Blaster34 Loc: Florida Treasure Coast

Happy birthday Addicus, enjoy. Ever considered one of the new a 'Bridge' Cameras since they are becoming better & better with technology and it also eliminates a lot of additional accessories (lenses) and great for traveling. Versatile, affordable (many are) and packed full of features. Sony's DSC-S10IV or other models, Canon Powershot SX60 HS, Panasonic Lumix FZ80/FZ82, Nikon Coolpix P900 all offer packages packed with quality features including great image quality, built in wide angle to extensive zooms, image stabilization all in a single package....just a thought.

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

I love my XT-2, but if I were looking for lighter, I would have gone for the XT-20. Weighs less than a pound without the lens. The tiny kit kens is very good and covers the range equivalent of 28 - 85 mm. 24MP and all the bells and whistles you could want, and all external controls. And at a nice price point too!

londonfire Loc: NY to NC

I think M4/3 is a good next step. However, before jumping in with both feet I think you should try out one of the 'older' models first. There are plenty of used Panasonic and Olympus cameras out there and even some seasoned vets of these brands will tell you that sensor technology in these cameras has remained pretty much the same for a long time. Sure, there's new features added but a lot of times you don't use them. I've only progressed to the 16 mp level but I have shots on my 27" monitor that I can't tell from ones shot with my ancient 12 mp G1. Buy good lenses and they'll move right over to the latest models if you so choose.

mizzee Loc: Boston,Ma

I'm almost 70 and I had the same issue. I had Nikon gear, big lenses, primes, flash, D7000 and traded it all in For the Olympus Mark 5 II last year. I've never been happier with a camera. Because of its size and weight, and lack of same(!) I take it with me all the time. I am recharged. Do it and don't look back!

adm

I would also highly recommend micro 4/3. I have been using Olympus micro 4/3 for about a year now and am very happy with it. The size and weight advantage is huge with little or no reduction in image quality compared to APS. Olympus appears to have maximized the size/weight advantage compared to Panasonic. Another advantage of micro 4/3 is that you can use almost every lens out there with an adapter.

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

Happy Birthday.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

I’m in the same boat, 71 and coming up on 72, and I’m finding that my DSLR gear is a lot lug around anymore. I’ve been considering going mirrorless for awhile, now, and have pretty much narrowed down my choices to either the Sony A6xxx series or Olympus for Micro 4/3 format for the weight savings. Awhile back I was at a Best Buy and had a chance to handle the Olympus OMD-EM-5 with their 40-150 zoom lens and was amazed at the lightness of the combination. Should I go that way, my choice now is the OMD=EM10ii with the 14-40 kit lens and the 40-150 for a longer zoom. I’ll be able to carry my whole kit in a small bag instead of a big backpack. I’m not worried about the image quality or resolution of a smaller sensor. I’ve seen a lot of impressive results from M43 cameras.

And happy birthday!!

Camera buyer Loc: Las Vegas

I use a Sony a-6000 with an 18-55mm and a 50-200mm. Much lighter than my FF Canon rigs. I enjoy the Sony but for my stage photography, the noise level is more than on my FF's.

CaptainBobBrown

Depends on what you're trying to accomplish. If it's quality birds/wildlife forget the mirrorless cameras because they don't have the long lenses you'd ultimately want and if they did the lenses would be so large as to negate the weight size advantage of the mirrorless bodies. I went through the same process myself with the E-M1 and several of the best lenses available and nothing was good enough for birds/wildlife. Fine for landscape and micro though but the E-M1 didn't work out for me because of the OLED viewfinder getting green splotches after a short time. Olympus replaced the viewfinder on first time but with no explanation and it tried to pretend it was an unusual problem that "they'd never heard of before". Google "viewfinder green spots" though and you'll see lot's of people have had the problem.

moonhawk Loc: Land of Enchantment

I will add to the chorus: If you want smaller and lighter, then by "Mirrorless" tou need to go micro 4/3. Fuji and Sony are APS-C or Full Frame. the bodies may be smaller and lighter, but the lenses are not.

The advantages of a top of the line Olympus, in addition to size and weight, are:

Cost, compared to equivalent Pro quality glass and cameras. This will vary from lens to lens, and body to body, but I've spent FAR less on Oly lenses than on Nikon.

In body image stabilization, coupled with lens stabilization in some instances. (This is also true of the larger format mirrorless systems) With this you get up to 6 1/2 stops of image stabilization, so no more tripod to lug around. Talk about weight savings!

Electronic viewfinder: Adjust your settings till the image in the viewfinder looks the way you want it to. No guessing and less chimping.

A choice of many, many, truly professional quality lenses.

The best weather sealing in the business.
For a one-body, one-lens travel camera, the Oly E-M1 mkII with the the 12-100 Pro lens cannot be beat. Check it out. May be the only lens you ever buy again.

TMcD Loc: Minneapolis, MN

Here's another vote for the Olympus EM1 mkII. I purchased an Oly EM5 MkII for the express purpose of cutting down on weight compared to my Canon DSLR and EF lenses.
The EM5 proved to be a bit too small to be a good fit for my hands. After quite a bit of agonizing I pulled the trigger on the EM1 Mk II which I found to be a much better ergonomic fit for me.

I love this camera and the pro series lenses from Olympus. While the IQ isn't quite up to my full frame Canon, it is none the less very close, especially at ISO 200. It isn't quite so good once you start getting into a higher ISO range, say over 800, but the image stabilization allows you to use extremely slow shutter speeds and keep your ISO low under many circumstances. I highly recommend this M43 set-up as an excellent way to reduce the size and weight of your gear.

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

The long a-mount lenses do work well on the A6000 with the Sony LA-EA4 adapter. The first image is using a Sony A6300, a LA-EA4 adapter, and an older Minolta 500mm f8 reflex lens (a mirror lens) as an example of using a lens that many would think couldn't do a decent job. I was probably 700 feet from these Cormorants and no way to move closer.

The 2nd image is using an Olympus em5ii with a cheap a-mount adapter, and my Tamron 150-600mm lens. This time it is all manual focus. But with the 2.0x crop factor, the 600mm now looks like 1200mm (compared to looking like a 750mm shot in the first with a 1.5x crop factor). Both images where from the same spot, but 3 months apart.

Bottom line is that you don't give up the ability to use long lenses with either the Sony A6000 family or the m4/3 family. of which I have both. (Also have the larger body a-mount cameras as well).

Sony A6300, LA-EA4, Minolta 500mm reflex lens

(Download)

Olympus em5ii with Tamron 150-600 with adapter

(Download)

jmizera Loc: Austin Texas

The GH5 is great, especially if you intend to shoot video as well. If not, the G85 gets you there at almost half the price. Including one of the lowest priced IBIS cameras on the market. Picked up one this summer, and it just a fantastic little camera. Even though I own a 5DII, I did not miss it one bit on my last trip. The smaller weight and size was just a bonus.

Still some great video capability as well. Just no LUTs or fancy shutter speed features.