A lot of lip service is being paid to how the camera doesn't really matter. Pros have repeatedly shown that you can get results with anything. Heck, I sometimes feel nostalgia for the times when I had less gear and took photos I liked more.
Now here comes the kicker:
"The camera's only job is to get out of the way of making photographs."It's ironic that I found this right in the middle of an article about how gear doesn't matter. It does - just not the stuff some people worry about. And not necessarily the same stuff for everybody. The fewer things you have to learn to compensate for with your gear, the better. If what is left is irrelevant to your purpose, you end up with a "perfect camera".
-- Ken Rockwell
Here's my take for the moment:
- Accurate viewfinder. I don't mean 100% vs. 95% field of view. I mean the same frame format as my target images. I'm a snapshooter. I don't have the patience to learn how to frame for 3:2 prints with a 4:3 camera so I want a camera that can do (and display) 3:2 natively.
- Reliable autofocus. The last time I was able trust visual feedback for everyday use was in a manual SLR with a large viewfinder with split screen and microprism. I want to know that when it blinks "focused", it is.
- Reliable auto white balance. Slightly too cold or too warm is livable but it shouldn't stray into magenta or green tint unless explicitly told so. Not the case with some cameras.
- Good JPEG engine. Raw is fun, no doubt about it. I should know, I've been shooting it a lot recently. The problem is that with my latest camera raw turned out to be nearly a must. I'd rather take "good enough" JPEGs out of the box and only post-process select ones for an extra touch.
I wonder how this list will change when I buy another camera. :)
