mizzee Loc: Boston,Ma

I completely agree with trying out the Olympus! I’m of comparable age and ditched all my beloved Nikon gear for it. I’ve never looked back. I use the camera more, I get better results and the PITA factor is gone, gone, gone. Some say it’s slower than Nikon or canon, it’s not.

grandpaw

I use a Nikon D500 with the Tamron 150-600mm and really like it but if it is too heavy a couple of people I know have the Nikon Coolpix P900 and the lens on it goes from 24 to 2000 mm. It is definitely not the quality of a DSLR but it it is light, takes great pictures and is very reasonably priced. It all depends on what you are looking for. It is very light has phenomenal range and very affordable.

Blair Shaw Jr Loc: Dunnellon,Florida

Gort55 Loc: Northern Colorado

david vt Loc: Vermont

Lots of options for you. Here is my set

- as @billnikon said, keep the 5500. Good crop camera. 24mp and light weight, which is one of your primary concerns. The 1.5 CF you are getting with it will help with reach
-if weight is a factor, stay with DX glass. Yes, the quality may be slightly less than the equivalent FF, but the trade-off for weight may be worth it for you
-your current two lens have no overlap. I find this a bit restrictive. You may want to consider more of a superzoom. Tamron makes a 18-200 and a 18-400. They have been mentioned a lot in past threads, though I have no experience with them personally. Might be a good all around lens. You can search past threads here for opinions, and try one by rental. You could trade in current lens to help offset cost
-wildlife. Definitely need reach. As @cng-canon noted, a 1.4TC on a compatible lens might be good for you. If you are out walking, easier to carry a TC than a whole other lens. The extra reach of a 1.4TC on a your CF will about double the lens applied to. I carried my 200 on a D7200 with a 1.4 up MT Washington in NH. Weight was key for the several thousand vertical climb, and that was worth it, for that event
-one note on the TC. The 1.4 will normally steal a stop of light (at least Nikons). Be careful of the max aperture at the long end of a zoom to make sure AF will still work

I am not saying the are not trade-offs, and weight is certainly one of the big ones. Only you can decide where the balance lies. You could go mirrorless and like save more, but I didn’t want to spend too much of your money.

MrPhotog

Sounds like your issue is with the weight.

Longer lenses are always going to be heavy. They have a lot of metal in that long tube, to start with. There are some things you can look at to reduce some of the weight, though.

Lenses with smaller maximum apertures usually have smaller size. Less glass, so less metal around it. They also tend to be less expensive.

Non zoom lenses, or ‘prime’ lenses, typically have fewer pieces of glass and no added metal inside for shifting the position of those extra lens elements As you vary the focal length.

Older lens designs (not strictly a ‘telephoto’ design) use fewer elements, and sometimes are lighter. Let me explain that: a single lens, like a magnifying glass, or eyeglass lens, has a focal length based on the shape it is ground to. It could be 50 mm, or it could be 1000 mm. If it was made of two elements which corrected for color aberrations at two wave lengths of light, it would be an ‘achromat’ lens, as most precision lenses are.

The focal length is the distance from the lens to the sensor or film when focused at infinity. Focus on something closer and the lens moves away from the sensor, so the barrel, tube, lens mount or bellows has to extend.

Here is where it gets tricky. Optical trickery.
Some smart people found a way to add more glass and get the magnification of a 500 mm lens, but with the lens physically closer to the film (this was back in the days of film). They called their designs ‘telephoto’ to distinguish them from the ‘long focus’ , and older/simpler, lens designs. Now we use the term telephoto for anything that gives us a bigger image, but there are plenty of older ‘long focus’ designs that can be found used. Some are truly excellent optics. For example, the Leitz Telyt 400, 560, and 800 mm lenses. These are two cemented elements mounted at the end of a long 2 piece tube, and as sharp as Leica lenses can be expected to be. Really top quality in a simple design. Because the tube is mostly just a tube there have been a lot of these lenses adapted to Nikon and Canon (and other brands) mounts. What you give up is auto focus and automatic aperture. For most people that is a lot to give up.

At the other end of the price (and quality) spectrum, in the 1970s there were lots of inexpensive 400 mm f/8 and f/6.8 lenses being imported in the then popular ‘T’ mount. A ‘T’ mount adapter ring let you use these on any camera brand. Again, no auto anything in features. Several months ago I saw a box of these (various brands-basically identical) at Roberts Photo in downtown Indianapolis for $10 each. I didn’t see them listed on line, though.

Remember my comment on telephoto lenses? Well, some more smart optical designers realized they could take just the glass and with a few tweaks adapt ANY lens to be a telephoto lens. And then we had teleadapters. Those are still on the market and you might want to look into them.

The typical teleadapter goes between your prime lens and your camera. It intercepts the focused light from the prime lens and spreads it out over twice, 4-times or 8-times the area, giving an apparently larger image It is as if the focal length of you lens is magnified by 1.4, 2, or 3 times. With a 135mm prime lens and a 2x teleconverter you would have the equivalent of a 270mm lens.

I’m the old days you lost a little optical quality (what would you expect from putting a $40 lens behind a $200 prime lens?), but now major lens companies make higher quality teleconverters, and some are matched to specific long lenses. In my opinion: They work better (usually) with single-focal length lenses rather than zooms.

Teleconverters designed for your lens mount should maintain autofocus and auto exposure on your camera. They weigh little.

Nice thing about teleconverters Is that the minimum focusing distance of the main lens stays the same. This can give some really dramatic close-ups with a macro lens, and let you use long focus of telephoto lenses on nearby objects.

Problem with the design of teleconverters is that because they take whatever light is coming through the main lens and spread it over a larger the image is proportionally dimmer. A 2x teleconverter gave you the equivalent of a 2 f/stop light loss. With film, that could be a problem. With digital you just kick up the exposure index on the camera. A 1.4x or 1.5x teleconverter would lose 1 f/stop.

Finally. a lot of the weight in your lens is the metal tube. With long lenses you can replace that with a lighter bellows. I haven’t checked to see if Novoflex is still in business, but they had a telephoto system which had a lot of faithful users. Interchangeable lens units were mounted to the end of a bellows. The bellows was mounted on a shoulder stock and could be adjusted by pulling a trigger-like mechanism for very rapid focusing. The weight was a bit less than a metal-tubed telephoto lens and (according to stories I heard) the system balanced nicely on that gunstock mount.

So 4 possible options for you to look into. Hope you find something (new or very old and very used) which fits your needs.

ronpier Loc: Poland Ohio

Definitely keep the D5500. It’s a great camera with wonderful IQ. If weight is an issue I would consider the Tamron 18-400. A great daily use lens that only weighs 1.55 lbs. Try it and see if you like it.

Electric Gnome Loc: Norwich UK

I have a D7100 crop and a D850 system. From what you say about being 68 and not in great shape I would stick with DX. I would also consider Z50 very small and light but limited lenses at the mo, or even a micro 4/3 system like Lumix. If you get the adaptor you a can use your current lenses with the Z50. Have a look at Jared Polin's review here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42uM-HcJPKY&t=15s

Canisdirus

If weight is the primary consideration ... ALL of the long lenses are heavy.
I'd suggest going Fuji and getting the Olympus 300mm f4 lens.
It will do all that you need ... and is considerably lighter....just over 3 pounds.
It will give you the reach of a 600mm ...with some caveats...there are always caveats...
It takes very sharp images and is considerably easier to shoot with than the big gun lenses made by anyone else.
When in doubt ... go with a prime...always.

olemikey Loc: 6 mile creek, Spacecoast Florida

Buy a couple little 3-to-8 LB workout weights and do a couple sessions a day, start with 5 minute workouts and work your way up....after a little time the camera and lens combos you've listed won't seem bad at all (weight wise), you will feel better and be in better shape for the years to come...better to start now than wait till you can't lift/carry/suport a rig weighting less than 8 lbs. I'm older than you and it works well for me - and you are going to want that 300-to-600 range. Pooh pooh me if you want, but a short workout session daily will help you in many ways. Good luck and good shooting!!

Josephakraig

When I had the 5500 I loved it. When I had the D300 I loved it, not enough to keep it though after seeing the 800. When I had the D800 I loved it. When I had the D810 I loved it. When I got the D850 I decided I would have it for life. It is heavy but takes unbelivable pictures. I also have the Tamron 150 to 600. I use it sometimes with a TC201, these are nearly usless with out a heavy tripod. I'm in my 70's and hate to carry the stuff around but when I get back and review my shots I find it was well worth the effort.

What camera you have is not the most important thing you have. Shot selection and knowing how to best use your camera/lens/tripod combination is VERY important. One thing I will say about the Nikon D810 and D850 is that they have ISO 64 which is the most wonderful feature I have ever had on a camera. Dynamic range at ISO 64 is about 15 stops on both cameras.

Full Frame will cost more than just the camera, new lenses will have to be purchased too. The reach is not significantly different between full Frame and cropped sensors, it is an apparent difference. If you crop the FF you get pretty much the same thing but your field of view is larger so you have more area to choose from when cropping. I'm glad I went to Full Frame but it was an expensive decision and it took me a few years to complete my kit.

photoman43

Another vote for the Nikon 300mm f4 with a 1.4xtc or the Nikon 500mm f5.6 pf. I have all and use them all the time on my D500 and D850. Stick with DX bodies for the extra reach of the crop sensor. If you need bigger buffer and faster fps, consider a D500. It is a wonderful camera and not that heavy. I am 77 and know where you are at age wise.

rcorne001 Loc: Cary, NC

Just curious, what about the D5500 has you considering a different body? That might alter the discussion a bit. Same with the type of sports and wildlife. Are you looking for "pro" quality or more of a walk around? Are you going to post mostly to some type of electronic medium or are you going to do some serious prints? That information might help with recommendations.

Paul Diamond Loc: Atlanta, GA, USA

I'm older than you. But age isn't everything. In 2019, planning a vacation to Yosemite, I decided to carry a heavy backpack (26lbs) and go on walks for 4-7 miles several times a week. I needed to build up my strength and stamina so I could walk around Yosemite with my camera gear. It worked. I dropped some weight, gained strength and stamina. I hope your health will allow you to build up your strength and stamina, which will benefit your life and your future, not just your photography.

I shoot with D800E and D850. Both are big and heavy cameras. They have a high learning curve compared to earlier, simpler cameras. Per your OP, not recommended. But, the smaller, lighter D500 might be great for wildlife, sports and active grandchildren that are important to you.

rangel28

I would recommend keeping the D5500 and adding a Nikon 300mm f4 PF, along with the Nikon 1.4 teleconverter (the ii or iii versions work fine with this lens). The 300mm f4 PF is a super light lens that pairs well with the teleconverter. The D850 is a great camera but it is larger and heavier. I also have been looking at the Sigma 100mm-400mm lens (not the Tamron) and have read good things about that lens.