May I vote for a camera combo (studio and field) every serous photographer should have?
In that case D3x plus D3s!

I vote for the D3x and the D3s which isn't on the list. Together they cover high res and high speed. Need one of each. If I could only win the lottery.

ted2001 said:
I'm curious why so many users think the D3s is superior to the D3x? Is it that this group is more oriented towards Nikon's faster speeds (fps & ISO)?

I've seen some of the images from the D3x find them quite remarkable.

It's a hard choice. For the shooting I get paid for, the D3s is infinitely more useful. The high ISO performance is a huge benefit. For what I do for myself, I would prefer the D3x. The high ISO performance is good enough for most of the more challenging situations, and the excellent DR and resolution would be amazing. I'm really happy with my D700, though, so neither for me for now.

Willis said:
Nikon D40 FTW!

Seconded!

And its younger brother, the D3000.

While I doubt the D3000 will be the same to me as MY D40, for those starting with DSLRs, it should be just as magical.

NikoDoby said:
I mean speed/handling wise not physical dimensions. The D3X is 5fps versus 1.5fps on the S2. Plus the D3X has the 51point autofocus and image quality at high ISO is better. Even though the S2 is weather sealed I seriously doubt it could take a beating like the D3X can.

As for why all the D3S love? Well it'll all go away once the D4 shows up :^)
But honestly I think it's just the price that turns many off about the D3X. I think it's even more of an "issue" since Sony has the "same" sensor in a $2000USD camera now!

the wisdom speaks through You my friend; although I wouldn't compare D3x to a900, definitely not the same league; if someone will give me a900 I would put this camera immediately on ebay and got (for the same money) d300s+accessories, if someone would give me d3x I would use it, even if it's not up to my specification (too slow for a wildlife professional camera)

as for PP camera of the Year, I think it's gonna be EP1, as it was a revolution (especially in price, comparing to panasonic) although my heart belongs to Nikon

-1 for the 7D too. In typical Canon style, it received plenty of hype up until, and for a while after its release. Then the problems started to roll in - noise everywhere you look, soft images, unreliable AF (you'd think they'd have fixed this after 2 bodies in 2 years). It could have been a great camera, but Canon screwed it up again by cramming more pixels and ignoring other aspects of camera design.

If I had to vote, I'd vote for the EP-1. I'd like to see where the m4/3 system goes in the next few years.

ted2001 said:
A lot more nimble than a Hassie of Mamiya. I don't think the S2 is any larger than the D3, btw.

I mean speed/handling wise not physical dimensions. The D3X is 5fps versus 1.5fps on the S2. Plus the D3X has the 51point autofocus and image quality at high ISO is better. Even though the S2 is weather sealed I seriously doubt it could take a beating like the D3X can.

As for why all the D3S love? Well it'll all go away once the D4 shows up :^)
But honestly I think it's just the price that turns many off about the D3X. I think it's even more of an "issue" since Sony has the "same" sensor in a $2000USD camera now!

I'm curious why so many users think the D3s is superior to the D3x? Is it that this group is more oriented towards Nikon's faster speeds (fps & ISO)?

I've seen some of the images from the D3x find them quite remarkable.

My list would be D3s (too bad it's not an option) then D3X, EP-1, and finally 7D

D3s

If we don't compare cameras between brands, I'd say the Canon 7D... it was about time Canon get some worthy DX camera that can compare to the D300.

The EP-1 will probably win mostly because the 7D can't win because it's nothing new (mix of a 5D2 and D300.. really) and the D3x is only a 1Ds Mark III/A900 that came out later...

Nikon D40 FTW!

A lot more nimble than a Hassie of Mamiya. I don't think the S2 is any larger than the D3, btw.

I wouldn't call the S2 nimble. I'd still prefer the D3X over it even if money weren't an issue.

The D3X brings a new level of image quality to a nimble camera platform. I see the Leica S2 as it's successor.

PBrigido said:
My vote is for the D300s. Great value, nice HD video abilities, available to the masses without being priced out of range.

The D300s is still in my opinion the best overall DX camera money can by, but it is not on list and does not bring anything new to the table like the Olympus did.

Pete

BTW I have no plans to get the Olympus, but it great to see the camera being made and it will open the door to other similar cameras being made by other brands

My vote is for the D300s. Great value, nice HD video abilities, available to the masses without being priced out of range.

OK if I should vote, besides my -1 for Canon, I would vote for Olympus simply because they have made something new, not done before, the other 2 are only higher MP version or so of other similar cameras

Pete

Instead of the Leica M9 why not just get the D3S?

I think the 7D is there because it's the closest canon has come to a Nikon :^)
Despite it's "problems" it's pretty solid competition to the D300/S.

The D3X is there because of it's incredible image quality, but I doubt it'll win since there's nothing really revolutionary about it. Previous winners have all been cameras that "redefine" the market.

Previous year's winners:
2004 Nikon D70 (Nikon's first consumer DSLR)
2005 canon 5D (first "affordable" full frame)
2006 Sony A100 (Sony's first DSLR)
2007 Nikon D300 (for being so awesome)
2008 Panasonic G1 (first mirrorless "DSLR")

I'd certainly vote for the D3X. The 7D offers nothing new and the EP-1 has that evil viewfinder (I've previously hated them).

If I had the money I'd love both the D3X and D3S. I could have a lot of fun with the D3X, a good tripod and the PC-E lenses.

So the whole compact camera with interchangeable lenses thing is a fad too? The EP-1 is significant because it was the first EVIL compact camera.

EP-1 is just a fad camera, I'm not voting for that pile of steaming junk.

And while I may not be able to afford a D300s or a D3s, I'd gladly vote for them because eventually their technology trickles down to lower DSLR bodies.

409600! That is insane! I'm definitely first in line for that!

Why'd they put D3X on that list? I'd rather vote for the Olympus. They should have put D300S or something like that—D3000?

jonnyapple said:
Silly of me. I meant 409600. I need to brush up on my powers of two.

That is getting scary, same thoughts again, sure hard to compute them big numbers

Pete

Silly of me. I meant 409600. I need to brush up on my powers of two.