Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Sony a7RII 22.1 oz
Canon 5D MII 31.39 oz (Only 9.24 oz more)
Canon 80D 22.9 OZ (Only .8 oz more)
Canon T6i 18.0 oz (4.1 oz lighter)

Weight on this scale is negligible. Perhaps psychological but in reality it is not much difference in mirrorless vs DSLR. I looked at Canon but you look at the Nikon 7XXX, 5XXX and 3XXX you will find similar weight differences that are virtually negligible.

Your sacred 70-200 f2.8 Sony 52.21 without mount for tripod 52.21 oz and Canon 52.6 oz with mount. This is a .39 oz difference.
These weights are so small in difference I doubt most on this site would have no idea which is heavier by holding them.

This is not a defense of one over the other just a quick exercise showing it is pure fantasy claiming big weight differences between DSLR and mirrorless. I am sure you can make a DSLR very heavy and a mirrorless very light by choices in a specific lens for each but the other way around is also true as well.

For size going to the sacred 70-200mm f2.8 Sony is 3.46"X 7.87", Canon 3.5"X 7.8" there is no difference in size at all.

So there is a lot of hype on this site but it is purely psychological in the real world.

And as stated before most all decent cameras have no perceptible shutter lag fractions of microseconds differences are again humanly imperceptible compared to human reaction times. This is especially true for those who talk about being older most cameras are far quicked than your reaction time to press a shutter.

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

Since most of the Hogs here are on the far side of 50, I think that weight is nearly ALWAYS a consideration, even though (for reasons of Macho) may not always be voiced. Being an old bag myself, I freely admit an SLR is just too heavy to tote any more. If I travel, I take something I can put in my still oversized purse. Shutter lag? Not so much. "Finger lag" is likely to be more at fault than a modern shutter mechanism.

banjoboy Loc: Austin, TX

Weight (and to a lesser extent, size) is the main reason I'm getting ready to switch from my D7100 to a M43 camera. I absolutely love the D7100, but after a day of lugging it around with the zoom I think again of moving to something more manageable. My concern is to find something that equals or approaches the image quality and the ease of operation of the Nikon. I've been looking for a couple of months and am leaning toward the OM-D E-M1 MkII. Will have to see if I can rent one for a weekend before making the final decision. All that to say that weight is a consideration for me, and I won't have a camera with noticeable shutter lag.

Marionsho Loc: Kansas

Anticipation.... as in I want the shot a half second from right now.

cjeisch

It's called shutter lag but it's really focus lag. All cameras take a split second to focus-some longer than others. Once focus is achieved the shutter activates immediatley.

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

I don't agree that it is focus lag in most cases. If you are using back button focus and continuous focus then the shot should be in focus before you press the shutter. When the shutter button reaches half way the camera will judge and set the exposure unless you are in manual mode. To me it is the physical moving of the mirror that is going to account for most of the shutter lag in this case. I shoot a Canon and this is how I usually am shooting. Often in shutter priority mode.

Best,
Todd Ferguson
Harrisburg, NC

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

I am sure the OM camera is slightly lighter than some DSLRs but again the closest lens to the 70-200 is the 35-100 and it is 58 oz which is heavier than the Sony or Canon and is 8.3" long and 3.79" in diameter which is bigger around than Sony or Canon. Yes it is slightly faster but is your only option. The weight of the lens makes up for lighter camera.
Again it is purely psychological the fraction of ounces difference.

banjoboy Loc: Austin, TX

Not sure where you're getting your lenses from, but I don't shoot a 70-200. I do know that moving from a D5100 to a D7100, using the same lens and strap, made a noticeable difference when carrying for a full day. On top of that, OM lenses don't have the VR mechanism inside and are smaller glass, so they ought to be lighter, right? I'll have to check to compare actual numbers, but your half pound difference that you note in your one comment is nothing to sneeze at if you're going to hang it around your neck for a full day.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

If the shutter lag on the SX60 is workable, I'm glad I never bought an SX40. The main reason I stopped using my SX60 as my dedicated doggie cam is shutter lag. As for mass, they don't come much more massive than the 1DX, but then it is a really nice camera.

cfbudd Loc: Atlanta, Georgia

Hahaha!!

Kuzano

I certainly pay close attention to shutter lag. That's why I shoot mirrorless, which is a significant function of shutter lag... time the mirror goes up and down. Haven't used a DSLR for years for that reason, at least in digital.

As far as body weight, I border on obese, being approx 50 pounds overweight. That's the most important factor I consider about weight. It truly impacts the amount of gear I can carry when out with camera for the day. Huge factor in my endurance, and quite possibly the harder issue of weight to deal with for my health.

Oh, camera weight... Pshaw!!!! not an issue with mirrorless gear.

Obesity is the killer here!!! How is your body weight.

jct842

15 years or so ago my niece with a pink barbie camera got shots that my nikon messed up. I came close to smashing the nikon. Was the last opertunity to photograph my mother before she passed. Shutter lag was huge with the nikon and the barbie was mechanical film camera.

banjoboy Loc: Austin, TX

Back to the weight issue for a moment, I wasn't questioning your weights, rather your assumption of the 70-200mm glass. If I put that much glass on a camera, I'd not be complaining about the weight of the body! I just did a check of the OM vs D5100 and D7100 weights with the lens I've used on the Nikon, and one with a lot more glass than I will probably buy for the OM (the 12-40 f2.8), and the combination produces the same weight as the D5100 and lens that were not an issue for me. Both are a full half pound lighter than the D7100 (I use the nice 18-105mm kit lens - does a remarkable job.) The point is, that for the weight of the lighter camera I'm getting much better camera build quality, hopefully equivalent IQ (need to verify this), at a size and weight that are easier for me to tolerate. Each person has to make their own decision tree of what is important and what they can live with. For me, at this point, this looks like an acceptable solution. I'll know in a few months.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Overall my comments are aimed at those who lay claim to fantastic savings in weight for mirrorless cameras vs DSLRs. Actually I think Olympus has a great product as well as Fuji. If I were not vested in Canon and as wealthy as some here and able to change willy nilly for the latest whiz bang camera every week I would be tempted to also pursue Olympus or more likely Fuji (Larger sensor). Both are great quality but are they so fantastically light weight you have to tie them down? No. You put the same popular lenses as you have been using on a Nikon and there is not much if any difference in perceived weight, mostly mental.