LenCreate

As others mentioned, you can use your Nikon lenses with any of the Nikon mirrorless cameras with Nikon’s FTZ adaptor. Nikon is now selling the adaptor for only $49.99 with the purchase of any new Nikon mirrorless, a $200 saving. If you’re going to make the plunge, do it soon while Nikon still has the mirrorless cameras on sale.

User ID

TYCO

User ID

If only better lenses would mean better pictures :-(

Most of the better picture makers of my acquaintance tend to be ignorant of the latest advances, so they are immune to GAS. Upshot of all this ignorance is that superior pictures are usually produced using inferior gear.

CO

I don't know why you're throwing Sony in here and making some smart ass remark about me owning two Z7's. My post was about how micro 4/3 doesn't come close to the performance of full frame.

You're comparing the price of the 24 megapixel Sony A7 III to the Nikon Z7. The 42 megapixel Sony A7R III ($2,798) is the counterpart of the 45 megapixel Nikon Z7 ($2,496).

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Your 810 will give you the colors you want, exposure is the key, along with processing.

Now, from your comment here, if 'spray and pray' is your preferred style, then you very well should consider the machine gun.
--Bob

d3200prime

olemikey Loc: 6 mile creek, Spacecoast Florida

??? Thanks Captain Wonderful

DavidPine Loc: Fredericksburg, TX

If you buy an FTZ adaptor you can use all your Nikon F lenses. It works real well.

User ID

So, you were dissatisfied with m4/3 ? Pix not worth the effort ? or what ? I found it harder to use. Easy to tote but otherwise more challenging. Not shocking. 6x9 was really soooo easy compared to 135. Deja vu all over again ;-)

Retina Loc: Near Charleston,SC

The main reasons I will buy a mirrorless camera is for less vibration, silent exposures, and easier manual focus, all reasons I occasionally use my old bridge cameras when a DSLR just won't do.

nikonbrain Loc: Crystal River Florida

Comparing a D60 to an Sony A7R M3 is like comparing a Duck to a Buffalo....Compare a recent nikon like a D 850 to the A7R M3 you won't see any difference to matter even printing 10 feet long ....and if half the "photographers" here were a tenth as good as any camera they own there would be a lot more Professional Photographers making a living at it ...A great Photographer can make a great image with any camera put in their hands ....

photoman43

I shoot right now with three Nikon DSLRs and a host of Nikon lenses from 20mm to 500mm.

I have no plans right now to convert to a mirrorless system as my current Nikon DSLRs are more than adequate to meet my photo needs. Given that I use a lot of tele lenses for nature, I would not get much weight savings by substituting a mirrorless body for a DSLR body as most of the weight is in the lenses.

If I were to go mirrorless, I would likely stay with Nikon as all of my Nikon lenses can be used with the Nikon FTZ mount adapter. I do not have to by any new Nikon S mount lenses unless I wanted to.

Before you buy anything new from anyone, make sure it fits a real need that you have.

Go here for more good info on mirrorless cameras:

https://www.sansmirror.com/

Verryl

They are on the expensive side, but I bought my Panasonic Lumix G9 specifically for the in-camera focus stacking function. I have not used it on small objects (insects), but to take wide DOF photos on the twelve 40 to 60 foot long benches, and I generally take them hand held. The 5 axis stabilization on both the camera and each lens is good enough to take the 1 sec it takes to capture the 30 or so images to be stacked in camera if I am standing comfortably and not reaching awkwardly. The color and detail (sharpness) is superior to my old D80 and D7000 Nikons. I do not use the movie functions, and there are many other handy new features. I got the Leica 12-60mm lens and the Leica 100-400 lens. I only use my Nikons to take pictures of the Lumix.

Verryl

Verryl

I think you would be correct that a newer camera with a larger sensor would take better pictures than a newer 4/3 sensor, but my newer Lumix G9 4/3 mirrorless is much better than either my older Nikon D80 or D7000. It stands to reason that sensors may have improved in 4+ years. Obviously the overall quality and cost of either design (mirrorless vs DLSR) would be a factor for same-vintage cameras.

Verryl

jaycoffman Loc: San Diego

Just my experience--you can read about the technical differences. From my experience, pluses and minuses, the switch was worth it.

I shot with a Nikon d7100 (crop frame) for years using both Nikon and Tamron lenses. I really liked that camera but it got heavy, I was having issues with low light shots and I felt my image quality (IQ) was not what I wanted.

So I sold everything and switched to the Sony a7iii (full frame mirrorless) and went with Sony lenses so far. First the negative. (1) The weight is about the same. (2) I have not made up for the telephoto which I shoot a lot. (3) The learning curve for Sony menus is steep and I have not completely mastered it although I have mostly gotten what I want. (4) I'm not sure that I have completely mastered the focus options.

Positive. (1) When I get everything right the IQ is noticeably better. (Like someone else commented--I noticed a couple of people on safari who were using mirrorless and their images were better than my Nikon.) (2) Low light is significantly better and on most trips I shoot a significant amount in low light. (3) When I get the focus right it's really amazing. (4) The weight hasn't put me off . . . yet. (5) I enjoy challenges and learning the new system has really gotten me interested again .

So overall I am glad I made the change. After selling the Nikon and lenses buying the Sony was not a horrible outlay of cash but it was significant. I just have two lenses now (Sony FE 4/24-105 G OSS and Sony FE 4.5-5.6/70--300 G OSS). At 300mm full frame I miss my crop frame with a 400mm lens so it will cost me money and weight to deal with that.

Hope this gives you some insight into my experience and things to think about.