What keeps you using your current camera brand?

[AntonLargiader]

Two things for me:

1. Cost of replacing a system of lenses
2. Coast of learning the menu system.

That makes it sound like inertia is all that's holding you back from changing, and that you'd be better off with something else if those weren't factors. Your parting comment counters this somewhat, but the level of satisfaction with your current system should factor into the numbered list, I think.

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

There are rumours circulating about a G100MkII with the new sensor, IBIS and other such stuff that lacked in the original one. Release somewhere in the first quarter in 24. That can be a nice and rather small one, the current runs at OM-5 size and weight.

That would be a compelling choice for me. The G100 has a pretty big EVF, IIRC, so that's another bonus, though I think they'd need to add some more buttons, switches, and dials to truly replace the features of the GX line.

I've liked the output of the Panasonic cameras over the years, even if the colors are a bit clinical, the files are pretty workable and the detail is there. CDAF never bothered me much, though even Panasonic is starting to get away from it.

 

[Brian]

Nikon mirrorless- the Z5 was under $1K for a full-frame mirrorless camera with a 3.6MDot VF. Easy to use with Manual Focus lenses. I do not have any AF lenses for it.
Nikon Df- uses all of my Nikon F mount lenses, manual focus and autofocus.
Leica Rangefinders- use RF coupled lenses that I own, going back to 1933.
I probably have a world-class collection of lenses.

 

[saltireblue]

Started with a Canon back in film days and stayed with the brand for many years. Never saw any reason to see if the grass was any greener on the other side of the fence. Changed to Fujii in 2016 for weight of equipment reasons and am still more than happy with the quality of the equipment and equally importantly, the quality of the images. Not curious when it comes to other brands...

 

[tilman]

To respond to this thread, I probably have to modify the original question, and change the singular expression "camera brand" to a plural form, "camera brands" - as I use and have been using several, for... well, for several years.

I like my Mu-4/3 cameras for their smallish size, and for a handful of wonderful (and generally smallish) lenses. The GX9 deserves special mention for its in-camera l.monochrome.d monochrome setting (to which I am addicted ); the E-M5.iii gets kudos for its surprising (to me) AF capabilities, and general jack-of-all-trades versatility. And my ancient infrared-converted GX1 is still a great little camera. That's two brands already, Lumix & Olympus.

The Fujis have their own addictive qualities, including the best in-camera 'recipes' and color jpeg capabilities of any digital cameras I've ever used (the X-T5), and somehow shrinking everything I could want into one tiny small-sensor package (my X30). Okay, that's three brands now.

Then comes Pentax. My current Pentax DSLR (a relatively compact K-S1) seems to share most of the logical and pleasing-to-use controls of all the old analog film Pentaxes I shot with for centuries, and its generally logical menus never drive me nuts (like those of some other manufacturers). Somehow, Pentaxes always just seem to 'feel right' in my hands. Not to mention that the universe of Pentax lenses, both Pentax-made and 3rd party, is immense and, more often then not, foolishly affordable. And the Q7 has to be the cutest ridiculously-tiny-yet-surprisingly-capable camera I've ever used.

Hmmmm... that makes four 'brands'. I could happily just shoot with them for the foreseeable future.

I have to admit I misread the original question. More in the spirit of “what keeps me from buying into an entirely new system” or “what keeps me from keeping up with the update cycles…”…

My m43 system still works really well as a main system - plus I really like the character of the old four thirds lenses…
Add to that a collection of ‘serious compacts’ (Sigma, Olympus and Ricoh) that all have their own characteristics…
(There’s a Nikon D750 too, for when I need it, but it sees the least use)

The Canon G1X mk3 is the only tempting thing right now - for being a weatherproof compact camera (something that’s still missing for me)

 

[rayvonn]

I'm liking this thread as it doesn't focus on what we think is the "best" but what currently suits us and why. The world "currently" was deliberate as the beauty of it is these things can suddenly change, eh. For me it's currently brands rather than brand and here's why:

Nikon Z6 - Front end for adapted lenses but unfortunately as much a computer to me as a camera due to the challenge of manually focusing old lenses basically disappearing. Focus assists and image stablisation, the latter of which I'm conceited enough to think I don't need, make focusing old lenses now insanely easy to a degree one couldn't have imagined not so long ago, in fact it's not a challenge at all now. I do have one native S line lens and although using these is not the prime reason for me owning the camera, it's enough for me to be informed that they're excellent should I ever have the need for one. It's just that computer analogy that nags at me, a spiritual thing no doubt, but it sometimes gets me wistfully looking at DSLRs again. I would feel the same whatever Z camera I owned. But the Z6 is there for a reason and it carries out its intended purpose brilliantly. That's what keeps me using it.

Leica M(9)/ M-E - As bare bones a digital camera as you're ever going to find, it's all about that exposure triangle of aperture, shutter speed and ISO (with ISO not going that high) and little else. Which puts all responsibility for image making on to me which is why I love it, it forces me to think, there is no other option. Plus it's the only FF CCD camera which, together with the lenses I use, can render images akin to that which sit in family picture albums spanning back many many decades and right up to now. PP time on the camera's files is minimal (they're so nice and unlike the digital images of today's cameras) and the FF aspect of it is relevant to me as it is with the Z6 as prime lenses from either today or say 60 years ago are used at their intended focal length. None of this matters to most people but it matters to me, in fact it makes photography enjoyable to me which is what keeps me using it.

Ricoh GR III - A fixed lens camera which lets me dispense with that FF hang up on interchangeable lens cameras, what keeps me using it is that it's a swiss army pen knife which is with me at all times every day. To get that ASPC sensor in something smaller than the size of my hand is still something to be marveled at and its picture taking abilities are exceptional, the raw files from this thing are so malleable.

With all of the above options, I can get prints up on walls without having to engage gizmo Ai-like software but even then I do have a liking for early digital cameras which may require that such as that 3 megapickle Fujifilm S3000 that I used for the recent SIJ challenge. But that's another matter......

 

[Rick Waldroup]

When the m4/3 system appeared, I sold all my Nikon gear and went in that direction. I am still using the system today. The main thing that attracted me to m4/3 was the size of the gear and the affordability of the lenses. A few years ago I played around with a Nikon Df but I started missing the economical size of my m/43 system. I shoot mostly street and documentary stuff and the m/43 system is really good for that kind of photography. I shoot a couple of Panasonic GX9 bodies and a couple of GF1 bodies. I have a fine set of prime lenses. At this stage in my life, this is the right system for me, and I can't see changing anytime soon. But, you know how famous last words go...

 

[rloewy]

I shoot m4/3 because it's a great do it all compromise for me. The size is right for hiking and offers good enough AF in these situations. Most other places I shoot adapted manual lenses and the small sensor allows me to use adapted 16mm cine lenses that would vignette too much on bigger sensors.

It also helps that you can get fantastic old 4/3 glass which has some amazing lenses.

As for why Olympus? For all the flack they get for the menus, the scp is the easiest way around multiple settings quickly even for small cameras with limited physical controls

 

[CountingGx85Gx8G9s]

That makes it sound like inertia is all that's holding you back from changing, and that you'd be better off with something else if those weren't factors. Your parting comment counters this somewhat, but the level of satisfaction with your current system should factor into the numbered list, I think.

No, just the knowledge that it takes a year of consistent shooting for me to learn a menu system where I can make changes not on the dials very fast if conditions change. Time is the main reason I would not switch. And yep, I don't have the 20K it take to get a FF lens system of lenses like I have.

 

[camprl1]

I started with film back in the day. My dad had a couple of Pentaxes (S1a and Spotmatic). I bought into Minolta (XG-M and later XD) in the early 80s. The first move into digital was with a tiny Nikon P&S (L4), but I had kept the Minoltas. In 2014 after reading about mirrorless I was attracted by the description of the Fujifilm cameras and was excited by the thought of using my older Minolta lenses with an adapter. I couldn't justify the cost of the X-E2 so bought the X-A1. I enjoyed that except for the lack of viewfinder and the autofocus couldn't keep up with my grandchildren! So now that I could justify the cost, I bought the X-T5 and sold the X-A1. I'm happy to just have one camera. Like @saltireblue I'm not curious about other brands. That doesn't mean that I don't enjoy reading about others' experiences with their cameras!

 

[MiguelATF]

I have to admit I misread the original question. More in the spirit of “what keeps me from buying into an entirely new system” or “what keeps me from keeping up with the update cycles…”…

My m43 system still works really well as a main system - plus I really like the character of the old four thirds lenses…
Add to that a collection of ‘serious compacts’ (Sigma, Olympus and Ricoh) that all have their own characteristics…
(There’s a Nikon D750 too, for when I need it, but it sees the least use)

The Canon G1X mk3 is the only tempting thing right now - for being a weatherproof compact camera (something that’s still missing for me)

To amplify on your last thought, the Canon G1x MarkIII is truly a superb small weatherproof camera. As well as being small enough to fit into a (l-a-r-g-e) pocket. I owned and used one regularly for a number of years and later at some point, in a fit of irrational frugality, decided to part with it. It's probably the one camera I would unhesitatingly buy again (for many other reasons, including the quality of its zoom, the surprisingly excellent small EVF and its not-overly-complicated menus) - so I suspect that if you ever give in to the temptation, you will wind up appreciating and using it. (Of course, on the general theme of this thread, if I still had mine, that would make 5 brands that I am currently using... Sigh )

 

[William Lewis]

Nikon mirrorless- the Z5 was under $1K for a full-frame mirrorless camera with a 3.6MDot VF. Easy to use with Manual Focus lenses. I do not have any AF lenses for it.
Nikon Df- uses all of my Nikon F mount lenses, manual focus and autofocus.
Leica Rangefinders- use RF coupled lenses that I own, going back to 1933.
I probably have a world-class collection of lenses.

"Probably"? Dude I can imagine museum curators getting into bare knuckle fights for your collection

 

[John King]

My three basic mFTs "systems" work very well for me.

E-M1 MkI E-M1 MkII + 8-25, 12-100 and 75-300 MkII
E-M1 MkII E-M1 MkI + 12-50 macro and 40-150R
E-PM2 + 14-42 EZ and f/1.8 25

And a small collection of lenses to suit, with a far wider selection of OM and FTs lenses with adapters.

Can't see any changes for the near future.
Maybe a Hasselblad X2D ...

 

[JensM]

My three basic mFTs "systems" work very well for me.

E-M1 MkI + 8-25, 12-100 and 75-300 MkII
E-M1 MkII + 12-50 macro and 40-150R
E-PM2 + 14-42 EZ and f/1.8 25

And a small collection of lenses to suit, with a far wider selection of OM and FTs lenses with adapters.

Can't see any changes for the near future.
Maybe a Hasselblad X2D ...

If I may ask, why the Pro lenses on the older body, John?

 

[MiguelATF]

My three basic mFTs "systems" work very well for me.

E-M1 MkI + 8-25, 12-100 and 75-300 MkII
E-M1 MkII + 12-50 macro and 40-150R
E-PM2 + 14-42 EZ and f/1.8 25

And a small collection of lenses to suit, with a far wider selection of OM and FTs lenses with adapters.

Can't see any changes for the near future.
Maybe a Hasselblad X2D ...

John, I think a Hasselblad X2D would become a strong, creative tool in your hands.
With all your excellent micro four thirds cameras, one could argue that you don't really need a 'Blad.
But 'need' is such a malleable term, and open to so many interpretations. And I, for one, would love to see the kinds of photographs that you might wind up creating with an X2D

 

[John King]

If I may ask, why the Pro lenses on the older body, John?

Whoops! Wrong way around ... Doh!

Will fix, thanks Jens ... .

 

[John King]

John, I think a Hasselblad X2D would become a strong, creative tool in your hands.
With all your excellent micro four thirds cameras, one could argue that you don't really need a 'Blad.
But 'need' is such a malleable term, and open to so many interpretations. And I, for one, would love to see the kinds of photographs that you might wind up creating with an X2D

Very kind of you, Miguel .

 

[bastibe]

Fuji Lenses. Not because they're necessarily better than others, but because I painstakingly tried most of them, and it literally took years to find the ones I like.

Lens rendering is a highly personal thing. There are too many variables to list, really, and no objective answers. Online reviews didn't help, either, I had to experiment with the lenses myself to find the traits I like.

I have gone through this process once, with the Fuji system, and found a set of lenses I like. I know them well, and have learned how to use them for the kinds of images I like to take.

Going through this process again on another lens mount is frankly too daunting a task to even consider. And ultimately, to what end would I even do that? Just for a small improvement of sharpness or resolution or dynamic range? I have come to realize that my photos are never limited by these technical variables. I'll take a soft, noisy, meaningful photo over a technically perfect one any day. This is another hard-won realization.

So I'll stick with Fuji. I'll stick with the 16-80, which is not perfectly sharp, but small, versatile, and has a surprisingly beautiful rendering for a zoom. I prefer its rendering over the 14-45, 16-50, 18-55, 16-55. I'll keep my 23 f/1.4 R, which is a bit chunky, but has a smooth, unassuming blur with no highlight rims, no swirls, and no cat's eyes. If I could choose, I'd take the Sony RX1's lens over it but that's not possible on Fuji. And I'll keep my Ricoh GR III, which is tiny, sharp, and so, so, capable. There's just nothing like it.

 

[JohnBdigital]

For me its the film.. (or now sensor).
I loved my Pentax ESII and my Minolta X-700 in the film days but then came the DSLR. So I sold my film cameras/lenses.
I then used my Canon 10D, 5D, 40D & 60D.. However I found out that Sony used better film (sensor) which allowed for more shadow pulling and highlight recovery in raw.
So I then used my Sony A6000, A6500 & A6400 and still use many of my Canon lenses on Sony

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

Nikon mirrorless- the Z5 was under $1K for a full-frame mirrorless camera with a 3.6MDot VF. Easy to use with Manual Focus lenses. I do not have any AF lenses for it.
Nikon Df- uses all of my Nikon F mount lenses, manual focus and autofocus.
Leica Rangefinders- use RF coupled lenses that I own, going back to 1933.
I probably have a world-class collection of lenses.

If I ever did get a FF, it would be either an S5 or Z5. Both check enough boxes for specs. Every time I consider it though, I start aching at the idea of carrying anything over 150mm. Fuji is actually among the lightest in many categories. It’s why I keep trying them, I suppose.