Hi;
I have been mulling around the idea of going to a mirrorless DSLR. I understand the consequences. It means buying all new lenses, etc. Currently, I have a Nikon D500 with only about 10,000 snaps on the shutter, and about a half dozen various lenses. Over time I went from a Nikon D200 to a D300 to a D7000 (I used that as a back up to the D300) and finally went to the D500. I can't say that I'm unhappy with the D500. It takes excellent photos and I have had no issues with it.
My thought is this: Going forward, in not too many years down the road, ALL new cameras will be mirrorless. When that day comes, existing cameras will be worth something less than what they are worth today.
Since going mirrorless will entail getting all new lenses, it frees me to look at other camera manufacturers.
The three top contenders IMHO are: Nikon, Canon and Sony. I do a fair amount of indoor photography where I can't use a flash, so I need a camera with a decent ISO rating.
I guess the only other deciding factor is what type of trade in I can get on my current equipment. I'm looking for suggestions, with pro and cons various models. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

I decided to post these images because of recent discussions about whether or not people should use 2x extenders. I know these are birds, but putting them in the bird subsection will prevent the converter discussion.
The photos are taken with a Nikon 400f2.8s lens. The built in 1.4 converter is being used and coupled with a 2x converter. The wren also has a 5mm extension tube for closer focus.
So, the question is are these photos sharp enough, or should people not use the converters and attempt to gain the extra reach by cropping. I believe that any loss of image quality from using the converter is more than offset by the additional reach and the ability to come closer to filling the frame, but I thought it would be interesting to see where any discussion would go. Those of you who believe that no one should use teleconverters, go ahead and have your say. The photos will be posted in the first reply.

Hard work and happy accidents: why do so many of us prefer ‘difficult’ analogue technology?

https://theconversation.com/hard-work-and-happy-accidents-why-do-so-many-of-us-prefer-difficult-analogue-technology-227472

One photographer they interviewed on the topic of working with film:

"I like the pace of it, it really slows you down. Your options to take pictures are really limited – you’ve only got two-to-six shots, and the film and processing are expensive. It’s also very labor-intensive getting that shot from inside the camera to print, so you’re really conscious of getting it right. If you make a mistake at the beginning, you can invest a few days and it’s still going to be a rubbish shot. You’re not going to fire off 1,000 pictures like digital, and that really appeals to me."

Whether or not you use film is there value in slowing down and welcoming "happy accidents?"

Hello! I am planning a 2025 African Safari. I am interested in large game (lions, gorilla's, elephants, etc. It is a bucket list vacation.

I just purchased the OM Solutions 150-600mm lens (300-1200mm 35mm equivalent), but is is not weather sealed. I have web pages that detail, by month, the overall weather for each month.

It appears that it is BEST to go when it is dry and dusty for that is when large game gather around shrinking waterholes.

If I do go then, what type of precautions should I take to protect the lens from dust? Has anybody been on an African safari who can tell me anything that they learned? Is the lens only good for borders, for which I don't have the skill set.

Anything I forgot to ask that I should know? Many thanks in advance! Linda