PaulR01 Loc: West Texas

Take a look at the Canon 6D the picture quality goes up and the weight and all the extras go down.

marki3rd Loc: Columbus, Indiana

Tell that to cthahn!!!

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

That's what I do, but slightly heavier weights. I do that primarily to be able to carry camera equipment. Yup, that's me. Apparently another UHH member was at the same place I was and took this photo. That's also an older Gitzo tripod. In the case, a Graphic View II 4x5, film holders, filters, lenses, light meter, etc.
--Bob

Sannye Loc: Oregon

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

Some of us have. It was a simple gesture, but quite communicative!

Selene03

I agree. The 6D is an outstanding camera and relatively light weight. It is especially comfortable to hold with an op-tech strap that crosses over the body. If you can, try to hold one.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

No on board flash. Doesn't bother me much, I have a small flash for fill light and big one that reaches out to nearly 200'. I think I used the built in flash on my 7DII three times in the last two years, for quick snaps of my Monarch Butterfly raising project.

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

I would agree on the flash. I hardly ever use the built in flash in my camera even though it has one. On the other hand my 580 EXII (or at least one of them) is always part of my standard 'grab bag' kit. The weight of the actual camera body is a relatively small part of the equation from my personal perspective, it's the lenses and other things.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Yes, my yn600ex-rt is a full meal, the little Canon 220EX is a soup and salad, that built in flash is an emergency package of cheese and crackers.

Selene03

You nailed it!

Reinaldokool Loc: San Rafael, CA

Get the Sony a6500.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

You can easily compare the size and weight of the various Canon camera models on a number of websites, including Canon's own or any of the major retailers (B&H, Adorama, etc.)

7DII is the top of the line APS-C Canon model, the most "pro-oriented", with mostly metal construction, high durability components (shutter rated for 200,000 actuations), larger battery for the higher number of shots per charge, more sealing for dust/weather resistance, dual memory card slots and the highest performance autofocus (aside from the full frame 1DX-series).

Next step down is 80D, weighing in about 20% less than 7DII. It's pretty close in a lot of it's performance factors (1/8000 top shutter speed, 1/250 flash sync are the same), though more plasticky, less well sealed and with lower durability (100,000 click shutter).

Next step down are the 77D and Rebel T7i, which are nearly identical in size and weight to each other, and are over 40% lighter than 7DII. To save size and weight (and probably cost), these use a penta-mirror instead of a true pentaprism. This makes their viewfinders slightly smaller and less bright. They also use a smaller battery (about half as many shots per charge, compared to above cameras). Their shutter is slightly lower specification (1/4000 top speed, 1/200 flash sync). I haven't seen any durability ratings, but this level of Canon model has typically been about 75,000 "clicks" in the past.

Depending upon what earlier Rebel model you used, any of the above might be a noticeable upgrade. The earlier, but still widely available new, Rebel T6i and T6s would be too (similar size/weight to the 77D & T7i).

More entry level (perhaps not much of an upgrade for you... and certainly not "comparable" to 7DII build quality and performance), but a lot lighter, the Rebel T6 is about half the weight of the 7DII. Finally, one of the most compact and light weight of all DSLRs, the Canon SL1 is nearly 60% lighter than the 7DII.

Something else you may want to consider is the "mirrorless" Canon M5. It is quite compact and about half the weight of the 7DII... plus lenses for mirrorless cameras can be smaller and lighter, too. The only problem is that so far Canon has only made a limited selection of EF-M lenses for their M-series cameras. There aren't a lot of third party lenses for them, either. But, you can use some EF and EF-S lenses on it, via an adapter (Canon's is expensive at $200, but there is a $70 Vello available... and possibly some other affordable ones).

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

The SX50 is a great little camera and is capable of nice results with good light in a variety of situations. However with regard to the using it for the type of subjects you provided, or in lower light, it's not even close to being in the same league as a camera like the 7D Mark II with a top quality telephoto lens. And of course, no one would expect it would at a fraction of the cost. But the OP did ask for a smaller and lighter camera that performs as well as the 7D Mark II.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

Actually you're off on the weight difference. The 6D is 770g, the 7D Mark II is 910g. The difference is 4.97 oz not 8.. Unless you are using an ultralight 40mm pancake or the 50mm f/1.8 nifty, the relative difference in overall weight would be small. With a lens like the Canon 24-105 I mounted on both, the total weight would be around 51oz and 56oz. respectively for the 6D and 7D II. Not really significant if a reduction in weight is the goal.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

Don't knock the built in flash. When I'm out and about on a sunny day, and don't have my flash unit with me, the built in flash can be employed as a fill light in a variety of situations. While not a perfect solution, it's saved many a photo for me over the years.