Canon, Nikon, and Lumix (parent company, Panasonic) have made some interesting strides into creating a true hybrid camera, but which should you choose? First, make a list of what is most important to you. Basic things, like raw, uncompressed still imagery, high ISO quality, and lens accessories are a necessary list to begin with. These days, the megapixel rating just doesn't cut it: you can have the most megapixels that a current model could have, yet your still and cinema image quality could suffer from extreme digital noise.
With competitive technological breakthroughs resulting in better cameras being developed even before the latest model reaches the shelves, one camera could be king one day, and back of the pack the next. Between 35mm and M/43 (micro four-thirds), right now, my choice would be to stick with the 35mm Canons and Nikons. I'm partial to Nikon, and would choose the Nikon D7000 as my one camera that I'd carry on location. Canon has some great models that capture terrific digital film and still images, but they've been less than stellar with their changes in lens mounts, while Nikon lenses can be mounted on bodies from 20 years ago.
But with having two Nikon bodies - a D3 and a D3S hybrid - what would be my third, true hybrid camera to choose? Right now, I think I would settle on the Lumix DMC-GH2. Over the Nikon D7000? Yes. The reason being, the D7000 has no built-in EVF (electronic viewfinder). Lack of an EVF is the reason people find themselves adding accessories to live-view 35mm DSLR's. But the GH2 has the EVF, is smaller and lighter, has interchangeable lenses (albeit, not many), and operates well as a still image shooter. It also sports a killer AF system on the 14-140mm lens, which also shoots at variable frame rates with no rolling shutter.
No comments:
Post a Comment