Recently I’ve seen an upswing in the number of “which camera is best” posts in some of the online forums I follow – perhaps due to a minor Gear Lust epidemic after announcements of new cameras by Nikon and Canon and others?

I posted a reply to one question about whether it would be better to purchase a Canon 40D or 5D and my response got some supportive responses – so I’m posting it here:

The 5D can produce better image quality than the 40D (unless some miracle is revealed when the camera is available for actual testing) because it has a) greater MP dimensions, b) larger photosites.

That said, the question remains whether the “betterness” is a) noticable, b) significant, c) worth the cost.

(Selecting one camera over another because it is “better” is kind of like buying one car instead of another because it is faster. Let’s say one can go 120 mph and the other can go 125 mph. I suppose that 125 mph is “better” than 120 mph, but what if you never drive faster than 70 mph…)

A crop sensor 10 MP DSLR can produce outstanding image quality. With good technique (oh yeah, and inspiration…) you can get photographs that will reproduce at quite large print sizes. (I sold 16 x 24 inch prints of photos made on a 350D.) If you aren’t going to print this large or if you will mostly distribute electronically, frankly there is little to be gained from FF. (And, yes, I’m a full frame camera user: 5D plus L lenses.) You’d probably see more difference in your photography by taking the money you saved by getting the 40D and investing in good lenses, tripod, filters, etc.

By the way, it also remains to be seen how much difference the extra two bits makes in actual images.

So, yes, the 5D is “better” than the 40D (OK, not if you need a fast burst rate…) on the basis of image quality. However, the 40D – or even the excellent 400D – could be a “better camera” for a particular user.

My point is not so much about the specific comparison between the Canon 5D and the newly-announced 40D. It is more about what it means to look for the “best” camera.

I believe that “best” is a very subjective concept here. The important question is not “which camera is best?” but, rather, “which camera is best for [the kind of photography I do]?” The answer would be quite different for each of the following:

• Professional photographer doing studio portrait/product photography.
• Photojournalist shooting professional sports.
• Landscape photographer shooting while hiking/backpacking. (Hmmm… that sounds familiar, somehow… ;-)
• Serious photographer shooting wildlife with long lenses.
• Serious, experienced amateur shooting a variety of subjects and making letter-size prints.
• Casual amateur shooting family events for electronic sharing and small prints.
• Beginner with no previous SLR photography experience, unsure of where/how interest will lead.

I’m not going to make specific recommendations, with one exception. If you are new to this DSLR stuff, please don’t listen to those people telling you to immediately invest thousands in pro-level lenses and bodies… that are appropriate for their photography. Start small; a Canon 400D/XTi with the kit lens (or the equivalent from Nikon, Sony, Pentax, et al) is a far more appropriate place to begin. Take a lot of photographs; explore and learn – before long you will begin to understand what your best camera might actually be.