What makes your final camera purchase decision

jwashburn

What is it that usually makes yours final decision for your camera?

I will use myseslf as an example. I have a d200 and I am looking to upgrade. I am a serious hobbyist. Nothing is driving my quest. I dont have any business drivers, just fun.

In reality I am looking at D300 or D700, as much as I would like to think I need a D3. For the sake of this argument, I will include it. It applies to Canon or any other camera maker. My question is really what is it that really makes you say OK, I am going with Model X.

I look at the D300s and the D700 and there are features in the lower price 300 like dual card slots, more FPS and Video. The 700 has full frame capabilities, (on the long end of the spectrum, it never hurts to have a little extra length, but when I shoot wide angles, I wish I didnt have the extra length of the dx format)

Now if you bring in the D3 it adds even more fire to the mix. The megapixels are the same, it has more FPS, which as an action guy I like. Its feels WAY better in your hand than the smaller cameras. I just feel more professional when I hold it (silly I know). So the D300s is about $1900, the D700 is $3000 and the D3 is $5000.

For me the D3 is out, I just cant afford it, nor could I really live with myself spending that much money since I am a hobbyist at best.

I personally am leaning towards the D300s because of the feature set. I like the ability to have video (dont know if I will ever use it), the FPS and the dual card slots. I dont think the giving up those features just to get FX format is worth it. Possibly because I dont really know what I am missing.

So what is it, that drives you to make the final call.

Price? Features? - Just curious how other people make their decisions

divamum

1. Specific features
2. Handling/ergonomics
3. Price

Sometimes #3 will rise up the priority list as needed. For instance, while the 5DMk2 would comfortably fill #1 and 2, there's not a snowball's chance in hell that I can afford it in the forseeable future. Therefore, I move on to other options within my budget.

At the moment, I am a very happy Xsi user, but have had a 2nd body in mind as a long-term plan from the day I bought it. I am waiting for the current announcements from Canon and will then start figuring out whether or not anything will be financially viable for me in the next few months. At the moment, the only thing I really "need" to upgrade is even better low-light performance (ie high, smooth ISO options); faster/more sophisticated autofocus would be nice, but isn't a dealbreaker. If none of the new models offer me better performance than I have, then I'll just wait it out a bit longer

And if they do deliever on features but the prices are too high, I'm really happy with what I have and will just hold on until I either find a great deal, prices come down when something else is released, or I put together the funds required.

Qarik

jwashburn wrote:

What is it that usually makes yours final decision for your camera?

I will use myseslf as an example. I have a d200 and I am looking to upgrade. I am a serious hobbyist. Nothing is driving my quest. I dont have any business drivers, just fun.

In reality I am looking at D300 or D700, as much as I would like to think I need a D3. For the sake of this argument, I will include it. It applies to Canon or any other camera maker. My question is really what is it that really makes you say OK, I am going with Model X.

I look at the D300s and the D700 and there are features in the lower price 300 like dual card slots, more FPS and Video. The 700 has full frame capabilities, (on the long end of the spectrum, it never hurts to have a little extra length, but when I shoot wide angles, I wish I didnt have the extra length of the dx format)

Now if you bring in the D3 it adds even more fire to the mix. The megapixels are the same, it has more FPS, which as an action guy I like. Its feels WAY better in your hand than the smaller cameras. I just feel more professional when I hold it (silly I know). So the D300s is about $1900, the D700 is $3000 and the D3 is $5000.

For me the D3 is out, I just cant afford it, nor could I really live with myself spending that much money since I am a hobbyist at best.

I personally am leaning towards the D300s because of the feature set. I like the ability to have video (dont know if I will ever use it), the FPS and the dual card slots. I dont think the giving up those features just to get FX format is worth it. Possibly because I dont really know what I am missing.

So what is it, that drives you to make the final call.

Price? Features? - Just curious how other people make their decisions

Keep in mind the D700 has the best in class iso performance of any full frame camera. Also it has micro adjustment capability for lens which is no small thing.

InsuredDisaster

For me its all about getting a serious upgrade and improvements over my last model. So I had my D70 for about 4 years. I was ready for something new while it was out being repaired and considered the options. I didn't want to step down for sure (D40 series was out) and the D80 actually looked like a step down in some regardsor very little improvement. So for me to blow a lot of money on a new camera, I wanted it to be completely better in nearly ever field. This left only the D300 (in the realm of affordable). It had extremely high reviews and praise, and it looked phenomonal on paper. I've been completely happy with it.

I obviously wanted to stay with Nikon as I had a D70 already that would soon be back and I wanted everything to work across the board.


Right now, I'm happy I went with the D300 over the D700 (which was not quite available I think, but that's beside the point) Its quite a bit less (like you, the D3 is out. I'd rather get a Leica M8 for that kinda money) I'd probably do that again.

For my next camera, I think it will be around 2012 unless something completely totals my 300 early. Again, I'll look for substantially better features in all regards, and it will probably be a 700 series camera, so full frame, wider angle, etc.

That being said, as nearly all of my shooting is towards the wider end of things anyway, I'd probably consider what sort of lenses you want to use with it, and what you already have. I've got a DX fisheye and ultrawide, so for me, I can get really wide with DX format. But I've also got, and continue to aquire, a number of FX lenses (all future lenses for me will be FX capable as well), including a 24-70 2.8. With this lense, I'd strongly consider the D700. In fact, I tend to shoot with two bodies anyway, so I'd probably want an FX to fit with the 24-70 wide angle, and the put the 70-200 on the DX format (to give me the telephoto range)

If you shoot only mainly wide angle, and you've already got a super expensive, and wonderful wide angle (FX) that you'd really like to keep as a wide angle, such as the 24-70 Nikon, then I'd go for the 700 right now. The cost of adding quality ultra wide angles would rapidly eat into the savings you get by going with the DX 300 series camera.

Of course, its your money, so make sure your happy with your purchase!

Don't forget,the 700 or the 300 will both accept a grip for that extra professional heft.

davev

Features and price together.

Lets look at dave's camera buying habits.

I normally buy the cheapest camera with the most features.
I have had in order, (all canons) 300D, XT, XTi, 30D, XSi, and now the 5DMKII.

I pretty much bought a new D Reb when they came out, but after I read a few reviews about them.
I changed this pattern after the XTi. I was very disappointed in this camera. The biggest reason was
the noise at higher ISO's.

So I broke away from the rebel line and bought the 30D for a little more.
It was a good camera, but for shooting wildlife, and going back 2 megapixels left me wanting again.

Enter the XSi. Fairly good high ISO noise, 12 MP, all in all, a pretty good camera.

So how did justify buying the 5DMKII?
While I was buying the XTi, the 30D and the XSi, a friend of mine bought a 5D. (he's still using it)
His shots always seemed to be a bit richer in color and contrast.
So doing quick math, the cameras that I bought cost around $2800, his 5D was around $3000 i believe.

So rather than going through that again, I dumped a big chunk of cash for the 5DMKII.
I use iso 800 on this camera like I used iso 200 on my XSi. The look of my photos seem to be better,
but that could be the rose colored glasses that I look at this camera with.

I think the big thing is, I will have this camera for a few years, I will learn the ins and outs of it
better than any of the others, and with 21 MP, I know I won't be left behind anytime soon.

So in my case, the more expensive camera will cost the same amount in the end.

Cygnus Studios

When I upgraded to the D3 it was a no brainer. I shot film and never liked the crop sensor system. I also was so heavily invested in Nikon, there was no use in looking at other systems.
I also like the larger camera versus the small bodies. (yes I know you can add grips).

Any system or camera you buy has to fulfill the needs of the user. Each model has advantages or disadvantages. If you shoot a lot of wide angle shots, a full frame system is right up your alley. If you shoot a lot of things where you need the extra reach and cannot afford the extra long glass, a crop sensor will work for you.

It really depends on what you shoot, how you shoot it, and what feels right in your hands. All cameras feel different in your hands. For work, I shoot almost exclusively with my DL28 and when I go back to the D3 it feels like I am carrying a load of bricks.

chrisjohnson

I have spent more than twice as much money on lenses and accessories than on the camera, so the lenses I have/want/can afford will drive my next camera decision. I want to feel comfortable with the total system, so an entry level camera with a pro lens will not feel or look right. The components are also designed to match, so camera and lenses need to balance. Better determine the money you want to spend and buy accordingly - there are no bad cameras from the A brands.

ghinson

With a recent ocean wave mishap, I am now in the market to replace my D90. Although the sudden expense is not a welcome surprise, I have to admit that the possibility of upgrading to the latest and greatest is somewhat thrilling. My first thought was that I want to upgrade to a FX camera, and the D700 has amazing reviews. Everyone seems to love this camera, typically more even than the much more expensive D3.

But...

It's still a $2400 and up camera. (Amazon.com seems to be significantly cheaper then anywhere else, right now.)

And this is just a hobby for me.

And I have several lenses that are DX lenses (the Tokina 11-16mm, Nikon 35mm/1.8).

So maybe I should look at the D300/D300s (or even another D90). Save $800. Not have to replace as many lenses. Should be fine for me.

I haven't decided yet. When I read about the D700's amazing high ISO capabilities, and extended dynamic range, I'm sorely tempted.

Thom Hogan has an excellent, objective review of the topic here:

http://www.bythom.com/nikond700review.htm

Qarik

ghinson wrote:

With a recent ocean wave mishap, I am now in the market to replace my D90. Although the sudden expense is not a welcome surprise, I have to admit that the possibility of upgrading to the latest and greatest is somewhat thrilling. My first thought was that I want to upgrade to a FX camera, and the D700 has amazing reviews. Everyone seems to love this camera, typically more even than the much more expensive D3.

But...

It's still a $2400 and up camera. (Amazon.com seems to be significantly cheaper then anywhere else, right now.)

And this is just a hobby for me.

And I have several lenses that are DX lenses (the Tokina 11-16mm, Nikon 35mm/1.8).

So maybe I should look at the D300/D300s (or even another D90). Save $800. Not have to replace as many lenses. Should be fine for me.

I haven't decided yet. When I read about the D700's amazing high ISO capabilities, and extended dynamic range, I'm sorely tempted.

Thom Hogan has an excellent, objective review of the topic here:

http://www.bythom.com/nikond700review.htm

by the way the tokina works on FF but only to about 15mm.

ghinson

Qarik wrote:

by the way the tokina works on FF but only to about 15mm.

The Tokina at 15mm on a FX camera would equal ___mm on a DX camera? (I feel like I should know the answer to this question, but I am feeling dumb right now.)

Internaut

It can be a whim. I bought the Panasonic G1 on a whim because I wanted to try micro 4/3. It can also be for some reasonably rational reasons. My Olympus E-510 was two years old and while it can take amazing photos, I know Olympus have made some fairly sizeable enhancements in terms of their imaging tech. So I was going to get the new E-620. So I went into Jessops and saw they were selling the E-30 with the same lens kit for the same price......

Now, I normally buy on size. As a frequent business traveller who enjoys taking photos, a small flexible kit makes a lot of sense. But...... I handled the E-30, compared the VF to the E-620, noted it had more focus points (and it's reputed to have a generally faster/more accurate AF system) and the digital level and..... I bought it. So sometimes I guess I buy on handling!

So, I'm on a business trip at the moment (another one to Fiji, not that I'd want to gloat on that point :ivar ) with the E-30 and single lens. I do miss the extra flexibility my other kit gives me (the E-510 + 14-42 + 14-150 + 25mm pancake + 9-18 + assorted filters takes up about the same space as the E-30 in my cabbin baggage) but am really enjoying the E-30 and the best glass I own (Leica 14-50 f2.8-3.5).

rookieshooter

For me I wasn't willing to accept any limitations in my camera so I bought the D700. I had read all the reviews of it and the D3 and it just gave me goose bumps thinking about how great it was. I was a Canon guy at the time.

So one night, in the heat of the moment, I bought it online. I regretted it when I woke up in the morning but ever since it has arrived I have been 150% satisfied. This camera, to me, is perfect because it does it all: Fast FPS with grip, high ISO, amazing color and dynamic range, easy to use, tons of flexibility. With the Canon prosumer bodies there are compromises, plain and simple. But Nikon took their pro sensor and AF and put it in a regular body and I love it.

I guess there will come a day when the D700 needs an upgrade but that day is so far out on my calendar I can't even see it so I am totally in love with this purchase.

The only "problem" is I've rented most of the ED lenses and they are all so beautiful, but each one costs about $1,900 so compiling a lens kit is an expensive proposition. To wit:

14-24mm F2.8: $1,900
24-70mm F2.8: $1,900
70-200mm F2.8 VRII: $2,400
200-400mm F4 VR: $5K

You can see my dilemma.

AlbertZeroK

The last cameras I bought:

30D - Ergonomically Correct, Cost (backup camera for my 50D)
50D - Ergonomically Correct (I have big hands), Features/MP, Cost
Olympus 1030SW - Features (Underwater capable), Wide Angle

I got the Olympus as a nice point and shoot, but really I got it for the underwater capability - I picked the 1030SW as it had wide angle.

My DSLR's, simple, it has to fit in my hand. I can't use a D40 or XT, the cameras just don't work in my hands. I need a camera that I can put a grip on - Weight is also important. It's like my obsession with a 24 oz hammer, I want something that feels like it will get the job done. my 30D and 50D really fill that. (So does my wife's D90, but only with the grip on.)

angevin1

jwashburn wrote:

So what is it, that drives you to make the final call.

Price? Features? - Just curious how other people make their decisions

Need! Price is always a consideration. so if price allows, then NEED is pri-1 for me. If I hadn't had a need for Higher ISO capability, I'd still be shootin the D200: tank!

Had a D200, needed better ISO capability, bought D300...not good enough, three Months later D700. Still have D300 and D700. Like both.

Crop is great if for nothing other than giving extra reach off of same lens. But, have to admit, will get another D700 when funds allow, for back up with total NEED for low light capability!

Would buy a 5DMkII today if I thought it'd add something to my personal mix. Video being the standout.

Interesting...just stopped over at Amazon and I can get 2 D700's for under the price of one D3.

Scott_Quier

The first consideration is photographic challenge - what am I trying to shoot that I can't get, with acceptable results, from my current kit? Is it noise, fps, buffer speed, ???? Then I take this (those) needs and look at the available hardware. Is there something out there that will meet/exceed my need, and if so, at what price? If there is and the price is within budget, then it's mine. Otherwise, I take a pass.

But, as much as I would like to be able to satisfy my kit-upgrade lust, I just don't have the funds. I have focus on what I need rather than what I want/lust for.

My 50D purchase of last Oct was for the AF Microadjustment - my lenses where not quite spot on and it was showing in some of my shots. Opinions about whether the 50D did better with high-ISO noise were, at the time, all positive but have since become more mixed. I tend to agree.

My most recent purchase (Canon 5DII) was driven by a need to get lower noise in my high-ISO shots and that seems to be holding. Video capability did not even enter into the equation - though after seeing Nikolai's recent video investigation into the properties of his 24mm TSE, I can better see a use for that feature.

jwashburn

great comments.

upgrade lust

That describes it perfectly.

My biggest problem is impulse control. I shot some low light boxing stuff and it looked so grainy and horrible. I was ready to dump the D200 and get something else. Then my better half reminded me that the boxing shot was a one time deal and that I didnt NEED a new camera.

Thanksfully my wife keeps me in check, otherwise I might have everything Nikon makes.

The only "problem" is I've rented most of the ED lenses and they are all so beautiful, but each one costs about $1,900 so compiling a lens kit is an expensive proposition. To wit:

14-24mm F2.8: $1,900
24-70mm F2.8: $1,900
70-200mm F2.8 VRII: $2,400
200-400mm F4 VR: $5K

You can see my dilemma.

Mine would be the same with the addtion of the
AF-S VR NIKKOR 200mm f/2G IF-ED $4500+

Manfr3d

I opted for a Canon 5D Mark II simply because of the large full frame
viewfinder. It is no problem to adjust to one camera layout or another.
And most cameras are so good nowadays it's not worth worrying about
the technical details too much. For the photographic eye the viewfinder
is the single most important interface to the rest of the world .. in my
opinon.