why you changed gear over time. How does your current gear solve photographic "problems" in a way that other gear doesn't/didn't?

Even that isn't really helpful in isolation. Photography is about images. Gear is a collection of tools that help one to create those images. Sometimes the gear matters for a specific image, sometimes it doesn't. Without images, it's hard to evaluate someone's gear choices.

I don't think random lists of gear by forum regulars are helpful/useful overall. I get that some people take pride in their gear, but personally I feel it is missing the point. The proof is in the pudding (i.e. your images).

I don't have a problem with gear threads, especially if they are asking specific questions related to photographic needs. I don't have a problem with threads (or replies within a thread) that compare the pros/cons of specific gear. I don't have a problem with people sharing the gear they used to create a specific image (either in the POTD thread or in a specific thread devoted to an image). But a random list of gear used by forum members--I don't see the point.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but I see the purpose of this thread to either boast about one's own gear, to establish photographic "credibility" by showing you have "real" gear, or to form bonds within this community by sharing something of yourself as relates to the gear you use. The latter isn't totally crazy as there is often back-and-forth banter in the comments of people chiding other members over their choice of gear. Gear can be a source of conversation and something that can create social bonds. Maybe that's ultimately the point of this thread?

Sorry, I'm being a curmudgeon. I probably shouldn't have replied to this thread, just like I didn't reply to the previous thread.

 

[r.harris1]

I agree - gear is just a “thing” that’s not particularly important in the grand scheme of things. What you say is true, images are what’s important, and really, any modern camera can produce really good ones. That said, I personally love cameras and lenses as objects. I’ve both inherited and bought gear and come from a family of photographers who’ve done it professionally and while I certainly haven’t (came to it late), I personally find cameras to be interesting as items and find it interesting to see what others have, just ’cause. I love the history of photography. I love watching what people think is important at any given time. I think lens choice and film or digital sensor color science matters and I like to see what people use because it gives - to me - insight into the other person’s creative process and story telling preferences. I don’t care what someone has specifically - it’s not important - nor am I interested in copying what someone does, except to learn a technique I shape in my own way. But a little friendly view into another person‘s creative choices and viewpoint are interesting to me. I totally get why it isn’t everyone’s cup of tea, though.

Speaking for myself, any gear that I list isn’t about boasting, just sharing where I am currently with tools of my craft and they will change over time as my creative voice changes. My most expensive was inherited (I’d rather have my father back than his expensive camera) and I can barely use it effectively - nothing to boast about there . I will likely sell it but I’m taking advantage of the opportunity to have it. My favorite is whatever Nikon DSLR I happen to have cause we are a Nikon family. Just cause. And my lenses reflect subject matter I like to shoot, either wildlife or landscape. They reflect my budget (not very high) but also reflect that I like how they render. They help me tell whatever story I happen to be trying to get out there.

So none of it is particularly important, but for me important and interesting can be two different things.

 

[Clix Pix]

I made the change in gear because I was ready to move into mirrorless full-time. I switched from Nikon to Sony because, well, Sony had the native lenses that I wanted. I am gradually building a group of lenses from scratch, each lens meant to be used and to fulfill certain functions. I happen to like and prefer to spend my money on quality gear, and that's the direction in which I am going as over time I consider my choices and make my purchases. If that's seen as "bragging," or "boasting," well, so be it; how unfortunate and sad for some people that they may have that perception.

Actually, as readers of my comments in posts and viewers of my images may have noticed, I use a variety of tools to shoot photos, and in fact some of my favorite images have been shot with my iPhone or with the RX10 rather than my new FF camera body and lenses..... For quite a long time I shot pretty much only with the RX10 "bridge" camera, as a sort of test. The upshot of that was that I knew it was time to get back to shooting with an ILC and with lenses that would do specific things. To me the image is the most important thing -- capturing an unexpected event, an interesting scene, an animal or bird doing something funny or caught in a different sort of position or angle or just being themselves is what delights me most when I have a camera in my hands. My images aren't always the most technically perfect, but if I've managed to capture a humorous scene, a different scene, for me that goes a long way -- I like to present images which interest me and which may or may not interest others, as well as aim for some variety, too. I'd rather present interesting images than technically perfect but perhaps boring ones. Of course the ideal is a combination of being both technically perfect AND interesting!

My main shooting preferences are wildlife, nature and macro/abstracts/tabletop photography, with a few other things in between. My lenses and my images pretty much reflect just that.

 

[Alexander.Of.Oz]

• Pocket Dwelling Camera (with added Telecommunication abilities)
• Buzzy Flying Camera
• Compact Camera
• Not so Compact Camera
• Slightly Bigger Camera
• A variety of Glass for the last two based on Architecture and Landscapes
• Holding steady things
• Things to move picture making things around in
• Things to make images slower, longer and more dramatic
• Things to let light be shone, bounced, focused and colour changed at whim
• Things to move image creation devices in all manner of ways to create immersive imagery

 

[Erehy Dobon]

I'm not sure how helpful a thread like this is. Why is it important to share a list of gear that you use? Why should anyone care?

...

But a list of what gear people are using, in isolation, isn't (or shouldn't be) of any real interest. It just strikes me as idle boasting.

Your stance held water back in the film era when a camera body was a light-tight box, everyone could load the same film into their cameras and the main difference were the lenses. Back then it was primarily Canon v. Nikon which focused on lens image quality, autofocus speed/accuracy, and flash capabilities. Those were also the only two 35mm SLR brands where one could easily rent exotic lenses (e.g., 600mm/f4 bazooka).

Today, dSLRs are fading as digital photography moves to mirrorless bodies which means retrofocus lens designs are giving way to smaller lens that have fewer optical design compromises. Go ahead and look up a 35mm film lenses around 50mm/f1.4 for rangefinders (like a Leica) and an SLR (Canon EOS). The latter are enormous.

Far more important is the digital sensor. Today, photographers aren't loading Fujichrome Velvia 50, Kodachrome 25 or some ISO 800 print film in all of their camera bodies whether it be a $120 P&S or a $1000 pro-caliber SLR. Each digital camera body has a unique sensor.

Back in the late Nineties, I could load up rolls of Velvia in A.) Contax 35mm SLR, B.) Contax G2 35mm rangefinder, and C.) Yashica T4 Super, all of which used Zeiss lenses. The image recording medium was the same, the main difference was the lenses. Light falloff, vignetting, chromatic aberration, distortion around the edges. The rangefinder's lenses had the best optical performance.

Digital photography has changed all of that.

It's no longer Canon v. Nikon. Sony crushed the competition with their superior sensors about five years ago which is why AP news photographers have mostly moved to this platform. Add the need for video recording and Sony's long broadcast video experience (e.g., Betacam) is another advantage.

Superior sensors are particularly important in low-light situations.

If all of your photography is done on tripod then perhaps camera brand doesn't matter but that's no longer the case.

 

[Alexander.Of.Oz]

Your stance held water back in the film era when a camera body was a light-tight box...

I think you may have misunderstood the reply to which you responded? I can't speak for them, of course, but my interpretation was that it is more important to think about the artistry of photography than the gear used to make the photographic image.

Case in point, you could give the same photographic gear to a bunch of different people and they will all come up with differeing results when capturing the same things. Partly through interpretation or how they were moved by the subject and partly by technical ability. Art vs Gear, I guess.

Today, dSLRs are fading as digital photography moves to mirrorless bodies which means retrofocus lens designs are giving way to smaller lens that have fewer optical design compromises. Go ahead and look up a 35mm film lenses around 50mm/f1.4 for rangefinders (like a Leica) and an SLR (Canon EOS). The latter are enormous.

The Sony lenses I have that are more recent builds for my mirrorless cameras and the Sigmas are even bigger than those you speak of. I only see Venus Optics/Laowa making smaller high quality lenses at this stage for full frame bodies, but even they mention they are not really designed for the high MP sensors that are out there. Olympus and Panasonic made medium sized lenses for the M43 range, but their Pro level lenses are not any smaller than those for APSC or Full-frame sensors really.

Far more important is the digital sensor. Today, photographers aren't loading Fujichrome Velvia 50 or some ISO 800 print film in all of their camera bodies whether it be a $120 P&S or a $1000 pro-caliber SLR. Each digital camera body has a unique sensor.

Oh! I tend to put the glass as the prime thing needing to have better quality than the sensor being used. Stick crap glass on the most amazing sensor and you will get crap imagery. Maybe I am not understanding you somehow?

It's no longer Canon v. Nikon. Sony crushed the competition with their superior sensors about five years ago which is why AP news photographers have mostly moved to this platform. Add the need for video recording and Sony's long broadcast video experience (e.g., Betacam) is another advantage.

Canon have a long and proven track record of video and movie industry production too, as do many other brands, some of whom make their own cameras, sensors and glass. A Canon C200, 300 or 500 is equally as good as anything from the Sony FX line and is the choice for more documentary film making crews than the Sony's currently.

Superior sensors are particularly important in low-light situations.

Bigger sensors with bigger photosites with bigger glass and wider apertures will always rule the lowlight world due to physics. A fullframe sensor with higher MP's will not fare as well as a fullframe sensor with lower MP count, due to the larger photosite's ability to basically gobble up more light and therefore respond with cleaner details.

Again, I think you may have not quite gotten the comments made alluding to the importance of the artistic ability to create an interesting image being more important than the gear used to get there.

 

[braddick]

Don't be mad! I am just a beginner in this hobby. It's something my wife and I are starting out together and enjoying so far.
I know there are way better cameras and equipment yet for now, this is how we started this fascinating hobby:

1- Canon Powershot G9. We've owned this one for about 12 years and it still is a fun little camera to mess around with. Also, if I end up dropping and/or breaking it, I am no longer concerned.

2- (for adventures at the Wild Animal Park in Escondido, California): Nikon P1000. It is a bit unwieldy, yet fun to take photos we would otherwise not have an opportunity to take.

Now, the more we learn and the more we participate the more I lean toward cameras like the Canon D90 and even some neat Sony cameras. But, that is for down the road.

Thanks for letting me share.

 

[Alexander.Of.Oz]

Don't be mad! I am just a beginner in this hobby. It's something my wife and I are starting out together and enjoying so far.
I know there are way better cameras and equipment yet for now, this is how we started this fascinating hobby:

1- Canon Powershot G9. We've owned this one for about 12 years and it still is a fun little camera to mess around with. Also, if I end up dropping and/or breaking it, I am no longer concerned.

2- (for adventures at the Wild Animal Park in Escondido, California): Nikon P1000. It is a bit unwieldy, yet fun to take photos we would otherwise not have an opportunity to take.

Now, the more we learn and the more we participate the more I lean toward cameras like the Canon D90 and even some neat Sony cameras. But, that is for down the road.

Thanks for letting me share.

I can't see any one being mad with you!

It makes perfect sense to continue using what you have already while you explore photography in your own way.

 

[someoldguy]

So last fall I started moving from Canon full frame (5D2 , 6D2) over to m43 (G9). Mostly due to weight of kit when traveling . It took a while to get all the glass I wanted , predicated on my most used Canon focal lengths , but now I'm pretty much set . So now my kit is 8-18 PL , 12-60 PL , 50-200 PL , 100-400 PL ,1.4 extender , 15/1.7PL , 45 macro (might sell this) , 14-140 3.5-4.5 gen1., Laowa 7.5/2 . I was looking forward to doing some trips this year , but COVID got in the way . Still a shot at something interesting next month if I can escape from the clutches of the medical profession and there's no 'second wave' from the virus.

 

[kallisti]

Your stance held water back in the film era when a camera body was a light-tight box, everyone could load the same film into their cameras and the main difference were the lenses. Back then it was primarily Canon v. Nikon which focused on lens image quality, autofocus speed/accuracy, and flash capabilities. Those were also the only two 35mm SLR brands where one could easily rent exotic lenses (e.g., 600mm/f4 bazooka).

Today, dSLRs are fading as digital photography moves to mirrorless bodies which means retrofocus lens designs are giving way to smaller lens that have fewer optical design compromises. Go ahead and look up a 35mm film lenses around 50mm/f1.4 for rangefinders (like a Leica) and an SLR (Canon EOS). The latter are enormous.

Far more important is the digital sensor. Today, photographers aren't loading Fujichrome Velvia 50, Kodachrome 25 or some ISO 800 print film in all of their camera bodies whether it be a $120 P&S or a $1000 pro-caliber SLR. Each digital camera body has a unique sensor.

Back in the late Nineties, I could load up rolls of Velvia in A.) Contax 35mm SLR, B.) Contax G2 35mm rangefinder, and C.) Yashica T4 Super, all of which used Zeiss lenses. The image recording medium was the same, the main difference was the lenses. Light falloff, vignetting, chromatic aberration, distortion around the edges. The rangefinder's lenses had the best optical performance.

Digital photography has changed all of that.

It's no longer Canon v. Nikon. Sony crushed the competition with their superior sensors about five years ago which is why AP news photographers have mostly moved to this platform. Add the need for video recording and Sony's long broadcast video experience (e.g., Betacam) is another advantage.

Superior sensors are particularly important in low-light situations.

If all of your photography is done on tripod then perhaps camera brand doesn't matter but that's no longer the case.

I think you misunderstood my post or perhaps I didn't express myself well enough.

All gear obviously isn't equal. Whether it is niche use cases or more general discussions about which gear is "better", there certainly are differences between bodies, lenses, sensors, formats, brands, etc. Depending on the use case, these differences may matter in important ways or they may not. While worthy of discussion, that isn't the point of this thread. This thread is asking people to post a list of the gear they are currently using. I personally don't see the value in sharing a list of people's gear that is devoid of any context, for the reasons I gave.

 

[kenoh]

Swapped out my Fuji gear with a Nikon Z6. Swapped my Fuji lenses for roughly same in Nikon F mount. I did this because of a silly internet induced belief that Lightroom was ruining my Fuji files. Looking back, I was being stupid. Some of my Fuji files are my most enjoyed images.

The F mount lenses are great because they can be had for reasonable money - something I moved away from Sony for. Their glass prices have been getting silly over the past few years. If I am spending thousands on glass, it will be on lenses for the Leicas.

Added 2 more RX100s to the team including one that has been IR converted - I like B&W a lot so an 830nm filter on the RX100 makes some lovely images.

Other than that, various random bits of metal, plastic and glass gadgetry.

Bought a second Synology NAS to expand storage, both backed up to AWS via Glacier.

Unfortunately amongst this, I didn’t manage to acquire any more skills.

My New Years resolution was to make use of what I have and not buy any new cameras or gear. Lasted 9 days. My promise to myself of going to the gym lasted longer!

 

[Clix Pix]

I think you misunderstood my post or perhaps I didn't express myself well enough.

All gear obviously isn't equal. Whether it is niche use cases or more general discussions about which gear is "better", there certainly are differences between bodies, lenses, sensors, formats, brands, etc. Depending on the use case, these differences may matter in important ways or they may not. While worthy of discussion, that isn't the point of this thread. This thread is asking people to post a list of the gear they are currently using. I personally don't see the value in sharing a list of people's gear that is devoid of any context, for the reasons I gave.

Maybe you’re the one who has missed the point of this thread? You’re not the thread starter, the OP, so how do you know what the intent of the thread actually is? What’s the point of attempting to second-guess the OP’s intention or the potential value of this thread? There is nothing stated in the first post that suggests that people cannot also discuss their gear, talk about why they may or may not have purchased or are or are not using a particular lens, etc...... Often that kind of discussion quite naturally follows a list of what one is using, and in fact there has already been some additional commentary in the thread regarding people’s choices and how or why they made them, etc. Darmok’s thread from nearly a year ago certainly reaped such benefits as well......

 

[kallisti]

Maybe you’re the one who has missed the point of this thread? You’re not the thread starter, the OP, so how do you know what the intent of the thread actually is? What’s the point of attempting to second-guess the OP’s intention or the potential value of this thread? There is nothing stated in the first post that suggests that people cannot also discuss their gear, talk about why they may or may not have purchased or are or are not using a particular lens, etc...... Often that kind of discussion quite naturally follows a list of what one is using, and in fact there has already been some additional commentary in the thread regarding people’s choices and how or why they made them, etc. Darmok’s thread from nearly a year ago certainly reaped such benefits as well......

I read the thread title and the OP. Both state the point of the thread fairly clearly. Furthermore, Darmok just listed his current gear. He didn't give any context as to why he is using his current gear or why he changed over the past year. That also speaks to what was expected in replies to the thread.

I stand by my posts in this thread. It's fine if people want to reply to this thread and list their gear. I personally don't see the point, for the reasons I have outlined.

This isn't an attack on anyone, certainly not Jarmok as I like his images as shared in the monthly POTD threads and I appreciate his comments in numerous other threads. I'm simply stating that for me the idea behind this particular thread isn't interesting or helpful in any meaningful sense. People can knock themselves out listing their current gear--but I personally don't see the point.

To be blunt, a list of the gear you are using is meaningless. Far more interesting would be explanations as to why you are using your current gear, why you may have changed gear over time, and ideally example images that justify your reasons for using the gear you are using. Without context, gear lists are completely meaningless.

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

I’ve asked similar questions before, and I leave them open-ended to see where the conversation goes. I guess this time it went south, but there’s no need for anyone to die on this hill, so sorry to stir up some trouble. I’ll take the feedback in mind, although I’ve benefited from threads like this before. I do have a bad habit of asking others a question and forget to provide much background of my own! Most of you know I try to keep it light-hearted here, so, sorry again.

 

[kenoh]

Your stance held water back in the film era when a camera body was a light-tight box, everyone could load the same film into their cameras and the main difference were the lenses. Back then it was primarily Canon v. Nikon which focused on lens image quality, autofocus speed/accuracy, and flash capabilities. Those were also the only two 35mm SLR brands where one could easily rent exotic lenses (e.g., 600mm/f4 bazooka).

Today, dSLRs are fading as digital photography moves to mirrorless bodies which means retrofocus lens designs are giving way to smaller lens that have fewer optical design compromises. Go ahead and look up a 35mm film lenses around 50mm/f1.4 for rangefinders (like a Leica) and an SLR (Canon EOS). The latter are enormous.

Far more important is the digital sensor. Today, photographers aren't loading Fujichrome Velvia 50, Kodachrome 25 or some ISO 800 print film in all of their camera bodies whether it be a $120 P&S or a $1000 pro-caliber SLR. Each digital camera body has a unique sensor.

Back in the late Nineties, I could load up rolls of Velvia in A.) Contax 35mm SLR, B.) Contax G2 35mm rangefinder, and C.) Yashica T4 Super, all of which used Zeiss lenses. The image recording medium was the same, the main difference was the lenses. Light falloff, vignetting, chromatic aberration, distortion around the edges. The rangefinder's lenses had the best optical performance.

Digital photography has changed all of that.

It's no longer Canon v. Nikon. Sony crushed the competition with their superior sensors about five years ago which is why AP news photographers have mostly moved to this platform. Add the need for video recording and Sony's long broadcast video experience (e.g., Betacam) is another advantage.

Superior sensors are particularly important in low-light situations.

If all of your photography is done on tripod then perhaps camera brand doesn't matter but that's no longer the case.

Nerd here. There are only a handful of sensor manufacturers and they pretty much all use 2-3 fabrication plants in Asia. Sony is one of them. Sony provide sensors to a number of camera manufacturers. Don’t get me wrong, I am sure they only license last generation or older to 3rd parties but it is a known situation that as it stands today, a number of cameras we see as competing with each other are indeed fitted with Sony sensors.

What makes them unique now (Excluding the lens) is the software used to process the image during the demosaic process. This is where the magic happens for example Leica are known for having worked with hundreds of thousands of images to tune their software to get images from the sensor that looked like Kodachrome - this is why people wax lyrical about how beautiful the images from an M9 are (me included. 11 year old camera and I will use it over anything else unless I worry about damaging it).

The company that show their strength best in this regard is Fuji. Their film simulations are fantastic but it is all just code. I suppose the imaging code is the equivalent of the super secret emulsions recipes of of film.

 

[kenoh]

Don't be mad! I am just a beginner in this hobby. It's something my wife and I are starting out together and enjoying so far.
I know there are way better cameras and equipment yet for now, this is how we started this fascinating hobby:

1- Canon Powershot G9. We've owned this one for about 12 years and it still is a fun little camera to mess around with. Also, if I end up dropping and/or breaking it, I am no longer concerned.

2- (for adventures at the Wild Animal Park in Escondido, California): Nikon P1000. It is a bit unwieldy, yet fun to take photos we would otherwise not have an opportunity to take.

Now, the more we learn and the more we participate the more I lean toward cameras like the Canon D90 and even some neat Sony cameras. But, that is for down the road.

Thanks for letting me share.

Mad? God no. Nothing at all to be mad about. This is great that you are here. I think that you are already a step ahead of the game in that you probably know your G9 inside out, you will have at least an inkling of its limitations and how to exploit its benefits.

I dropped One of my RX100s last Sunday and I was like a petulant child for the rest of the afternoon because I scratched my precious. Thankfully it was “only” the P&S and not one of the rangefinders

Thank you for sharing. There is a lot of experience in this little corner of the hindernet so stay a while, hang out and enjoy the banter. Despite what may look like bickering in this thread, it is all people who have known each other virtually for years.

 

[fauxtog]

Body: Canon 5D MKIV
Glass: 35 2.0 IS; 40 2.8; 50 1.2; 85 1.2; 135 2.0

planning on getting the Canon R5 for Christmas

 

[akash.nu]

Just for the laugh I’m gonna leave my main gears here.

- a solid and powerful body that can fit into various different attachments.
- normal lens 26mm f/1.8
- telephoto lens 52mm f/2.0
- wise angle lens 13mm f/2.4
- gorilla pod where needed
- extra improvised attachments such as the back of a whisky glass, sunglasses, glass globes etc

And just for the suspense not mentioning any brand or model number.

 

[Internaut]

• Olympus OMD E-M1 mk 2.
• 12-40 f2.8.
• 25mm f1.8.
• 45mm f1.8.
• Cheap as chips 40-150.
• Pen F.
• Panasonic GX9 plus 12-60 kit and 20mm f1.7.
• Sony A7 II, 24-70 f4, 28mm f2 and nifty 50.
• Ricoh GR (mk1).
• Fujifilm XF10.
• Fujifilm X100F.

Everything but the Sony kit picked up second hand from eBa or the local second hand camera store. The X100F was bought second hand using my lockdown savings (along with a tricked out iPad Pro (2020). And yes, I’m looking to rationalise a little.
[automerge]1599925776[/automerge2

[automerge]1599925802[/automerge]

 

[baypharm]

Donated all of my photography equipment and now shoot exclusively with the Leica Q2 and the M-10 Monochrom with 35mm lens. Of the two cameras, I will take the Q2 anyday over the M-10. While it shoots incredible b/w imagery, the rangefinder system is not for everyone. I rented both cameras before deciding to purchase them. No regrets.