Is there such a thing as a perfect camera?

A "perfect" camera is solely up to the person buying it and is limited to their budget.

For example, I bought a Canon 1D Mark III for the following reasons:

1) Manual settings (ISO/aperture/shutter speed)....check

2) rugged, full size body......check

3) weatherproofing.......check

4) made for action shots ( 10+ fps)......check

5) long battery life (1,000+ shots)....check

6) decent sensor/mp ratio (<2.4mp/cm².....mine is 1.9)....check

7) controls easy to find/use.....check

8) wide array of lens choices....check

9) NO VIDEO......check

10) NO USELESS "features" (smile detection, photo editing, etcetera)...check

So, IMO...that camera is about as close to perfect as I can afford.

As far as Image stabilization...that is what a monopod/tripod or fast shutter speeds are for

A perfect camera... no.

But no camera needs to be perfect.

If you use on-line reviews to determine the suitability of a product, you will always find something negative about anything.

You have to take reviews with a grain of salt I am afraid.

And especially in the compact camera market, there is severe competition, which means each manufacturer tries to stuff as many features into a camera as they can but come in at a lower price-point than other manufacturers.

At least in the high-end compact camera market, this is not quite as bad. But under $400, forget it. You are getting the influences of over-done marketing and cut-throat competition that makes it hard to find any camera that has everything. And even some cameras that have gone overboard on the marketing influences; those that have marginal super-zoom lenses and sky-high MegaPixel sensors can be awful.

While image stabilization is sometimes beneficial, is not the cure all. Many millions of perfect photographs have been taken in the days before image stabilization, by photographers that know how to minimize camera shake; whether it be how they hold the camera, when to use a tripod, or how to adjust the settings. Image stabilization, like other "necessary" features found these days on cameras quickly become the lazy way out.

While there is a lot of junk out there, especially in the low to medium compact market, there are some decent cameras to be found. Just figure out the few functions you truly need in a camera rather than a long list of superfluous features, and go with that one.

The camera that fits your important needs is the perfect camera... for you.

welcome to life kid, nothing can be perfect. It's just the way the universe works. For example, when I was moving from NY, 18 can go anywhere my choices were cheap fun tepid rainy Oregon. Beautiful old fashioned peaceful hotter than poop racist Savannah. Or $4000 studio in the burbs lovely LA.

A large format film camera is truly the perfect camera for quality. But it take 20 years of learning, and a small truck to take out, an hour or so to get a shot. A compact camera is the complete opposite, instant and easy but the pictures are shite.

There is a perfect camera for you. But the problem is you have to make some effort. A standard SLR or DSLR give you control and high quality pictures IF you are willing to learn how to use it. The other balance is they can be $5000+ once you get your whole kit together. But if you are willing to learn and not rely on gimmicks like IS or autofocus or "smart effects mode" then your camera will be perfect. Nothing is free, you will have to learn, lean, learn, study, learn.

The problem is you are asking a dumb machine to do a human task. Features are silly toys to help the people who don't want to learn think they brought a magic wand. I have in body stabilizer, I lean my jiggly corpse on a pole if I need to be more steady. I have smart auto, I read EV charts to the point where I can guess a damn good exposure for myself. I have effects mode. I read what each exposure variable does and practiced it.

Cameras are not one size fits all. I'm sure canon wishes they were, but they're not. A Pentax 645 cannot be replicated by the Canon eos 1D, It does what it does, perfectly. I'm looking forward to when I can buy a Fuji X10, I'm hoping it'll be perfect for me.

I' have a DSLR, with which I pretty much loath, but I need it for some of the work I do. But what I like is a small fast camera. A DSLR Makes me feel like tool, I stick out on the street and DSLR guys are often those hobby guys, so other people think you're a tool if you use one.

The closest thing to perfect is a Leica M3. Anyone who's been lucky enough to own one will tell you the same. I just can't spend that much on a camera... boo-hoo

I've shot for more than 20 years without stabilization.

Nikon and canon make a few cameras where the only disappointing feature is the pricetag. Nikon's D3s comes to mind

" I'm sure the majority of photographers get disappointed with their camera after using it for a while!"

Actually, no.

That's because all DSLRs are basically the same - tools to take a light meter reasing with, and to select ISO, shutter speed and aperture with as well as to focus. That covers the vast majority of requirements.

There may be additional features, but very most of these are rarely needed, and usually can be substituted.

Just post a list of things that are important to you, a budget figure, and people here can recommend a camera to you.

yes dear there is a thing called perfect camera

Try searching for cannon mark4 1D

there's nothing more you can ever get in a camera

no detail a simple ans to ur question nothing is 100%

Close. Try the site below.

Nope. Not yet bit theyre working on one though.