DMF

My wife is an experienced photographer currently using a Nikon 750. Looking for a mirrorless camera, weight has become very important, these typically do not go together any better than price. We do make large prints. While we have only owned Nikons, making the change to mirrorless makes changing manufacturer easier. All guidance and ideas will help my search. Thanks, Doug

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

As soon as you say, "weight has become very important", this usually means you should consider downsizing to either APS-C or 4/3rds. I will let others talk about APS-C. 4/3rds will save you the most in size, weight, and cost. The upper end lenses of Olympus and Panasonic are not cheap. But there are several bodies and lenses that will give you a weatherproof and dustproof system that either new or used will not set you back a whole lot of money compared to the same system in APS-C or FF. My best suggestion for a combination is an E-M5 body (original, mkII, or mkIII) with the 12-100 f4 Pro IS lens (24-200 in 35mm terms). This is a very hard combination to beat from a size, weight, cost, and versatility point of view. And there are both lighter and cheaper combinations of both Olympus and Panasonic that may or may not fit your needs better. But the combination I have mentioned is a very good starting point for 4/3rds. You will have over 110 lenses to choose from (either Olympus, Panasonic, or third party; all 4/3rds lenses are interchangeable for basic functions). Some of the phenomenal lenses possible are Olympus 300 f4 Pro IS (600 in 35mm terms), 100-400 Olympus and Panasonic (200-800 in 35mm terms), and the new (and expensive) 150-400 f4.5 Pro IS X1.25 (300-800 in 35mm terms, 375-1000 with teleconverter turned on). But there are also lenses like the 14-150 f4-5.6 that produces very good image quality for a reasonably low price. As long as you do not need prints larger that 30X40, this camera system has the potential to meet your needs.

DMF

4/3rds appears to be growing in popularity rapidly, your reference to print size is very helpful. I have noted the square format, maybe a challenge vs the "35mm" shape. Sincerely appreciate your effort listing the available options with comments, certainly gives me a head start. Thanks, Doug

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

If your wife is used to a FF, then the only real way to reduce weight substantially is to move to a smaller format, as it’s the lenses that drive the weight. Going to a mirrorless FF is just not going to give her a substantial reduction. I think that for many, going all the way from FF down to M43 may be a very large compromise in high ISO low light performance if she does any substantial amount of low light work. I’m faced with a similar issue having recently developed a shoulder problem that makes holding up an almost 6 lb FF with a grip and a 70-200 f2.8 really painful.

I’ve found that the Fuji APS system is an excellent answer. Roughly half the weight for equivalent lens performance, 24 MP resolution and very usable with minimal noise at ISO 6400 or even above, and importantly, I can shoot it comfortably one handed. I would recommend taking a look at the new Fuji X-T4 and equivalent lenses. I think you’ll find the ergonomics superb, the sharpness, color rendition, DR and noise of their sensor is excellent, and Fuji XF series lenses are the equivalent in IQ to the best that Nikon or Canon offers. And I doubt you will see much difference in the IQ of any of your shots compared to the D750, but you will certainly notice the size and weight difference.

DMF

When you say "handling with one hand" and "half the weight" encouraging. Thanks for your input. Doug

Ched49 Loc: Pittsburgh, Pa.

Since your wife is familiar with Nikon's feature set, it might be a good idea to look at Nikon's mirrorless Z cameras. Why change brands if you don't have too.

DMF

Is the lens weight significantly different for mirrorless cameras?

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

You may find this DR chart of the D750, Fuji-XT3 and Oly E M5 instructive. The source, Photons to Photos, also has a tabulation below the chart showing relative High ISO/low noise performance. As expected, in general, each reduction in format size costs about a stop in DR and high ISO performance.

JBruce Loc: Northern MN

*Square*, is just one of the options. It is easy to shoot in a 2 x 3 format or 16 x 9 or square. I have been using Olympus em5-2 and em1-2 for several years along witth a variety of Olympus and Panasonic lenses, and love the system. John

DMF

When reading about the 4/3 the "square" image is used. Are guidelines for the other formats available in the view finder? I always fill the frame.

JBruce Loc: Northern MN

DMF, I'm not sure about any visible guidelines, I only use the full sized 4 x 3 and then crop in post as needed, if needed. The square format was probably the authors preference for his own reasons. John

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

Some further reference for you as to the higher costing lenses if you shoot wildlife. The 300 f4 Pro IS (I have this one; see Image Resource's review of it) is $2900, on sale for $2750 right now. It is 8.94" X 3.67" dia., 2.8 lbs. w/o tripod collar. The comparable Canon is $13,000, 17.6" X 6.6" dia., and 6.7 lbs. The comparable Nikon is $12,300, 15.2" X 5.5" dia., and 6.8 lbs. If one wanted to go "whole hog" for wildlife, which of the three lenses is the most affordable for the same angle of view? To be fair, there are differences in DOF and ISO abilities between FF, APS-C, and 4/3rds. But for most of us 4/3rds users, the differences are not enough for us to take on the extra size, weight, and cost. Most of the Pro Olympus lenses are under $1500 and most of the non-Pro lenses are under $1000. The 14-150 f4/5.6 is $500 right now and there are several UHHers that use that specific lens quite successfully. The 4/3rds system is quite good. But be aware that it will not meet everyone's needs. Hopefully it will meet your needs.

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

If she want to go mirrorless with lower weight and bulk, and she wants to stay with Nikon, the Nikon Z50 is looking like a great camera, and with the FTZ (F mount To Z mount) adapter, she can use all of her current Nikon lenses without loss of performance. The Z50 is APS-C and the Z5 is full frame.

If switching brands entirely is ok, she might also consider the Sony A6xxx line of crop sensor cameras. The top line is the A6600 and would serve her well. Just know that the good Sony lenses aren’t cheap by a long shot, but it’s hard to beat the Sony G Master series. The A6xxx series will save her a lot of weight and bulk.

That said, I agree heartily with the M 4/3 systems recommendations.

sueyeisert Loc: New Jersey

I switched from Nikon to Fuji x-pro 2 and my friend chose the Fuji XT-2. The transition was easy. You hardly need to read the manual. We are both very pleased.

Flickwet Loc: NEOhio

Lifelong Nikon user here, I moved into M4/3 with the Olympus system in a serendipitous manner. After some time I moved back to Nikon again. I still have Oly's for IR and portability but, they are not my primary cameras.
Because:
I found the handling confusing,
I found battery life as always an issue,
All my Oly's have required significant repairs, shutters and sensors (focus).

Size and weight wise I find carrying a D7*** reliably sufficient, I could see getting a D5600 if you needed a lighter DSLR.
No question if I were the OP I would look into the Nikon mirrorless system. My next purchase will likely have me getting the Z50 with the FTZ adapter.

Old dogs, new tricks, and always horses for courses.