Jerrin1 Loc: Wolverhampton, England

Until mid December 2016 I owned 2 x Olympus EM1 bodies + 4 lenses and a Nikon D500. I bought the Nikon because I was a bit useless at capturing birds in flight with my EM1's. In mid December I part exchanged my 2 x EM1's for an EM1 mark II. Had the EM1 been as good as the EM1 mark II for BIF I would never have bought a D500. From a personal point of view, I now have the perfect wildlife system for my style of photography: D500 + Nikkor 300mm f4 PF VR + 1.4 TC, a Sigma 180mm f2.8 macro lens, EM1 mark II + Oly 300mm f4 PRO + 1.4 TC + Oly 12 - 100mm f4 PRO. That said, hypothetically, if I had to give up one of my cameras it would be the Nikon D500 - a scenario I would never have contemplated prior to purchasing my EM1 mark II - it is that good.

bkellyusa Loc: Nashville, TN

I started with a Sony NEX 5 and moved up to the A6000. The common complaint that the auto focus system on mirrorless cameras is slow is a nuts on these cameras. It may be true on some ofther mirrorless brands or it may have been true years ago but it's definitely not true on any modern Sony camera that I am familiar with.

gsnelson Loc: Western Maryland

I use both and like both. I prefer the Sony mirrorless because of the portability, the great Sony-Zeiss glass, the wonderful electronic view finder, and the fabulous peeking lines. I use Nikon partly for old-time sake, having been very active in the hobby in the seventies, and having kept some legacy glass. I also have more recent Nikon glass. The Sony feels most like my Nikons from back then. I carry extra batteries, as they are cheap and small. I shoot mostly landscapes, city (town) scapes, portraits -- not birds or sports for which the Nikons are probably better suited. I normally enlarge to 30 or 40 inches. And like many others here, I am well into my seventies.

Jbat Loc: Charleston, SC

I moved from a D800 with a group of lens to the Fuji system last year. I now have a Fuji X-Pro2 and X-T2. These are Fuji's top of the line most recent cameras. In addition I have a number of Fuji lens beginning with their prime 14 f/2.8 and ending with the Fuji 100-400 plus a 1.4TC. The primary reason for my change was size and weight. I add to that my opinion that mirrorless is the way cameras are going and while the Nikon/Canon DSLRs are great equipment, if you look at trends I believe you will find that more people are going to mirrorless every day and not the reverse. I loved my D800 and it is a great camera and combined with my 80-400 lens, it was a great bird and landscape camera but holding the camera for any length of time is just a burden and when I did not need the 80-400, the other lens were also large as most FF lens will be. The Fuji equipment is not as light as M4/3 but is a lot lighter than Nikon FF, and even more so if you go to some of their outstanding primes. My experience is that the new X-T2 is very close to focus speed that my D800 was. Of course, neither are equal to a D5 but I don't think that is the comparison. Beyond shooting birds in flight, the Fuji cameras are outstanding. IQ is great, color is excellent, the cameras have excellent controls that are better than my D800. And Fuji has spent and is spending a lot of money on developing a great group of prime and tely lens. Notes from others on things like battery life are correct but that is not a problem. I just buy a few extra batteries. I follow the Fuji forum regularly and virtually every day I see someone joining the forum who made a change like I did. Almost all liked their former equipment, like I did, but really enjoy the Fuji equipment. The most common comment is that shooting is really fun again as it had been in the past.

Tomcat5133 Loc: Gladwyne PA

I like both Nikon and Sony cameras. I still loved my Nikon experience but Sony has won me over. The D800 with 70 200 is like carrying an anchor. I miss the viewfinder for sure.
Still have a few lens. I think it depends on the shots you want and how you will get them. I still love the Sony a7s. And recently got the a6300. Went to Disneyworld last week
with wife daughter and grandkids. I have the kit lens (and others) 16 50 and thought pixs will just be OK. Well the 6300 with this lens amazed me. It is such a light rig.
You can shoot with one hand while holding granddaughters hand. It certainly is not a D800 or an a7s but amazing results.
Jerry sold his Sony's and I can understand why. The menu interface is awful on these Sony's. I find myself searching for the card initializing every time.
The AF is better on the a6000 series but not that great. The Canon and the Nikon are much better. Yes I can pull focus but do a lot of event stuff
as candid happenings. The color in the Sony's is different. More cold and a bit magenta (?). I like the look. Love Canon's color science but their camcorders
and still cameras are to expensive for me at this point. I put an older mediocre Nikon zoom on the 6300 with a metabones speed booster the other day.
I was surprised how I like this rig. Yes I prefer small quality mirrorless cameras over DSLR.

BobHartung Loc: Bettendorf, IA

And who else are you asking for?

Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan

Did anyone mention that the lighter the camera the more camera shake when you press the shutter?

I prefer a heavier camera.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

You really should try 5 axis IS, like the one in Olympus...it'll take care of the "shakes"...even the coffee shakes.

John Howard Loc: SW Florida and Blue Ridge Mountains of NC.

Marc, this is the first I have heard of using Leica lens with AF. I had been told the rangefinder lenses don't work on the Sony A7 series. In fact, I have tried my 21mm and it appears the angle of the light hitting the sensor does not work. I have done this using the Novoflex N adapter, which does not allow AF. I understand how you are not satisfied with the AF but this is generally a problem with the mirrorless system, and may not be the adapter. Thanks for posting about the TechArt AF adapter. I'll look for it and give it a try. - John

efleck Loc: Vancouver, WA State

I've had my EM1 MkII only three weeks so I am still new to it. However, I have found the larger capacity battery a major improvement. Last week I went to a local wildlife refuge and shot 647 images of birds. When I returned home and after linking the camera to my iPhone to geotag all the images, I saw that I still had 47% of the battery charge (assuming the percent charge readout is accurate.) Also, my pics did not include the use of any flash. With my EM1 I would never have gotten that many images without switching batteries. Assuming that I fully depleting my new battery with around 1,200 shots, this is pretty close to what I would have gotten with my previous camera, a Nikon 7100.

Two years ago I switched from a Nikon 7100 with a kit of DX lenses. A major incentive for change was the extra charges I was assessed when flying on small planes from one African safari remote site to another. My Olympus kit is about half the size and weight. I was unhappy with the AF ability of the EM1 and during this time I may have wished I had not shifted; however, the EM1 MkII AF ability is dramatically better and I am getting excellent focus on BIF. Unlike many, I prefer the EVF to an OVF. The new EM1 MkII refresh rate is so fast now that I see no stutter in the EVF.

Cheers, Earl

bull drink water Loc: pontiac mi.

I use both.

Impressionist

Am a big fan of the word and as opposed to either/or. The Sony a6000 continues to impress. I have better cameras but none that offers the versatility along with value. I appreciate the upgrades of the newer models. Occasionally will bite on other cameras and can see why others swear by them. The a6000 is the one I would immediately with another.

lwerthe1mer Loc: Birmingham, Alabama

For years I shot Canon, my last body being a 70D, which I hastily sold when I purchased my Sony a7ii. I love my a7ii, although I question whether I, an amateur photographer, really need a full frame sensor. At my skill level, I sometimes long for my old 70D.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

In my experience/opinion...nope.

TonyL Loc: Coventry, UK

I moved from D7000 to EM5 Mk1 then decided I preferred the EM1 Mk1, which I really like. I did find that the Nikon was a bit big but in the final analysis it's all a question of personal preference. I'm disappointed that someone isn't happy with the battery life of the EM1 Mk2, I thought that was one of its big advantages over its predecessor. I also have an Olympus Stylus 1s which I find very good as a carry round camera, with many similarities to the Em1.