Boney Loc: Huntington Beach

I would like some input regarding mirror-less cameras versus our old reliable DSLR friends. I am 81 and physically going slowly down hill. I own a D7000 and a D300E. My walk around lenses are an 18-300mm for the D7000 and a 28-300mm for the D800E. I have many other lenses but these are left on these cameras. As time goes on I am getting weaker and a little shakier. My main reason for personally moving to mirror-less is to end up with a capable system but much lighter than my present systems.
From what I can tell the weight issue is not a big one, the mirror-less system are still fairly heavy. The image stability is now in the camera and it functions by moving the focal plane rather than some element in the lenses. What about focusing? With the mirror-less system does one totally depend on the built in auto focus for all focusing, or can one focus using the LCD viewing screen, similarly to the penta-prism finder? Can you see the image well enough to focus sharply with it? Since the image stabilization is in the camera shouldn't all lenses now be much or at least somewhat less expensive? They don't appear to be cheaper. Now this could be due to the cost of developing a new line of lenses.
With just these features being a little different I don't see a big advantage moving to the mirror-less world over what I now own.
If some of you folks with mirror-less can give me some feedback I would greatly appreciate.
I often end up shooting in situations that only a DSLR could accommodate, such as shooting through a different optical system, i.e. telescopes, microscopes and really different optical situations.
If most of ones shooting is outside, how well does using an LCD screen work out for you. I have trouble using them in bright sunlight, i.e. my mobile phone. Hard to focus using the screen under these circumstances..

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

I would stick with what you have.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Keep in mind 35mm-based cameras and lenses are your largest and heaviest option. The DX cameras are smaller, but not by much. The mirrorless bodies tend to be more compact (physically smaller) but not so much lighter in weight. If you're in an area you can try handling the Nikon Z50, you can assess if a DX-style mirrorless will really make a difference in size & weight for your needs. If that shop also has examples of micro 4/3 options from Panasonic / Lumix or Olympus, see if that change makes the size / weight change you need.

Consider too pocket models that are IBIS enabled, fit-in-your-pants-pocket size, and take great images with lots of options for movable screens and zoom ranges across the several Canon and Sony models.

For outdoors, a mirrorless camera with a view finder lets you review your images within the EVF (electronic view finder) just like you can only compose your shots today on a DSLR.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

If your current camera meets your needs and provides images that you like, why change?
Are you well acquainted with your current camera also?

Mine does, so I'm not, but everyone is different.

(I don't do sales hype, nor peer pressure.)
Now there is a particular camera that I'd like to get, maybe, but I don't need it.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

I recently met a man who went to a 1" sensor bridge camera to make things lighter and not have to carry a lot of gear while still getting good image quality that can be printed at wall hanging size.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Quixdraw Loc: x

The key question, Do you want to learn a new camera? I enjoy the process, on a new camera or a "new to me" old one. A couple of years ago, I was given a little Leica D Lux. Small, highly capable with a built in zoom. Not pocketable, unless you have Big pockets, I use it mostly in the city when I don't care to carry a bag. You might consider something like that. I still have and use my other Nikons.

hpucker99 Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

You might want to look into the mirrorless cameras for APS-C sensors (Nikon, Canon, Fujo. etc.) or the micro 4/3 systems from Olympus and Panasonic.

DaveyDitzer Loc: Western PA

Boney,
Chg_Canon has pretty much nailed it. It's the lenses mostly. The Nikon D5600 (crop) body is about 16oz. The DX 16-80 lens is about 16 oz. The D5600 body is comfortable to hold. I recently got a Zfc MILC and it's 14oz. The 16-50 kit lens is only about 4oz and the Nikon Z 50-250 lens is 14.2 oz. That's about as light a kit as you can get before going to a bridge or compact camera. Caution on the Zfc, I use mine with a paracord wrist strap because there's not much body to hold on to and sometimes my aged fingers are not 100% reliable. I use a Nikon P7800 for a really lightweight camera. It's a 1" sensor and shoots RAW. You have to decide how light to go for what you want to shoot.

Mark Sturtevant Loc: Grand Blanc, MI

No experience with mirrorless, but Ive been doing lots of research on them. I agree with quixdraw, especially if you really want to see what a significantly lighter camera can do for you. You might also consider one of the Olympus micro-4/3 cameras. Surely, that will be pretty light. Mirrorless and with a small sensor, it won't take much of a lens to have the effective reach of your 300mm lens. Those little cameras are packed with features. They have image stabilization in both body and lens, and they can be used together to get very good stabilization. At least one of the models has a special star tracking feature where the sensor gradually pivots during a long exposure. This to take pictures of the night sky while avoiding star trails (!)

This could be a big decision, whatever you choose. Trying out a system by renting it for a time is a good option, and lens rental companies make it very easy. I know the one called LensRentals also offers a Buy It option, and from my one-time experience with that it was cheaper than any used model for what I wound up buying.

Johanna Loc: Albuquerque, NM

I’m in my nineties and still use my D850 and the Holy Grail set of lenses. However I also bought the Nikon Z50 kit with a 16-50mm , 50-250mm, carry case, memory chip, battery charger and FTZ mount adapter for about $1200 when it first came out. I am pleased with it as a carry around/travel camera. I was on board a ship just east of South America and ordered it from b&h. Wonders what communications are possible!

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

My “primary” camera is a FF Canon, which, with a grip and a 70-200 f 2.8 weighs almost 6lbs. A friend, who is a pro and shoots a FF Nikon for work, is always carrying a Fuji for pleasure. The Fuji X-T2 (APS-C) weighs half the FF for equivalent lenses and gives up a stop of low light/high ISO performance compared to the FF (which was as much as I was willing to compromise). Other than the low light performance, the images from the Fuji are just as good, and the lens quality is a match for anything from Canon, Nikon or Sony. I find that I’m picking up the Fuji more and more...

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

Stay well Johanna and keep shooting.Have fun.

Bill_de Loc: US

If you want light, the Nikon Z50 (a DX body) 2 lens kit is light and does a nice job. The 2 lenses, 16-50 and 50-250mm, give you the equivalent range of 24 to 375mm. It might be worth buying one from a store that has a 30 day return policy. You might just like it.

They are, like everything else, on back order.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1511295-REG/nikon_1632_z_50_mirrorless_digital.html

There is also the new retro look Z fc with similar specs to the Z50. It is a little smaller and lighter with no built in hand grip. A one lens kit:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1649280-REG/nikon_unix_description_zfc_mirrorless.html

--

rlv567 Loc: Baguio City, Philippines

Quote:

"My main reason for personally moving to mirror-less is to end up with a capable system but much lighter than my present systems."