Compact Cameras

When you're purchasing your next compact camera, be sure to examine the sensor size. Sony cameras are notorious for using the smallest sensors at 1/2.3" (0.435 inches across the diagonal), so even though they pair the camera up with nice lenses, pictures still end up looking crappy. For a while, the king of compacts was the Panasonic DMC-LX3, or Leica D-Lux 4, both of which have a 1/1.63" (0.613 inches across the diagonal) sensor, the largest sensor of all the compacts. The new Micro Four-Thirds cameras, such as the Panasonic GF1 and Olympus EP-1, have sensors that are four times larger than the DMC-LX3 and D-Lux 4. They're a little bigger than typical compact cameras, but they sport interchangeable lenses. If you have the money, you might want to wait for the Leica X1. Its sensor, equivalent to my Nikon D300 sensor, is nine times larger than the DMC-LX3 and D-Lux 4. The drawback is you're stuck with a fixed-size lens, but I try not to use zoom on my compacts anyway. In November 2009, Canon introduced the S90, their answer to the DMC-LX3 and D-Lux 4. I urge you to check out the S90 because for only $399, it beats the DMC-LX3 and D-Lux 4 in low-light, no-flash photography. The DMC-LX3 and D-Lux 4 might have the superior Leica Summicron lens for that little extra crispness, but a so-so Canon lens can beat a Leica lens if the camera uses the so-so lens to full advantage.

DSLR Cameras

The choice is easy: Nikon or Canon. It's like Pepsi or Coke. I prefer Nikons for their better sensitivity in low-light situations, such as indoor photography. Both camera manufacturers make excellent as well as crappy lenses. Stick with prime lenses and fast zoom lenses. Avoid the slow zoom lenses even if they have vibration reduction capability. An excellent starter camera is the Nikon D5000 for $630 and an excellent fast zoom lens is the 17-55mm f/2.8 for $1300. Add another $40 for a memory card. If you aren't willing to spend about $2,000 for a quality DSLR and lens, you should probably not venture into the DSLR realm because you will probably outgrow a cheap DSLR and cheap lens quickly. If you have the money, the D300 for $1800 is a fabulous camera. The D700 for $2600 is even better, but you will need to buy lenses that take advantage of the full-frame capability. The 24-70mm f/2.8 for $1900 is a definite buy for the D700. There is no need to buy a D3s or D3X, for $5200 and $8000 respectively, unless you want to be a professional photographer. You might want to take into consideration the weight of the camera in your travels or everyday walks. The big cameras with lenses will weigh about 9 pounds. The smaller cameras are lighter and easier to carry. You'll need to buy a camera bag or sling for your DSLR.

Rangefinder

The rangefinder camera seems to be a technology of ancient times, but some people still love it. Leica has produced some winners, including the M3, M7, and M8. Both the M8 and the new M9 are digital cameras that store pictures on memory cards rather than film. Leicas are very expensive and offer limited features that will turn off many novice photographers. There are situations in which a Leica is the de facto choice, such as reportage photography. Still, it would be very hard for the average photographer to justify spending $7000 on a camera body and $1500 for a used lens. You have to really love Leica and know why you want a Leica to justify its expense. I have a Leica M8 and 35mm Summicron and 50mm Summilux lenses. I can take some beautiful pictures with this equipment, but I can also do so with my much cheaper Nikons. Some say that Leica cameras produce a certain look in their pictures, but this myth has been dispelled.

Medium Format

Mamiya and Hasselblad are the choices here. There is something distinctly beautiful about square photographs and both cameras can produce them. If you want to cheap out, you can use a Holga, but you won't be getting the absolute clarity and response of a Mamiya or Hasselblad. In fact, Holgas are used with an entirely different philosophy of picturetaking. Used medium format cameras that use film are relatively cheap, so pick one up if you're feeling inspired. If you have the money, both manufacturers have digital backs that can be added onto the camera in place of the standard film magazine back. You can then store pictures on memory cards or on a computer. You can get a used Hasselblad with a 120mm film back for as low as $500.

Large Format

A great starter camera is the Shen-Hao HZX 4x5-IIA with a Rodenstock 150mm lens for $1400. Why do large format? Imagine picture quality that will make your jaw drop to the floor. Imagine being able to alter a scene using perspective controls right on the camera. Once you start using one, you won't be able to stop. The ability to capture super-detailed prints must be seen to be appreciated. If you have the money, get an Ebony RW45 for $1900 plus a Rodenstock 150mm lens for $700. Ebony cameras are the ones that Shen-Hao tries to imitate.

Are images captured at ISO 2500 usable? Do grainy high ISO digital images look like images captured on <Brand X> film?

I don't agree that ISO 2500 is usable. ISO 1250 in the same context, yes, but 2500 gets to that point where it's too grainy-looking... and the grain isn't exactly good. A lot of people familiar with digital will see that it's an image that's taxing the sensor. One thing to note is there is no camera available that will take a really good image at ISO 2500. We can try to make excuses for why an image is grainy by comparing it to some famous film type out there, but the sad truth is digital is not quite there yet. Magnify your favorite film and then do the same with an ISO 2500 image. It looks like night and day. Film will have grain of all sizes. Pixels are pixels. In certain cluster formations, they can look good, but mostly they will look quite bad when an image is captured in suboptimal conditions. There are certain ways to hide the "grain" in digital in high ISO images, but on the whole it's best to avoid using high ISO if possible.