Why did you choose your work horse?

[Hamish Gill]

I imagine most of us have a "work horse" camera?
For some this might be for quality, size, convinience, or maybe its just the only camera you have etc ...
But what was the path that lead you to this camera?
Why this brand? Why this model?

For me it is my D3... I use lots of other cameras, my d50 for eg gets a lot of use, and recently I have been putting film in a lot of vintage cameras! My f3 is my film camera of choice, but when I want to rely on something to give me the best results possible its the d3! Obviously really, it's the best camera I own! But I'm interested in how people ended up with this "best camera"

Familiarity and lenses are the answer for me and it tracks back through my camera past...

I got to a d3 through this path

Nikon compact camera I was bought by my Nan in 1992 the "RF10"
I then had a minolta aps...
Then back to Nikon with a f60
Then had a canon digi compact - stolen
The back to Nikon with a 801
Then an 801s
Then a d70s
Then d300
Then d3

After the d70 was when I started collecting cameras
Stacks of vintage cameras and rangefinder gear

The thing that kept me with Nikon for my main camera after the f60 was all the lenses I had started to buy... And as I said the familiarity of the kit!

Every time I wondered about canon or Sony (I nearly bought a a100 instead of the d70s) I just kept thinking about the fact that I had lots of lenses for Nikon!

The thing that always struck me about Nikon gear was the ability to use lenses dating back decades with little fuss! There has never been any inclination to not stick with Nikon for this reason (apart from my recent desires for tse)

I'm not trying to start a brand war here (I'm sure you know me better than that by now)

I'm just interested in the path and decisions that have lead to the camera you now use the most!

 

[Oliver Lee-Haswell]

Well for me i started off with a Nikon FE, i loved the feel of the camera and the controls seemed very intelligently/sensibly laid out in my opinion - I could easily tell if i was on exposure or under/over.
Focussing was never the issue as it was split screen like a lot of other manufacturers out there and i was used to it from playing with my fathers camera / my uncles canon kit.

from the FE i then went on to a F80 along with going with AF lenses - (ultimately this was stolen hence why not in my current kit), without money toreplace what i had i started buying manual lenses for my FE and taking anything and everything for them.

It also around this time started working for the company i am with now - www.redboxcameras.com (shameless plug i know), and as we did second hand items, and still do, i built up lenses for what i was interested in/wanted to experiment with.

after using the FE for several years i bought an F100 with a 24-120 lens and loved it, it became my main camera and one i still use today, i was hooked on Nikon and as Hamish says any lens i had would fit EVERY camera i owned. From there i started collecting them, mainly in black and boxed if i could but otherwiseas i could find them.

I got the FE2 a while back as it was the camera of the days when i was born (those who know when it came out will be able to tell my age!) and loved it, it was similar to the FE which i started on with good upgrades for bits and pieces.

Then came a F90x (which i got at a good price of £50 complete with grip, mint condition and boxed!) and shortly after the F100 as i wasnt keen keen on the 90x.

After shooting with all my kit for a while i had some enquiries about Wedding photography, and portrait sessions from people i know, the first wedding i did was on film!! and rattled me lots (which ended up with me over-shooting on 35 rolls of film!), and costing lots to develop, i had used D70's/D80's and D100's as we had them in the shop to sell and after that i decided on a digital camera (slide film being my main medium for shooting), i weighed up lots of pros and cons between the D700 + grip and the D3 (they were under 1 year released at this point), and decided to go with the D3 as it would end up the same price as a D700 + grip + en-el4a + charger.

The D3 is a beast, it handles everything i throw at it, its built so strong that it has survived when i fell over breaking my arm, and splitting my head open (did break the flash's hot shoe bit though....) with very minor markings on the body, my 28-70 f2.8 gives lovely results and i wouldnt change it for any other camera (except maybe the D4 which is rumoured early next year).

After working with my cameras i have never regretted my choice, and as i work in a place where i get to play with both i still would end up with the Nikon system - In my opinion it is better than the canon when you get above the £2K mark, mainly for the low light capabilities, but also for how it feels when i ipick it up.

so, build quality, familiarity and lens choice led me to where i am today and i love every day when i shoot with it.

Oliver

 

[Chris Dodkin]

Some sort of twin lens, medium format (probably a Lubitel) - what were my parents thinking!

Kodak 177x Instamatic - a camera I could actually take pictures with! Remember flash cubes?

A cheapo Polaroid instant camera which was trendy for a few years, but way too expensive to use

Fuji STX-1 - as soon as I had a student grant - went to Boots and bought the camera the first weekend!
Bought quite a few lenses and a flash and learned the basics of photography with this camera.

Minolta 7000 - as soon I saw the auto focus feature, I was sold - went to Dixons, got a Dixons card, and bought the 7000 with 50mm lens and a flash.
Even though, by todays standards, the AF was sloooowwwwww, it was a huge innovation. I bought additional lenses, including a decent zoom - also a large Metz off-camera flash and battery - paid for the whole lot by shooting fashion shots for the textile design students at Poly.
Did my own D&P at Poly as well, mostly B&W (Ilford).

Canon EOS 5 - Canon had introduced AF earlier (which sucked), but had finally bought out the EF mount lens system with the AF drive in lens. The EOS 5 had state of the art AF, tracked your eye to pick the AF point, and had many of the 1 series features at a reduced price.
I bought some basic EF lenses and started using it in anger. On holiday in Tenerife, I wanted to take shots of the surfers - so needed a longer lens. Luckily there was a camera store in town with a lovely 400mm f5.6 L lens in the window - my flexible friend was exercised, and off I went to shoot surfing. Got some decent shots, scanned them into my Mac using a Minolta neg scanner - manipulated and fixed an image to enter in the Sunday Telegraph photo of the year comp, and luckily won the sports section.

Won a Fuji APS camera - re-gifted it to a good mate as a wedding gift (i.e. dodged a bullet)

Was asked to shoot a studio calendar shot for a company - usual pin-up girl stuff - shot with the EOS 5 and my existing EF lenses - shot went down very well with the client, and the model. Was asked to shoot a whole lot more studio work for the model, so invested in Canon L glass essentials, 28-70 f2.8L and 70-200 f2.8L. Studio work paid for that, and a second EOS 5 body, so I could shoot without having to keep changing lenses.

Invested in the Canon 300 f2.8L so that I could shoot motorsports - had tried with the slow 400 f5.6 L, with mixed results. Sold the 400mm.

Walked into Brands Hatch with a large white lens over my shoulder and blagged a press pass for British Touring Cars - See Hamish, big white lenses do work

Shot a whole load of images, offered them to a website covering the racing, got a permanent press pass and funds to buy the 1.4 extender and 2x extender.

Canon D30 released - first affordable DSLR from Canon - bought one to try - FANTASTIC! I could turn around my images for BTCC the same day - no film delays or costs - SOLD!

Bought another D30 and sold the EOS 5s. Shot extensively with 2xD30s until the Canon 1D was launched.

Canon 1D - incredible camera, which I still own - super fast AF and frame rate - perfect motorsports camera - for a while I had the 1D, and two D30s!

Somewhere in here I got my 600mm f4L from an EBAY seller for a steal

Canon 1DII - Logical upgrade - more pixels and better AWB - much better battery life.

Avoided the 1DIII as the new AF system was a disaster!

Canon 5D2 - I was doing less motorsports, and the resolution of the 5D2 was very enticing - I had amassed a good selection of Canon L glass, and this was arguably the best bang for the buck in the Canon bodies. I could not justify the insane expense of the 1DS series. 5D2 is far and away the best camera I have ever owned, and has changed the way I take pictures.

I am locked into Canon because of the investment in L glass - but that glass has now lasted me from EOS 5 to EOS 5D2, well over a decade in some cases - a very good long term investment.

For anyone considering a DSLR - I always say, buy the glass as the long term investment, the bodies will change long before the glass does.


Sorry, rather long winded - but once I started reminiscing...

 

[Paul Lange]

My main camera is the lowly Nikon D3000. I bought it after consulting with Hamish and decided with that particular model as I thought that I wouldn't really be into photography. I've always had an interest in it and it was something I had to learn at college but it was never a regular thing. I've probably spent about 4 times more on lenses sinse. I could probably do with a few more pixels and bracketing and mirror lock up would be nice but I don't really feel I need to upgrade yet. I like the fact that the camera is quite small and the controls are easy and fast to use. I might go for else soon though but will look for outright image quality and wide dynamic range. I also have a P7000 and dispite its shortcomings is a good camera. I wish that they would fix the auto ever so flakey auto focus issue but I'm pretty quick with the manual focus now.

 

[Glen Roberts]

I was a bird watcher and after meeting a wildlife photographer in a hide I decided to get myself a camera to record some of the birds I saw. The first one I bought was the Fuji Finepix s5600 because it had a quite good zoom and was fairly easy to use once you read the manual. I was getting some quite good shots but with birds you often had to crop quite heavily to get a decent look at the bird so I needed more pixels to get better crops.

So I thought of getting a DSLR and did a bit of reading. Most people regard the Canon 400 5.6L as one of the best "Birding" lenses you can get, excellent quality, decent length(400mm) and light enough to hand hold as a walk about lens so that made my mind up on the Make. The reason I went for the 450D was 12.2 megapixel, more than double what my old Fuji had, which meant being able to crop that little bit more and still get a decent quality image and I could afford one at the time rather than wait. But then I had to wait nearly another year of saving to finally get my hands on the "White Beauty".

If I ever get the funds to upgrade my camera I would probably go for the Canon 7D. More frames per second, better high ISO, much faster auto focus and also a few more pixels to crop off.

 

[Larry Bolch]

I worked for more than a dozen years at my last job as a photographer. I was issued Nikon equipment, but also used a variety of my own medium format cameras. When I went on my own, my familiarity with Nikon made the F3 the logical choice since it was the cheapest body for prolific shooting. The medium format equipment was carried over. I was never a fanboi of any system and have used equipment with many brand names.

When the time to transition to digital arrived, I looked at everything available. Time Magazine had just done a cover story on the "Machine of the Year", and it was the Nikon Coolpix 990. My expectations were rather low, and the camera blew me away. It produced some of my favorite shots of the decade. The Coolpix 5000 improved upon the controls and added RAW and 990 lenses worked upon the 5000 for the most part. Then followed the 8400, a camera I very much liked. Again the lenses were compatible for the most part with the exception of the .75x which gave me the equivalent of 18-64mm zoom range. It served me well for quite a number of years, and I would have stayed with high-end compacts, had the 8400 not been the last of the line. It became clear that there was going to be no further compact cameras at that quality level.

I still had all my lenses with the F3, so the D200 was the logical choice. The D300 that followed added at least another 1.0EV or more. There still was a feeling of adolescence to the D200 but the D300 felt mature—the first camera to do so. I was sorely tempted by the D3, but it was huge, heavy, noisy and attracted too much attention. I did not need its fast shooting capability, nor its robustness and total weather sealing. It would have been the perfect camera back when I was shooting sports, but what I really wanted was its sensor in a camera the size of the D300.

I picked up the rumor of the D700 a few days before it was to be announced and the rumor was pretty solid. I walked over to the nearby store and ordered it. Diana—who I have long dealt with—said "There's no such thing.", winked and took my order. When it arrived a month later, Diana said the Nikon rep dropped it off personally, and said it was the first D700 delivered in Canada.

It was as good as I had hoped. I have a print here shot at 12,800 that could have been shot with my F3 using ISO400-800 film. Now all my old Nikon glass worked at the angular coverage for which it was purchased. New zooms added great versatility. It shares all the maturity that the D300 revealed and more.

For the first time since buying the Coolpix 990, I really don't have any eagerness for the next generation. In fact, I can not think of anything any company could offer that would tempt me to buy. I love ambient light photography, and have never been frustrated by a lack of light. Image quality is amazing all the way to ISO25,600 which I have rarely needed to use.

http://larry-bolch.com/available-darkness/

My minimal kit is the 14-24mm and 28-300mm lenses, generally with the f/1.8 50mm included. Being a full frame camera, lenses are larger and heavier than their DX equivalents and the whole bag weighs over 3 kilos. Unless I have a specific shoot, much of it gets left at home.

The F3 and medium-format equipment also meant heavy-hauling. There were two film cameras I carried when off the job. For medium-format there was the Plaubel Makina 67, with a stunningly sharp f/2.8 80mm Nikon lens, equivalent to 40mm. For 35mm there was an equally superb Konica S3 with a built-in f/1.8 35mm lens. Both have between-the-lens leaf shutters that are nearly silent and allow flash fill at any shutter speed. Both are capable of publication quality work.

From the beginning, I have been longing for such a camera—but digital. Finally, Fujifilm delivered. The X100 perfectly fulfills the role of a carry everywhere camera capable of extremely high image quality and is a great people camera that will sync fill-flash up to 1/2000th of a second. Its low light capability rivals the D700. Together they make a great team and cover every goal I have in photography. I am totally equipped for the long haul, and it may be a very long time until I buy my next bit of gear.

 

[Hamish Gill]

After shooting with all my kit for a while i had some enquiries about Wedding photography, and portrait sessions from people i know, the first wedding i did was on film!! and rattled me lots (which ended up with me over-shooting on 35 rolls of film!), and costing lots to develop, i had used D70's/D80's and D100's as we had them in the shop to sell and after that i decided on a digital camera (slide film being my main medium for shooting), i weighed up lots of pros and cons between the D700 + grip and the D3 (they were under 1 year released at this point), and decided to go with the D3 as it would end up the same price as a D700 + grip + en-el4a + charger.

Same thought process ... a mate of mine bought a d700 before i had my d3...
I then bought the s/h d3, much to the mockery of my colleagues at the time "you just bought it because you wanted a better camera then ben" ... I let it slide, but actually it couldnt be further from the truth! the d3 s/h was £1900. the d700 was £1700 ... it made no logical sence to buy the d700 when i would have just put the grip from my d300 on it anyway!

The D3 is a beast, it handles everything i throw at it, its built so strong that it has survived when i fell over breaking my arm, and splitting my head open (did break the flash's hot shoe bit though....) with very minor markings on the body, my 28-70 f2.8 gives lovely results and i wouldnt change it for any other camera (except maybe the D4 which is rumoured early next year).

I have a sb20 with a snapped off foot ... ... ...
d4, next year, are we not expecting it September time anymore?

After working with my cameras i have never regretted my choice, and as i work in a place where i get to play with both i still would end up with the Nikon system - In my opinion it is better than the canon when you get above the £2K mark, mainly for the low light capabilities, but also for how it feels when i ipick it up.

Right there with you chap! i do joke on here about canons feeling flimsy, i am joking, but i stand by it to a certain extent, i personnaly dont find that canons handle as nicely... Its what your used to i suppose!

so, build quality, familiarity and lens choice led me to where i am today and i love every day when i shoot with it.

Oliver

ditto!

 

[Hamish Gill]

My main camera is the lowly Nikon D3000. I bought it after consulting with Hamish and decided with that particular model as I thought that I wouldn't really be into photography. I've always had an interest in it and it was something I had to learn at college but it was never a regular thing. I've probably spent about 4 times more on lenses sinse. I could probably do with a few more pixels and bracketing and mirror lock up would be nice but I don't really feel I need to upgrade yet. I like the fact that the camera is quite small and the controls are easy and fast to use. I might go for else soon though but will look for outright image quality and wide dynamic range. I also have a P7000 and dispite its shortcomings is a good camera. I wish that they would fix the auto ever so flakey auto focus issue but I'm pretty quick with the manual focus now.

In hind sight, do you think i advised well ... critique my patter

 

[Oliver Lee-Haswell]

I have a sb20 with a snapped off foot ... ... ...
d4, next year, are we not expecting it September time anymore?

in regards to the foot i got a spare from my repair company did it myself in under 10 mins, and it only cost £6 for the part!! (snapped the hot shoe foot of my sb28)

As far as the D4 goes.... well Nikon were meant to release a lot of SLR's this year but the earthquake and tsunami slowed everything down (where they make full frame sensors got hit badly), but with Olympics next year maybe September but more than likely later unless they have got everything sorted out in Japan

 

[Hamish Gill]

Dont sony make the sensors for Nikon?

Only time shall tell i suppose ...
Only wild imagination can give hints at what a d4 might be capable of... Im not going to quote anything, but if you read some of the rumours about it and the "d800" ... theres some pretty fanciful stuff doing the rounds ...
will be interesting one way or another im very sure!

 

[Oliver Lee-Haswell]

Dont sony make the sensors for Nikon?

only the low and mid SLR cameras have sony sensors, (although the D3 and D3s use them also) the D3x and any new full frame will have Nikon made sensors in them which were made in the factory at Saigon (i think)

 

[Pete Askew]

Well, like Chris, I started with an Instamatic bought for me by my parents for Xmas. Absolutely hated it and it crushed my emerging interest in stills photography. So, I saved up and switched to cine via a Quartz Super 8 (http://zenitquarzcameras.blogspot.com/) and spent several years making cine films mainly high(ish) speed of insects and stuff down a microscope. In the early '80's I went for a month to visit a friend who was living in Kenya and decided I needed a camera to take with me. I had bought a Nikon waterproof compact camera about a year before to take on holidays. As I was riding a motorbike every day (and indeed for the next 20 years), a waterproof camera seemed like a good idea! . But I wanted a longer focal length and so looked at S/H SLR's. And up popped a Nikon FE in a local Jessops. So I bought that, a 105mm Nikkor and a Sigma 600 F/8 catadioptric lens, a Benbo tripod and a monopod, a stack of Ilfochrome, some FP4 and HP5 and off I went. The FE appealed because of the wonderful matched needle metering. In fact I still have that FE (and a second) fitted with MD12's as well as the Sigma and 105 mm lenses (it remained a favourite focal length for years until I bought an ai'd 135). So, like Hamish I ended up with Nikon and loved the fact that I could use all of my lenses with every camera (which is why I have all of my Nikon cameras and all of my lenses to this day). I even used Nikon for my work photography using either a FM2 or F2 on copy stands and microscopes. I think my body collection of film cameras goes something like 2 x FE's, 2 x F2's (with misc finders and motor drives), 2 x F3's (with misc finders and drives), a FM2 and a F6. I lost track of the lenses but I have most primes from 20mm to 300mm as MF Nikkors, several Micro-Nikkors, a Medical Lens and a several Zeiss MF lenses.

I was also shooting MF on microscopes (dedicated bodies on Reichart microscopes) and the quality that this delivered led me to start playing with MF for personal work via a Mamiya C3 (with various lenses). I then bought a S/H Hasselblad C/M and 80mm lens (and a microscope shutter) for both personal and technical work and fell in love as it were. I now have several Hasselblad bodies (several C/M's and ELM's - some mains converted and with intervalometers - 503 CW's, Flexbody) and all of the lenses (some as both old C T*'s as well as CFE and CFi's) and these really became the workhorses I suppose.

I was fairly slow to switch to digital (and still shoot a lot of film). As a result of using the Hasselblad V system, my first real digital camera (I had a Fuji compact to play with) was a PhaseOne H20 back and then I added a P20 for field work (the battery pack for the H20 is a bit clumsy when working with a laptop). I had been looking at the Nikon DSLR's but wasn't impressed by the noise in the images but eventually I went for a Fuji S2 on a colleagues recommendation - it took Nikon lenses and was supposed to be good in low light. But I hated the body and its control system and consigned it to a microscope. Eventually I was tempted again and bought a S5 pro (plus a 17 -55) mainly for low light performance. It was OK but that was about it - it replaced the S2 on a microscope (and is still there - the S2 was given to a friend!) and I decided to buy a D2Xs. What a revelation in terms of handling etc. Low light wasn't great but it felt right in the hand. A few weeks later the D3 came out (if only I had waited) and after reading the reviews and playing with one that was it. That is now my DSLR workhorse (I have 2 and a D3s - intending to play with video at some point) and I use them for both technical (with misc T/S lenses, Micro Nikkors and my 30 year old medical lens) and personal work (with the 3, F/2.8 zooms and misc AF and MF primes).

I was also using technical cameras and have a Cambo Legend and an Ebony 45SU with a range of lenses from 55mm to 360mm. Onto these, via a Flex Adapter, I can use the PhaseOne backs and I also have a P45 which has 5x4 aspect ratio rather than square as the H20 and P20 do. To get the most out of this investment I bought a S/H Hasselblad H1/2 and bought the P45 in that mount and over the last couple of years have added a few H fit lenses to the collection. Mostly this setup is used for technical work although to be honest the V system is much better for this.

At some point in my film-only days I became interested in rangefinders and bought a Voightländer Bessa R and a 35 mm pancake lens. What a stunning little camera it was and it became my carry-around camera. However, although the lenses are superb, the bodies are build to a cost and the range finder drifts (easy to adjust but a pain) and mine occasionally jammed (OK, this could have been fixed as it was caused by the little plastic film indicator window glass having fallen out and rattling around inside somewhere). But I missed one too many grab shots (needed to be shaken before it would shoot!) and so I decided to go up market and bought a Leica MP (the Bessa R now lives in the glove compartment of the car!). A lot heavier but a beautiful camera to use. Over the years I have added various lenses from Voightländer, Zeiss and Leica and eventually bought an M8 to go with them having started using digital SLR's. Wasn't over-keen on the crop factor and the need for IR filters on the lenses was a nuisance (even if Leica did give you a couple of free ones). When the M9 came out my name was on the list and after a 9 month wait this became my default every day camera I suppose.

I still hanker after a good pocketable camera and was sorely tempted by the Fuji X1 but it doesn't tick enough boxes for me and so I use a Ricoh GR Digital III for that (I had the II and have passed it on). I also have and use a Mamiya 7II especially if I want to shoot MF film while away and don't want the weight of the Hasselblad.

So, back to the question! My technical workhorses are the Hasselblads and the Cambo when I'm not in the field. Then it becomes the D3 (there is a D700 sitting on a specialised macro unit in the lab - the live view is very useful for that). For personal work I suppose it is the M9. But I chop and change and the camera system I use is either selected to match the task in hand or of course, what I have with me at the time (or, with personal work, fancy using).

I know that sounds a big list (and it is and there are other bits and pieces as well) but I have been accumulating it since the early 80's and some of it was bought to meet the demands of work.

Now, if I'd have walked into that Jessops in the early '80's and there was a S/H Canon A/1 for sale this could all have been so different!! And regards video, have you seen the Panasonic AG-AF100?...

 

[Darren Bradley]

I had a Polaroid Land Camera as my first camera starting in about 79, and then a variety of compact 35mms that I can't really remember throughout the early 80s. My first SLR was a Yashica FX-7, in 1985. I had manual focus Contax lenses, which I remembered fondly. I got it for my first photography class in high school, as a freshman. I loved that camera for its simplicity and durability (I took it everywhere, and was the photographer for my high school newspaper). In 1990 when I left for college, I also took my parents' Canon AE-1, and used both extensively there for photo classes and such. But when I dropped out of college in '92 and moved to Europe, I actually left all my camera gear back at my parents' house and didn't pick up another DSLR again until 2008, when I finally caved and bought a Nikon D90 when I got too frustrated with the variety of lousy point&shoot compact digital cameras I'd been using to try to take pics of my daughter and document my architecture interests. I had the D90 for about a year and loved it for what I was able to do for portraits of my daughter. But I was still frustrated with the cropped sensor and the lack of tilt/shift options. So after about a year with that one, I finally relented and sold my D90 and all my lenses (I had a 50mm f1.8, a 10-24mm wide angle, a 55-200mm, and several others... all Nikkor), and replaced it with a Canon 5DmkII.

When people ask me which is better - Canon or Nikon - my usual answer is that they're both excellent and it really depends on what you want to shoot because Nikon is better at some things and Canon at others. The 5DMkII has a lousy autofocus, as everyone knows. And it also isn't as weather sealed and doesn't feel as solid in your hand as the D700. But what it does have is more pixels (a LOT more, which is important when you want to crop, as I do a lot), and since I am mostly shooting manual focus for my architecture shots anyway, the primitive autofocus on the Canon wasn't really an issue. But the biggest deciding factor was the TS-E lenses, as Hamish mentioned earlier. I've used both the Nikon and Canon variety and much prefer the newer Canon lenses, both for their ease of use and their sharpness (although I thought Nikon's first generation were probably superior to Canon's first gen.).

Of course, that means that I've sub-optimised the portrait taking side of things compared to what I could do with a D700 or a D3S (or d3X!). And I have missed some shots because of Canon's inability to autofocus in low light and poorer high-ISO performance. Such is life... Perhaps the pending 5DMkIII will give this camera the same autofocus as on the 7D, and then I won't have anything to complain about.

Anyway, I have a few other cameras I use from time to time, but whenever I don't have my 5D with me I miss it so I tend to carry it everywhere, despite its large size and relatively heavy weight (although lighter than a D700!). It's definitely my workhorse.

 

[Larry Bolch]

Dont sony make the sensors for Nikon?

Simple question, but not a simple answer. Sony has one of the few sensor fabs in the world and seems to welcome anyone who has a design and budget to have it made. Though fabbed by Sony, it is no more a Sony sensor, than if you had a custom chip done at IBM, it would it be an IBM part. I expect the fab treats Sony's camera division as just another customer. While some of the other companies may have a fab, they may not solicit business from outside the company. Panasonic has a fab, but I have never heard of them supplying another brand. I do suspect—but only suspect—that all Micro Four Thirds sensors are fabbed there, and Leica may also be a customer.

On the other hand, Japanese camera manufacturers clearly share technology, and even outsource manufacturing to seemingly rival firms. Thus Sony and Nikon have quite clearly collaborated on some parts. The end result is not identical, clearly there is a Sony version and a Nikon version, though much of the structure and wiring might be common between them.

On the other hand, Nikon has stated that some of their sensors are exclusively Nikon. To the best of my knowledge, Nikon does not have a fab, so they may farm out fabbing to the Sony fab. This would not make it a Sony part, however.

It also appears that Sony sells off-the-shelf sensors, primarily for P&S cameras. These would be the only parts that one could say for sure are Sony.

Fabs are fabulously expensive. IBM's fab in East Fishkill NY, USA, involved an initial investment of $2.5 billion US about a decade ago. IBM partnered with a number of other companies including Sony, Sony Computer Entertainment and Toshiba, who invested hundreds of millions of dollars. Micron has a number of fabs spread all over the world as well. I would expect that any custom fab would offer extensive help in design and preparation of a custom part.

Thus even if the design was started with a Nikon in-house authorization from top management, and was designed in-house with the advice of the fab, to some degree it is a collaboration, though the design goal was defined and primarily achieved by Nikon. The same would probably be true with the engine, which may be fabbed by another company in a different fab. Then there are all manner of small components which would also be sourced from most any place in the world. The shutter button may come from Indonesia, the LCD from Korea, batteries from China, and so on.

Optics, design and assembly would be done in house in most cases, (the FM10 is made by Cosina) as well as marketing, packaging, distribution, warranty and support. The brand and what it represents, is what makes it a Nikon. The same is true of the rest of the camera brands, as well as consumer electronics, cars and pretty much every other manufactured items.

 

[Hamish Gill]

I thought that might be the case to be honest Larry, I have just never had anyone clarify it!
TV's is an area that I find my self constantly correcting people on this sort of subject ...
We used to get people in the shop saying "why buy a Sony tv, when the screen is made by samsung" ... Where to start ... ...

With cameras I usually just say in a relatively uninformed way - "it's not the parts that count, it's what's done with them..."

 

[Milan Vjestica]

My first camera was a Box Brownie (I still have it). I started on SLR's with a Pentax K1000 and a couple of lenses all manual. I cannot remember why but ended up buying a Nikon FE and started down that path. What followed was an F601, F70, Zeis Ikon was given to me too. I went digital with a D50 (now in someone elses possession) and the acquired a Canon G9. Last year bought a D300 off some dodgy bloke that works in a camera shop............actuallly Hamish, thanks mate. I have also added a Panasonic GF-1..........that Hamish is a good salesman!

My camera of choice is the D300, solid, dependable, great results. I do use the GF-1 and G9 especially when travelling on business. Essentially it has been a steady progression trying to improve each time.

 

[Hamish Gill]

We just both have good taste in cameras Milan

 

[Milan Vjestica]

Hamish, indeed we do!