wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

4/3rds is not for everyone. That is why I suggested renting to try the various systems. For a lot of us that travel often, sometimes the size and weight means everything. The savings in cost is just a bonus. I need to supply photos for my wife's travel business. But I also want to be able to blow up photos as large as 30 X 40 should I want to. But there are photographers that shoot in constant low light. 4/3rds is not for them. And that is not the only reason for APS-C, FF, and MF. When it comes to weight and size, which the OP indicated, 4/3rds is the best choice.

User ID

Constant low light is where I live. I find no advantage in my
a7-II over my m4/3. I do suspect that a higher tech version
newer than my a7-II might deliver high ISO IQ superior to
my m4/3. But this thread is about whether to buy a current
a7-II at its very attractive clearance price.

Below, the first 3 images are by an a7-II at ISO 10000. The
4th and 5th images are m4/3 at ISO 12800. See for yourself.

Can't say there's zero difference, but is it significant ? To my
eyes, the amount of noise is not very different but OTOH the
type of noise looks different, and I prefer the m4/3. YMMV.

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

You don't say which Nikon you have, nor whether you are concerned with shooting ergonomics or total weight of your kit. But I would suggest that before you ditch your whole system and start over, check and see whether there is a battery grip available for your camera body. These grips, even though they add a little bit more weight, can actually make the camera/lens system easier and less fatiguing to hold and use. Doesn't help with the weight on your shoulder when carrying it, nor the weight of your camera bag. I've added grips to all my cameras (after discontinuing using them several years ago) and find the benefits (for me) far outweigh changing cameras or systems. By the way...I strongly recommend using only the branded grips. Better feel, lots better operation than aftermarket grips I have tried.

Might not work for you, but if it does, it's a lot cheaper than buying all new equipment.

By the way...I use larger Nikon bodies and heavy Nikkor lenses.

Diocletian

what an optomist! Actually expecting a straight answer in this forum!

Zooman 1

I am using the Canon R for the same main reason, one shoulder joint replaced and the other one needing it. Not a case of how strong, but of tolerance.

tropics68 Loc: Georgia

I agree. My A7ii with a 70-300 G lens is not what I would call a lightweight by any stretch. Using the highly scientific comparison test of holding one in each hand simultaneously and switching hands to be fair, I detected no appreciable difference between my Sony A7II and the Canon 5DS with a Canon
EF 70-200mmL IS lens.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

You should compile a list of the lenses and camera, then look VERY carefully at their specs. In most cases, there's not much difference in weight between full frame mirrorless vs full frame DSLR (there's more of a difference with APS-C or micro 4/3 cameras). The camera body might be a bit lighter, but the the lenses tend to be the same or even end up heavier than their DSLR equivalents. And you don't have near the selection of lenses available for mirrorless, that you do for a Nikon DSLR. Also look closely at the prices of comparable items. You might be surprised.

Sony A7II (24MP full frame) weighs 241 grams less than a Nikon D750 (24MP full frame)... that's 8 ounces difference. But a Nikkor AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8G ED ($1800) weighs 900 grams, while a Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM ($2200) weighs 886 grams.... 14 grams is equal to approx. three standard paper clips. Or a Sony Planar T* FE 50mm f/1.4 ZA ($1500) weighs 778 grams, while a Nikkor AF-S 50mm f/14G weighs 280 grams... 448 grams or nearly a full pound lighter (much smaller, too). Alternatively, there's the Sony Sonnar T* 55mm f/1.8 ZA GM ($1000) that weighs 281 grams, versus the Nikkor AF-S 50mm f/1.8G ($217) which weighs 185 grams. With those 50mm f/1.4 lenses on their respective cameras, the Sony kit would end up about a half pound heavier! With the f/1.8 standard lenses, the Sony kit woulld end up around 1/4 lb. lighter. Or with the 24-70mm lenses, the Sony kit would be about a half pound less than the Nikon.

Not sure where you are seeing that price on the A7II, either. I just looked at B&H and they're asking $1400 for the body only (about $100 higher price than a D750).

oregonfrank Loc: Astoria, Oregon

One obvious approach to reducing weight is to carry fewer pieces. When I travel and expect to do a lot of walking I carry one body (D500 or D850) and two lenses (17-35 and 24-70). If wildlife are expected I may add a 70-200 f4 and choose the D500. Also, I’m considering a monopod instead of carrying a tripod. If I carried all my gear I’d be under a 50 lb. backpack, not realistic at 79. I try to put together a package under 20 lb. That’s my approach at present. Frank

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

http://hazeghi.org/mft-lenses.html

It’s different for Micro 4/3...

Over 100 native lenses... Comparable lenses are less expensive than FF because there is less glass and metal in them.

Bill P

Moving from FF DSLR to mirrorless FF won't do you a bit of good, as the weight of the lens is more than the camera.
I got too old to drag around my Nikon gear more than 10 feet from the car, so I kept just the essentials of the Nikon FF gear, and added m4/3's. The weight saving is remarkable. And the quality of the results is good as well.

zug55 Loc: Naivasha, Kenya, and Austin, Texas

Yeah, let's forget scales if my hands feel the weight exactly the way I want them to feel it.

User ID

You disagree with the post that stated '998 with
kit lens'. Rightly so. But you're incorrect about a
'1400 body only' price. Body only, these days, is
what you do get for your $998. There are better
cameras to be had, but better deals ? Not for FF.

$998 BO is a clearance sale price. It comes and
goes, but lately it's here more than it's not. So,
if you did see a BO price of $1400 one day, just
wait a week ;-)

.

Linda S.

[/quote]
To really lighten your load look at the 1" sensor cameras. All self-contained.. super zooms... highly versatile and very tech able. The Panasonic and Sony were to only contenders and now Canon has intro-ed their 1" sensor camera.[/quote]

I have the Canon g3x 1-inch sensor camera. The shutter lag is so off-putting I hate using it. I purchased it as a second camera when I wanted to travel because the 5D Mark 4 and it's lenses are too much for me to carry especially overseas. I am now thinking of selling it and getting a Fuji xt3 camera and a lens. I'm going to go to Canon's website and Fuji's website and add up the weight to see there's an appreciable difference. Shutter lag is a real problem.

Selene03

I don't have the a7ii so I can't really help you there. I did get the a7iii and the kit lens you are looking at. It is significantly lighter than my Canon full frame setups. I got a good deal on the a7riii and got it because I wasn't really satisfied with the resolution on the a7iii, but that is me. The kit lens is not bad (though it is a long way from being among Sony's best lenses. I got the 24-240 which is of comparable quality for more range. Both are very light and good for a full frame light setup, but you may want better quality. I think the a7iii has some improvements over the a7ii, but the a7ii is probably a good camera.

That is my personal experience or as close as I can come to what you are looking at. I don't really know what you are really looking for. For serious shooting, I prefer my Canon cameras but the Sony is a good choice for hiking, etc. where I really need something lighter. Unfortunately, the only way to get light is either with primes (some of which are terrific) or Sony's less expensive lenses, lighter weight lenses.

cochese

Just sold all my Canon APSC bear and reinvested in an Olympus OM-D E-M1 II with a 12-40 2.8 Pro lens. I love the reduced weight and smaller size. Unless you do a tremendous amount of low light action shooting you lose very little. I am getting to know the system and will investigate other ranges of glass as I need it. Since Olympus and Panasonic both follow the m43 mount system there are many lenses available as well as older great 4/3 lenses from Olympus via an adapter. The lenses are where you save the weight. My 12-40 (24-80 35mm equivalent) fits in the palm of my hand. How many 24-70 pro level full frame lenses are that size?