What's the best all-around camera you've used?

The title is pretty much self explanatory, but just to flesh it out a bit, the following is a list of the cameras that for one reason or other are not the best all-around camera I've used:

Hasselblad X1D. Best picture quality I've every had from a camera, but buggy as hell and a fairly limited window in terms of what you can do with it.

Leica M240 (and variants): Probably the single best user experience I've had with a camera, but again, limited to an extent in what you can use it for.

Sigma DP Merrill / Quattro series: basically like the Hasselblad, but even more limited.

Fuji X100 series: Like the Leicas, a lot of fun to use and with excellent image quality, but a fixed 35mm equivalent lens again limits application.

So in my case (and I'm not a specialist: I shoot a little of everything), the best all-around camera I've used is the Sony A9. Easily enough resolution (for what I do), easily good enough autofocus (probably more than I will ever need), decent enough battery life, pretty impressive dynamic range (I don't shoot "midday sun in a coal mine" level stuff which requires a billion stops of DR), a totally silent electronic shutter which doesn't distort moving subjects...It's hard to envision a situation where the A9 couldn't do the job.

Let's hear about yours.

They're all compromises.

Even if I were to take money out of the equation (like, who needs to eat?) there are factors such as weight, DoF, bulk, AF, DR, high ISO performance, UX, shooting envelope, and availability.

Putting the money back in, I'd say that IME, the more "all-round" you want (larger shooting envelope), the more you have to pay, and the more you must compromise on bulk and weight.

So to me, what is "the best" very much depends on the use case. There is no doubt that my ILC kit has the best IQ and the largest shooting envelope, but my pocketable compact is far better for travel and social photography.

At the moment, I'm quite content with the gear I have, but from experience I have reason to believe that the best is yet to come. Gear evolves, needs change.

Good luck and good light.

I've got an old Fuji bridge s100fs. Great all around fun camera.

Yes, they’re all compromises but the camera I liked best was the pocketable Fuji XF1 from about 2014. Manual zoom to about 100mm equivalent, metal body, nice image quality despite the modest sensor size. The focus/zoom mechanisms all failed eventually though!

Actually I have to name 2.

1. Sony RX10IV for its long reaching zoom lens, 24-600mm FF equivalent.
2. Sony RX100VII for compactness and great zoom range of 24-200 mm.

Despite the 1" sensor, both cameras have very good IQ, YMMV.

May THE LIGHT be with you!

C U on https://dprevived.com/

Shashinka73 said:

Leica M240 (and variants): Probably the single best user experience I've had with a camera, but again, limited to an extent in what you can use it for.

Fuji X100 series: Like the Leicas, a lot of fun to use and with excellent image quality, but a fixed 35mm equivalent lens again limits application.

Click to expand...

Pretty much my user experience as well. I photograph a limited scope, so the camera I choose is only limited by me. The Leica M8 and the Mamiya 6 are my favorite to use, but the Swiss-army knife camera, for me, is the Nikon D7000.

I've owned a lot of great cameras, over the years, but none of them have been perfect for every situation.

I'm a little different from most people, when it comes to photography, and I'm more concerned about image quality, and size than any other features.

I'd probably be awe struck by some medium or large format cameras if they weren't so big.

Anyway, the one camera that I've always loved and consider one of the best, when it comes to image quality in a smaller camera, is the Sony RX1.

It was the first full frame, prime lens digital camera, and is still rated as one of the best, when it comes to image quality. That Sony built Zeiss lens is as good as it gets, and is still one of the highest rated 35mm lenses ever made.

So, even though it's not perfect for every situation, I'd still say it ranks as one of the best.

My best experience with using a camera was the Nikon D500. It was the perfect size, perfect ergonomics, extremely fast, accurate focusing, and good focus point coverage.

Sadly, its downfall was image quality. It was decent for an APS-C, but it was the only thing stopping it from being a perfect camera for me and what I used it for (sports, concerts).

Sony A7R2, going on 8 years now.

Small for a FF and mirrorless made this possible. It's actually a tiny bit smaller than my MFT Panasonic GX8.

Nature photography mostly, with two lenses: 35mm and 50mm Macro. When traveling/hiking I carry two cameras.

The 35mm is great for landscapes. The flip-up LCD is very convenient.



The camera's grip is perfect for one-hand use when necessary - holding back a branch with the left hand, for example. 50mm Macro here.



Other uses include street festivals, where the tiny 35mm is very inconspicuous.







--
Richard
http://www.rsjphoto.net/

it would be my Pentax 645Z---if I could only have one camera this would be the one. After that is a conundrum---either my K1mkII or one of the Sony FF cameras. No to Canon or Nikon, no probably to Fuji, even the medium formats (although i'd have to think really hard).

Just does everything so well. Note: I've never shot video with it, so can't comment on that. But the AF is excellent, as is the IQ.

Bert

For what I shoot, this is the best all-around camera I ever used. It addressed many issues I had with older Sony cameras (menus, touch screen, articulated screen, two fast card slots, ...etc). Also the resolution (33 MP) hits my sweet spot.

--
~George

I can't blame failure to get the shot on the camera.

For 35mm, I really enjoyed shooting the Nikon F2. Solidly built with a big and bright finder, everything just felt right about it, so long as you’re comfortable with manual focus.

For DSLR, while I love having dedicated buttons for everything, as much as I loved using the Nikon D3S, I think the D700 is a better compromise. That camera is magical. Even when shooting black and white at ISO 3200, things just worked.

For mirrorless, there is something special about the X100 series cameras, but for me, it’s specifically the X100T. I’m not much for rangefinders, but I liked this enough to buy and sell it on more than one occasion. A bit old by today’s standard, but it just feels good shooting with it. Tried the X100F which shares the same sensor as the X-T2, but I prefer the older sensor.

richj20 said:

Other uses include street festivals, where the tiny 35mm is very inconspicuous.

Click to expand...

Great photo and insanely fantastic lightweight lens.

--
RAW--- Reconfigurable Architecture Workflowness
I have a mirrorless camera. Everyone knows what that is.

No other out of all the cameras I have owned can do as many things well in a small enough easy-to-carry package.

Shashinka73 said:

The title is pretty much self explanatory, but just to flesh it out a bit, the following is a list of the cameras that for one reason or other are not the best all-around camera I've used:

Hasselblad X1D. Best picture quality I've every had from a camera, but buggy as hell and a fairly limited window in terms of what you can do with it.

Leica M240 (and variants): Probably the single best user experience I've had with a camera, but again, limited to an extent in what you can use it for.

Sigma DP Merrill / Quattro series: basically like the Hasselblad, but even more limited.

Fuji X100 series: Like the Leicas, a lot of fun to use and with excellent image quality, but a fixed 35mm equivalent lens again limits application.

So in my case (and I'm not a specialist: I shoot a little of everything), the best all-around camera I've used is the Sony A9. Easily enough resolution (for what I do), easily good enough autofocus (probably more than I will ever need), decent enough battery life, pretty impressive dynamic range (I don't shoot "midday sun in a coal mine" level stuff which requires a billion stops of DR), a totally silent electronic shutter which doesn't distort moving subjects...It's hard to envision a situation where the A9 couldn't do the job.

Click to expand...

That's how I feel about the Z9. Don't own one, but borrow Holly's occasionally. Holly owns all the heavy stuff, Fuji GX-100s, Z9, etc. My arthritis like the Z7 a lot better, and is curious about the Z8.

You know the saying "jack of all trades, master of none"? Well, the flagships from Nikon, Canon, Sony, and Panasonic have basically transcended that and are the "masters of most". One may excel at something that's another's weakest point, but even "weak" is pretty strong.

For anything really serious, the Z9 has features that are great for macro and product, zero vibration, moves like a rocket for action and high speed splashes and such, as much resolution as I need, and I'd shoot pretty-much any sort of video with it. A Z9 works best for me because I know the UI back and forth, and it works with my 40+ year accumulation of Nikon lenses.

Flavil said:

richj20 said:

Other uses include street festivals, where the tiny 35mm is very inconspicuous.

Click to expand...

Great photo and insanely fantastic lightweight lens.

Click to expand...

Thanks! It was my first FE lens back in 2016.







--
Richard

Maybe the Olympus E-M10. I've owned a couple.

And that's factoring in value as well. Has enough higher end features to keep up with much better cameras, but is small, inexpensive, and easy to use.