ychow8

Olympus OMD EM1 Mkii or Mk iii
with Oly m.zuiko 12-100 or 12-200mm.
Excellent light system

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

I totally agree... 12-100 is super sharp and equiv. to 24-200 in FF. EM1 MKii would be a dream match. If I did not already have the 12-40 I would be sporting the 12-100. Don't let the M43 format throw you off; an excellent system.

bebop22 Loc: New York City

I have had the Sony RX10MK3 for a couple of years and she does a great job and with shooting RAW I can get 13 x 19" blow ups. They will soon be coming out with the RX10MK5 so wait and see.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

You didn't tell us what Nikon camera(s) you've been using, so we can't compare potential image quality. I am guessing the Nikon DSLR(s) you've used are APS-C format, since an 18-200mm lens is almost certainly designed for that format. AFAIK none is made for full frame (there are other wide range zooms for FF, such as 28-300, 24-240mm, etc.)

18mm on APS-C is roughly equivalent to 24mm on full frame. 200mm on APS-C is roughly equal to 300mm on full frame. Why is this important? Well, if you go with a "bridge" camera... a camera with a viewfinder and a non-interchangeable lens... their lenses are commonly marketed with "full frame equivalent" focal lengths. This is because that type of camera uses a wide range of different sensor sizes... APS-C, Micro 4./3, 1", 1/2.3" and 1/3", so the manufacturers state the zoom range in FF equivalent to be able to compare them with each other. The actual focal lengths are stated in the specs and with the cameras that use the smallest sensors, in particular, are often a great deal less than the commonly used FF equivalent. Again, this is done to "fool you", but is done to allow comparison across all those different sensor formats.

Some sellers use "35mm equivalent" instead of "full frame equivalent" (in case you are unaware, so-called full frame cameras use a sensor that's approx. 24x36mm, which was the most common format used on 35mm film).

There are a variety of "bridge" cameras with non-interchangeable lenses that might come close to meeting your needs. The reason I am pointing you toward them is because they have a viewfinder, which I suspect any DSLR user will prefer over the often frustrating experience having to always use the cameras rear LCD screen to compose your images.

Something to keep in mind with "bridge" cameras is the larger sensors tend to have fairly narrow zoom ranges (such as 24-70mm FF equivalent), while the "super zoom" type (such as 24-3000mm) have tiny little sensors. The larger sensors make for better image quality and more usable higher ISOs.

Based upon the above criteria (viewfinder, 22/24/25mm to 200/250mm zoom range) I drilled down on the B&H Photo website and only find four cameras remain: two Panasonic and two Sony. They all appear to use 1" sensors and are all 21MP (might even all use the same sensor, since Sony sells them to many other camera manufacturers). Prices range from $400 to almost $1300:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/products/Point-Shoot-Digital-Cameras/ci/8612/N/4288586279?filters=fct_a_features_1123%3Aviewfinder-built-in%2Cfct_cameras-kits_7135%3Acameras-only%2Cfct_fixed-lens-zoom-lens_7220%3Azoom-lens-cameras%2Cfct_telephoto-35mm-equiv_4088%3A200mm%7C250mm%2Cfct_wide-angle-35mm-equiv_4080%3A22mm%7C24mm%7C25mm

Note that these cameras all have their viewfinders off to the lefthand side, rather than the centered viewfinder "hump" typically found on SLRs and DSLRs. Some people like this arrangement, others do not.

Search for reviews on the above models if they interest you.

I don't know what DSLR cameras and lenses you use now, so cannot say if the image quality these cameras produce will come close. The sensor is much smaller than an APS-C DSLR's. The 1" sensor has an area of 116 square millimeters. By comparison, a Nikon APS-C sensor is around 370 square millimeters. As a result, 21 million pixel sites on the APS-C sensor can be much larger and less crowded than 21 million pixel sites on that 1" sensor. The smaller, more crowded pixel sites cannot capture as much fine detail and are much more prone to digital noise.

I would highly recommend you also consider one of the APS-C or Micro 4/3 mirrorless cameras with a viewfinder (just as with the non-interchangeable lens cameras, there are some mirrorless models that don't offer a viewfinder

An APS-C or M4/3 mirrorless would still give you option to change lenses if you wish, but can be nearly as compact and lightweight as the "bridge" cameras with a non-interchangeable lens.

Some examples of these mirrorless with a viewfinder are:

Canon M50 Mark II (APS-C, 24MP)
Canon M6 Mark II (32.5MP), accessory viewfinder that's sold separately.
Nikon Z50 or Ffc (both APS-C, 21MP)
Sony a6600 or a6400 (both APS-C, 24MP)
Fuji S-10 or XT-3 (both APS-C, 26MP)
Olympus OMD-EM10 Mark IV (Micro 4/3, 20MP)
Panasonic DC-G9 (Micro 4/3, 20MP)

You might be able to find exactly the lens you want: 18-200mm. It depends upon the system. There isn't one like that in the Canon or Nikon systems. Canon offers a kit with EF-M 15-45mm and 55-200mm lenses. I included the Canon M6 Mark II above, even though it doesn't have a built in viewfinder, because is has an exceptionally high resolution sensor and there's an optional viewfinder available for it. Nikon offers a kit with 16-50mm and 50-250mm lenses. I'll leave it to you to explore the Sony, Fuji, Oly and Panasonic systems, if interested.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

Since you are changing systems, I would suggest looking at both APS-C and 4/3rds. 4/3rds will save you the most in size, weight, and cost.

I own an Olympus 4/3rds system. If I was ending my Nikon system and looking for the smallest most image stabilized system, I would look at Olympus if I did mostly still photography. And Panasonic if I did mostly still/video. Assuming still photography (Nikon is not know to be bought for video work), I would look at Olympus.

You are in luck. Olympus has a 12-100 f4 Pro IS lens (24-200 in 35mm terms, close to your requirement; it also can do 1/2 lifesize close-ups) and the E-M1 mkIII will offer you 8 stops of dual image stabilization. There are two menu systems in the Olympus. The easiest way to use the camera is the Super Control Panel. Double click the back "OK" button, select what you want to change, change it, and start shooting. The scroll menu can then be learned at your leisure. The easiest is way to expand the system would be to buy either the Olympus 7-14 f2.8 Pro lens or Panasonic 7-14 f4 lens and the Olympus 100-400 f5/6.3 lens or the Panasonic 100-400 f4/6.3 lens. This system would give you a 35mm angle of view of 14mm to 800mm and all handholdable, weatherproof, and dust proof. It is able to do high resolution handheld shots of 80mp RAW/50mp JPEG photos under certain conditions. And has built-in "neutral density" filtration.

The size of the 12-100 is 3.05 dia. x 4.59 and 1.23 pounds. The E-M1 mkIII is 5.28 X 3.58 X 2.71 and 1.28 pounds (with battery and memory card). No tripod needed, no rain gear need, and only 2.51 pounds of camera system to carry.

Check out the websites of the likes of Jay Dickman,
Larry Price, and Thomas Stirr. That will give you an idea of what 4/3rds is capable of. If size and weight are what you want to lose without a major loss in image quality, Olympus and Panasonic are worth the look.

DonVA Loc: British Columbia and New Mexico

Take a look at the Panasonic Lumix FZ1000M2 mirrorless. It has a nice sharp integrated 24-400 Leica lens, not as wide as you wanted but lots of reach. All the usual features (IS, wifi, touch screen, 4k video etc.) and so light that at first it feels cheesy cheap. You soon find out it's not. About $1000 CD in Canada.

Doc Mck Loc: Terrell,Texas

Sony RX10 mk 4. You won’t be disappointed. I bought mine on eBay at a discount. Had been used very little. Allegedly on one vacation trip and not brought out again. 24-600 mm zeiss lens. Very versatile. And seemingly durable.

bobfitz Loc: Kendall-Miami, Florida

Rembrandt could have painted a masterpiece with a tooth brush. There is far too much emphasis in gear and too little on vision and talent.

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

Is this not the model Gene recommends ? If so, it would deserve a GOOD look.

Doc Mck Loc: Terrell,Texas

. Not sure who Gene is. Rx10 mk 4 considered by many to be best bridge camera available, albeit, the most expensive. If interested, I’d recommend a used one on eBay with low shutter count. Unless, money is no object. I’ve been very successful with eBay purchases. That is where I got mine. $1300 in 2020. At Amazon, $$1600-$1700 new.

forbescat

I have a CoolpixP950 in addition to my D850. The attached picture was taken with the Coolpix with some minor post processing. The Coolpix is a breeze to use but not great for motion or long distances. It is light with fingertip adjustments. My arthritic joints love it but I do switch back to my D850 at times.

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

Gene 51... one of the really knowledgeable and credible members on this forum... I would trust his judgement on anything photographic.

Scruples Loc: Brooklyn, New York

I don’t shoot Nikon;I’m a Canon kid.
Without knowing you finances or how much you wish to earn or even what equipment and gear you have, I would like to make a suggestion.
Rather than selling stuff, how about donating it to a nearby high school. I have done it and I’m happy I did. After all, we are going to need a new generation of photographers. I can be privately messaged for any questions.

Bruce K

Sad to hear you’re leaving the Nikon family. I purchased the Sony 24-600 bridge camera model IV and it has performed quite well.

joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA

Awesome and beautiful composition
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐