Best crop sensor camera?

<p>Who makes the best crop sensor camera? Please allow me to ramble for a few paragraphs before getting back to that question. . . .</p>

<p>As one who has shot full-frame since 2004 (Kodak 14n with Nikon lenses followed by the Canon 5D and 5DII shortly thereafter--followed by Nikon starting in 2012), this issue of the best crop sensor camera--until recently--has been irrelevant to me. Yet, yet, during the last eight years there has always been some crop sensor camera lying around my house, starting with the Canon XTi, followed by the Canon T2i as well as the Nikon D90 and now the D7000. I have also experimented with Sony's NEX system, based on the 1.5x crop sensor. Yes, yes, I shoot my D800E faithfully, followed by my eBay-scrounged D3s, but, when either is overkill (or when the batteries are down), I typically grab one of the smaller DSLRs and head out the door. If not, well, I still have my phone and its cam with me--and I increasingly use them.</p>

<p>Let me add that I consider myself free from a lot of contentious false dichotomies, three in particular:<br /> I don't worry about <em>(1) the full-frame versus crop sensor debate</em>. Both types of camera are good and useful.<br /> I don't worry about <em>(2) film versus digital</em>, having started with the Miranda in 1977 and then the Canon AE-1 in 1982. Moving into digital was seamless: I shot both for a while--a very long while. <br /> Nor do I worry about <em>(3) the brand issue</em>: Canon v. Nikon v. Sony v. Pentax v. Olympus, etc. I've shot enough different cameras and brands to know that the camera is the least important thing we take out there, or at least a distant third after we consider, first, our skills (technical abilities/artistic vision) and, second, our lenses.</p>

<p>I mention all of this because I want to make it clear that I do not want to fight any of those wars here in this thread--not because anyone besides myself is going to care about my personal camera history. If anyone else wants to fight those wars, feel free, but I will see no need to respond.</p>

<p>All that said, why would I care about the best crop sensor camera <em>now</em>? Perhaps it is because of the desire to simplify, not to say that I seriously think about chucking full-frame as a<em> modus operandi</em> and as a mode of being. (I am still too committed to both high resolution and high ISO shooting to ever want to go exclusively to crop sensor cameras.)</p>

<p>Yet, I have to give the little DSLRs their due. Some of my best shots have been made with them, and those made by my friends are even better. Kent Staubus has been a big factor as well, given his penchant for night photography with crop sensor cameras. I always assumed that, if you were serious about night photography with digital cameras, you really, really ought to shoot full frame. Well, maybe not. . .</p>

<p>There is also this, which I stumbled across this morning, which I prefer to display here with the full URL showing the "D7200-vs-Cannon-7D-Mark-II-vs-Sony-A77-II" portion summarizing which discussion the URL is really linking to.</p>

<p><strong><a href="http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Nikon-D7200-The-new-APS-C-champ/Comparison-2-Nikon-D7200-vs-Canon-7D-Mark-II-vs-Sony-A77-II">http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Nikon-D7200-The-new-APS-C-champ/Comparison-2-Nikon-D7200-vs-Canon-7D-Mark-II-vs-Sony-A77-II</a></strong><br /> <br /> I also remembered Mike Halliwell's lamentations about Nikon's presumed forsaking of its DX line. He seemed to see the announcements of the D7200 and the 7D II as portending something like the end of the world, at least where Nikon DX was concerned.<strong><br /></strong></p>

<p>In any case, what is best <em>right now</em> with crop sensor, and what trends are emerging? Where, for that matter, is digital imaging headed?</p>

<p>I know, I know: I could have, should have stopped after the first seven words far above . . . .</p>

<p>--Lannie<br /> </p>

<p> </p>

<p>It depends on how you're using your images, mostly, doesn't it. And what you're shooting. If I shot sports, I'd get the 7D II and not look back. But I don't.</p>

<p>imho, if you can't get a good image out of the latest from Nikon/Canon/Panasonic/Fuji/Olympus/Pentax/Samsung, it's not the camera.</p>

<p>The best crop frame camera is the one that you have with you, on a good tripod if possible, when you need it. And it follows that it's the camera you know and understand.</p>

<p>For that reason, I ditched even my Nikon DX last year and went to µ43. The DX kit was too big to carry EVERYWHERE, and the µ43 is small enough to never leave home.</p>

<p>Obviously, ymmv.</p>

<p>If I were to buy an APS-C camera, it would be the Fuji X-T1. This camera has interchangeable lenses, is weather sealed and has excellent ergonomics. Fuji makes outstanding lenses for this camera, but with adapters you can use nearly any lens from Leica to Canon in manual mode. Best of all, it's about 2/3rds the size and weight of a small Canon or Nikon DSLR.</p>

<p>Since I am more interested in compatibility of existing lenses (Leica and Nikon) and angle of view, I decided on the Sony A7ii. You can't go wrong with either camera.</p>

<p>The trend is toward small framed cameras (rangefinder-sized) with an electronic viewfinder and full DSLR capability. Five years from now, cameras with mirrors may be on the same shelf with cassette tape players and vinyl records. Look where Zeiss is placing its bets.</p>

What makes a crop sensor camera "good" for you? A D7200 has a great sensor and AF system but it's larger than a crop

sensor camera has to be. An OM-D has great AF, and mirrorless goes, but the sensor is not a strong as a lot of APSC

options. Sony and Fuji are not as good at AF and slightly less small but produce fantastic image quality. Between those

two it mostly comes down to which company makes the lenses you want and which controls philosophy do you subscribe

to (knobs and dials vs menus etc.)

Lannie. Why do you want to know? Do you think one of these would make a significant difference to a picture you

would hang on the wall? Obviously you wouldn't buy the 7DII as according to DXO it is not in the same league as

the others if you believe their system. I have a 7DII that I shoot major swim meets with. My keeper rate is

significantly better with the 7DII than other Canons I have used previously. I can also use higher ISOs with the 7DII than my

previous 7D. This allows me to use my new 100-400 II indoors in places like Harvard. I could not do that with the

earlier 100-400. Other than that I have been shooting pictures with Canon and Bronica since 1988. I have done

weddings, newspaper work, portraits, all sorts of high school sports and. PR. It did not make a hell of a lot of

difference what camera I have used as I have gotten at least a professionally acceptable product with almost all cameras I

have owned and used. I have a Canon SL1 and an EOS M that work just fine as long they are used within their

limitations. I mostly use the 7DII with longer lenses and action. i use the SL1 with shorter lenses and when light is

not critical as it is smaller, light and easy to carry. Do I think an EOS 5DR would make me a better photographer? No

way. The thing that fails me the most is what goes on between my ears not my cameras.

<p>Depends on whether your priority is image quality or handling. IM-not-so-H opinion, Fuji's X-system have the best IQ and high ISO performance. Especially straight out of the camera JPEGs. Getting the best results from RAF raw files depends on the raw converter.</p>

<p>But with the exception of the X-T1, Fuji's responsiveness may be a mixed bag. I have the low end X-A1 and it wouldn't be my first choice for candid snaps of people, pets or anything that moves quickly. I prefer the Nikon V1 for that stuff. And I've chattered with several owners of the X100-series, X-Pro 1, XE-series, etc. They love their Fujis but usually admit the speed isn't on par with a typical dSLR. But I'm willing to accept some compromises for lighter weight.</p>

<p>If your priorities include handling, there are several APS sensor dSLRs with excellent IQ. I'd lean toward a Nikon D7100 or D7200, mostly because Nikon is familiar to me and I already have the lenses, and like the flash system too. But if I was starting from scratch, I'd consider Canon and Pentax dSLRs too.</p>

<p>However... frankly, I wouldn't bother with another APS sensor dSLR at all, unless it was a gift. There are full frame models not much larger or more expensive. I don't really like large cameras at all now, so if I'm going to lug one it might as well be full frame. And it would probably be Sony, in the sorta-dSLR mirrorless niche.</p>

<p>Simple 1 (made up) word answer: TINBOA</p>

<p>What I consider 'the best' restaurant you might hate.<br>

What I consider 'the best' car may not suit you at all.<br>

What I consider 'the best' vacation spot you may have no interest in.<br>

What I consider 'the best' clothing style may have you rolling on the floor laughing.</p>

<p>In a word - There Is No Best Of Anything</p>

<p>Not true!</p>

<p>Each of us makes purchase decisions which, to one person anyway, is the "best of" something. For the purpose of this discussion, sharing the reasons for this decision is topical, not necessarily the outcome.</p>

<p>The Canon EOS SL1 is about the same size as the Fuji XT-1 (thicker, but narrower and the same height) and about the same weight, but it's 1/3 of the price.</p>

<p>The IS no best camera, just as there is no best car or no best watch or no best motorcycle. It's all a matter of opinion, what you want and how much money you have.</p>

<p>My current favorite camera is the Canon Powershot SX60HS. Can't beat it for size, weight, versatility and convenience. Image quality is excellent, within the limits of a small sensor of course. Only thing it can't do is blur backgrounds like a large sensor camera can.</p>

<p>Nikon D400 but of course only untill Canon releases the 7D mk IV :-)<br>

It all depends on what you need and what you do have at hand.</p>

Sony A7s

Lannie, this is a catnip question for any serious photographer. For me it is reminiscent of a showtune from the Brodway golden era, " When I'm not near the girl I love, I love the girl I'm near." Says it all. Never met a really bad one yet. Good and better. Smaller is nice lately, petite, and sweet....

No best that is dearest l could nominate to lead the mirrorless pack. Like Dick I have owned and used a variety of brands and models. Not EOS but close enough to Canon's latest. One Nikon P and S. I liked it too...am fickle, but not indiscriminate.

 

I happen to presently like offerings from both Olympus and Panasonic in their top models. I have not reached for' rain washed streets by lamplight.' But i am sure I could if I liked to shoot such. I really have a warm relationship with one lately. We are going steady :-).... The versatile Lumix GX7. ( Several others are in the kit, Lannie, all four thirds or micro four thirds.) I can tell you what I myself like about the GX 7. Without placing it in your hands with the sharp and fairly fast X series Lumix zooms, not going to be persuasive. No images reduced for the web forums are telling. Don't rely on one or two enthusiasts of course. Look at the user reviews on Amazon and B and H. A catnip topic.

PS. Had I started some years back and Sony was then mature in the field, my relationships might be different. The crop sensor and its lenses are getting better and better. And better all the time. No real limit I can see by physics or anything we deem the last word... Camera feel in hand has so much value to me, and location of the buttons, with my fat fingers, and certain personal taste on design/ ergonomics. Lens selection of course counts. And maybe adaptation to what system you own.

Where, for that matter, is digital imaging headed?

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

Lannie, I will take a shot at your last question, the crystal ball one. Cameras as image collection gadgets are getting so small that we are reaching a point where there is little room for the controls. I am shopping for a retrofit cam for the back of my Camry. The company that sells rear view cameras says they recommend a model that can fit between the lights that illuminate the rear tag on the car. We are talking about a sensor and its software that is less than 2" square. In essence a two inch video camera...with iris and shutter. But the controls are elsewhere. So I expect that more and more the camera will be smaller and linked symbiotically to one or more carry around devices. Maybe even by telemetry or Wi Fi to our home computer. Autmation will be rejected by some and gain ground with most. Who cares whether we shoot manual or program, as long as the photo is clean. There will be an automatic darkening of bright sky and dark foreground, like a built in variable density filter. For the masses, the good folk, and the young, they will want to not carry a camera like we do at all. And a smart phone will have all the goodies. So that companies will have to think up a way to attract the Millennials soon. Colorful bodies, maybe back to the camo colour that used to be so unusual but no more. (Designs that are different and stand apart like the old Oly O product. Even steampuck for all I know) Cameras that can change their color or their shape. Convergence of camera design so we hold them like a movie camera and shoot both. Shooting so many video frames that we can snip out the movement of a bird in flight. ....

 

I will be proven conservative perhaps.

 

Aloha nui. GS, PDQ

<blockquote>

<p>I have not reached for' rain washed streets by lamplight.'</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Nor have I, Gerry, but the surprise is that, when I really did have such an evening unfold in front of my lens, I was not carrying one of the super low-light full-frame cameras, but my lowly (but beloved) D90--with kit lens.</p>

<p>I think it did pretty well!<br /> <br /> <strong><a href="/photo/15721012">http://www.photo.net/photo/15721012</a></strong></p>

<p>Truth be told, I probably will not buy any new cameras anytime soon, of whatever brand or crop factor. I just wanted to have a taste of the old Photo.net one more time before I logged on one day to possibly find out that the site has closed down. I hope that it never happens, of course, but maybe it is up to those of us remaining to see what we can do to resuscitate it.</p>

<p>It really is great when people do express an honest preference, and give their reasons for it, whatever it might be.</p>

<p>Thanks to everyone.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

<p><a href="/bboard/"We%20are%20all%20digital%20shooters%20now."%20--Milton%20Friedman">"We are all digital shooters now." --Milton Friedman<img src="http://http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_are_all_Keynesians_now" alt="" /></a></p>

<p> </p>

<p>Instead of looking at just the camera, I would look at what lenses are available for that system. How you USE the camera is the next biggest factor. If you are using it for travel, something compact becomes important. If you use it for wildlife, great AF dominates. Remember the idea is to match the gear to the use. The best camera for one thing might not be the best for another.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

Yeah Lannie there was nothing like it elsewhere and I miss it. So thanks for letting me participate here. Your friend,

Dick

<p>Thank <em>you</em>, Dick. Always glad to have the honor of your presence on one of my threads.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

<p>Lannie-I can't respond to the question of the "best" crop frame camera, but I had a similar question. My Nikon gear ( the 14-24, 24-70, 70-200 f/4 + tripod are too heavy for me now for hiking and too bulky to haul while flying.. I used a succession of Canon Powershots over a period of time but wanted better high ISO performance. My first try was the Sony NEX 6-never liked the menu system and ergonomics after the Nikon, and still wasn't thrilled with the high ISO performance.-also tried the Sony A7 in the store. For a travel rig I've settled on the Fuji X-T1 I'm happy with the ergonomics and the lens selections/quality. .The X-T1 is very close in size to my wife's vintage Nikon FG. I don't see the X-T1 replacing my D800 and D750, but on the other hand using my Nikon FX glass on a crop frame D7200, doesn't achieve very much in the way of size/weight reduction.</p>

<p>Canon 7DII - great, fast pro sports body. Sensor little less dynamic range than A77II and D7200.<br>

Sony A77II - 12 FPS body, 52 JPEG buffer - I use 2 with Sony 70-400 and Tamron 150-600 - pellical mirror slightly reduces image quality and light sensitivity. <br>

Nikon D7200 - 6 FPS but great dynamic range similar to A77II. I use 1 with my Nikon mount lenses. </p>

All is not forsaken, Lannie,. We have WNW, Mirrorless Mondays. Soon to come I can foresee Fuji Fridays and Sony Sundays. Why not except for need to downsize which could be handled by the server I believe... Valedictions and elegies standing by if needed in the vaults. I liked last month's interesting discussion on Peeping Toms even as it brushed against Off Topic type material to some degree. I am habituated to PN I fear and hope it sticks around for a while longer. Or gets bought up by Amazon. No, not a good idea.______ Buy a new camera. You deserve one. To make photos like that one of the colorful wall and zigzag illuminated staircase- fire escape. (Zigzag strip was am simple theme of my very first abstract painting, one I did for Professor Feininger in his Intro to sketching and painting class. He said the zigzag theme was always one he liked..And yes I like your linked photo above, very nice.)

<p>I wouldn't take the opinion of people lamenting the demise of something as an indicator of anything - some people just feel a need to always complain. When a camera comes out that fixes what they perceived as "big problems" on the old model, they will just find other flaws in the new one.<br>

The point that Kent made matters most, though: can the system that you'd be interested in deliver the lenses (and possible flashes) that you need? The Canon sensor may test worse according to DxO (which I'd already take with a pinch of salt), but the lens line-up has basically no equal, only Nikon coming close. Others are filling the gaps, but as good as the Sony ex-Nex (now Alpha) are, the lenses remain an achillesheel, if you want autofocus and no adapters. Fuji is working harder on closing that gap, but fast long lenses are for example still missing.<br>

The best sensor, best AF, best viewfinder, best construction quality, best.... - you can only judge an entire package, versus your actual needs. There is your best APS-C camera, mine could be a different one (I don't know, I am happy with what I currently use).<br>

My choice: Pentax has strong offerings, I'd probably love a Fuji (X Pro-1 attracts me most).... but I've got enough gear as it is, so I'd have to head down to a shop and try them if I'd really want to bite this bullet.</p>

Hi, Landrum, as already mentioned, "best" is determined by the user's needs and preferences.<br>

<br>The Fujiflm X-Pro1 with its terrific Fujinon 35mm 1.4 lens is the first digital camera I've had that I'm excited about.  --Sally

<p>That Fuji 35mm lens has ruined 50mm SLR lenses for me. I don't think there's really enough difference between current model APSC sensors to make sensors a big factor in picking a camera system, but it's areas like the Fuji primes that make a system stand out.</p>

<p>I believe that you guys are right about the Fuji line. I wish that I could afford one now--and Fuji has quite a stable of good cameras and lenses. Realistically, however, Nikon is going to have to be it for me, given the lens situation</p>

<p>I still shoot my Canon T2i occasionally, though. I bought my first Canon back in 1982, and Canon has never given me a basis for complaint.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

<p>Speaking of Fuji, here is a link to G. Dan Mitchell's page dealing with Fuji equipment:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.gdanmitchell.com/2013/08/24/taking-stock-of-the-fujifilm-x-e1-mirrorless-camera">[Link]</a></p>

<p>--Lannie</p>