January 5th, 2009 by 
Photo-John
Conclusion
I still haven’t made up my mind about the 2008 Camera Of The Year. I’m watching the discussion and poll results and letting the information simmer. That’s part of the reason for this article - I want more feedback from photographers. So if you’re reading this, your opinion counts. Please vote in the poll. And if you’ve got more to say, add it to the Camera Of The Year forum thread or post your thoughts in the comments section at the end of this article. Finally, if you own one of the cameras on the poll, please write a review. The PhotographyREVIEW.com user reviews are the foundation of the site and we always need your camera and other photography gear reviews.
Related Content:
Panasonic Lumix G1 Article
Nikon D90 Preview
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Announcement
Camera Of The Year Discussion
Camera Of The Year Poll
Nikon Review Page
Digital SLR Forum
Digital SLR User Reviews
All Digital Camera User Review Categories
page 1 page 2
January 5th, 2009 at 9:06 pm
I don’t know that it comes down to just Micro Four Thirds format vs. video. I voted for the G1 largely because of its beautiful and innovative design, its small size and its tilt-swivel LCD. It’s not perfect, but it’s definitely breaking new ground.
January 10th, 2009 at 7:35 pm
I go back to using the original Nikon SLR for photojournalism in 1968; hand held meter even. I like small and light. Today’s over featured, huge heavy digital SLR’s are of no interst to me. I love my Nikon 8400; just the shutter lag drives me nuts, but I still do professional magazine photography with it. I want to take a close look at the Panasonic G1, a great compromise camera if it’s as small and light as it looks. It just might replace my 8400.
Bob Rogers
January 23rd, 2009 at 4:59 pm
Bob, hold on to your 8400 as long as you can. I replaced mine with an LX3. In low light the LX3 performs better, and it works faster than the 8400, with faster writing times. Other than that, give me the 8400 any time. IT handles a lot better, and I mean a lot really, it is built like a tank (not so with the LX3, even though most reviewers think it is…) and the image quality at ISO100 is equal to the LX3. At ISO200 it has more noise, but the LX3 has a very nasty maze-effect in its JPEG-compression whereas the 8400-noise is very agreeable. So think twice before you give your 8400 away.