Flickwet Loc: NEOhio

I’m with you, two reverse shoulder replacements, one worked well, I went to M43 yes it’s lighter, I found the haptics underwhelming to the point that I went back to Nikon. I like labeled switches. Even the em-1 was annoying

jtwind

I had a Sony a7ii, very nice camera, it was my first full frame. Depends on what sort of photography you do, I do mostly landscapes and moved to a a7iii, not a major difference for me. As for weight it is lighter than most DSLR's that will do what it will do, the real weight is often the lens. With that lens it'll be a pretty light package. I mostly use a sony 24-70 f2.8 and it's roughly the same size and weight as the DSLR lens. So overall not a huge savings. My sony a6300 is a different story and is great for travel and carrying around a city.

pinsonb

I have the Sony camera you are looking at and really do like it. It is considerably lighter than the Canon I was using. I also have the Sony 6000, but my 7II will definitely be my go to. I purchased the 55 mm f/1.8 lens and could not nbe more pleased with the image quality straight out of the camera. In my opinion, you can't go wrong.

gsnelson Loc: Western Maryland

I am 75 years old and have some serious back problems, so I always choose my Sony A7ii over my Nikon D850 when I go for a long day of shooting. Both cameras are excellent at producing the results I want, but the Sony is so much less bulky that it is the obvious choice. I can adapt Nikon lenses to the Sony, though the adapter does add some extra weight. I bought a Fuji XT2, but its results were not what I was looking for, so I gave it to my son, who loves it.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Yes, I have the Fuji X-T2 also, but to be honest I just could not imagine not having a battery grip on the camera, I found the body without the grip to be uncomfortably small, it also helps with balancing larger lenses.

traderjohn Loc: New York City

I hear ya.

zug55 Loc: Naivasha, Kenya, and Austin, Texas

I think that researching the specs on the B&H web site is a great idea--I have been advocating that here before.

However, the facts in this case are a bit different. The A7 II is significantly lighter than the EOS 5DIII. Here are the comparisons with comparable 24-105mm f/4 zoom lenses. The Sony package is 436g lighter--that is just short of one pound. In other words, the Canon package weighs 35% more than the corresponding Sony package. The point is: both mirrorless camera body and lens are significantly lighter.

Canon 5d III: 860g
Canon EF 24-105mm F4L IS II USM: 795g
Total weight: 1,655g

Sony A7 II: 556g
Sony FE 24-105mm F4 G OSS: 663g
Total weight: 1,219g

The Sony 24-70mm f/4 weighs 426g; the total package is 982g.

The fact is that not only mirrorless cameras but also comparable mirrorless lenses are usually lighter than their DSLR counterparts. There are exceptions, of course. The Sigma Art lenses for Sony weigh as much as those for Canon or Nikon because it is the same lens. But newer lenses constructed for mirrorless cameras tend to weigh less.

This is particularly true for pro-level prime lenses. Examples are the Sony GM 24mm f/1.4 at 445g, the Sony/Zeiss 55mm f/2 at 281g or the five lenses in the Zeiss Batis series.

jaycoffman Loc: San Diego

Last week I introduced almost exactly the same topic (not to chastise you but just to show this is a topic of increasing interest to a lot of us). I was hoping to reduce weight and size of my d7100 and lenses and to improve low light performance. After many thoughtful replies and a trip to the local camera store to hold both the Nikon Z6 and the Sony a7iii I became more confused.

First I realized quickly that I wasn't going to gain much in weight reduction--specially with the Nikon Z6 which I have now rejected for a number of reasons. I also realized how much reach I'd lose unless I was willing to spend quite a bit more money and if I did I'd still have a heavy camera and lens. I think I would have gained a little bit in IQ (though my IQ is pretty good on my d7100) and I would also get improved low light performance.

My conclusion is that if I want to change to mirrorless I need to reassess what I need in a camera and whether I want to change my approach to photography just a little bit. I'm not sure of the answer but I no longer believe I will get a significant weight reduction in going mirrorless unless I start using a shorter lens.

The 28-70 lens B&H is offering as part of the package gets pretty good reviews for a kit lens. I'm not quite sure what that means in real life. I am still considering changing but am also considering just getting a high quality shorter zoom lens for my d7100 and keeping my longer lenses for special occasions (like safaris).

Here's a pretty good comparison between the a7ii and the a7iii. It is quite complementary of the a7ii so it may be of interest to you. Good luck finding the right system.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOf8Ccpbl6E

xt2 Loc: British Columbia, Canada

Here we go again. I have a “ton” of Nikon FF gear. It’s in the closet because, my several Fuji bodies and lenses are significantly lighter and more compact with one lens as an exception, the 80MM Macro is big and as heavy as my Nikon 24-70 MM. other than that lens, any combo in the Fuji lineup is so much lighter and compact. IQ, I actually prefer the JPEG engine/product of the Fuji. As a bonus, the amount of time in front of a computer has been reduced by at least 75% in post. All in all, a winning combo that is fun to use with visceral dials vs menu-driven systems that orphans my FF Nikon gear. Smaller sensor, smaller/lighter gear that in this case is fun to use and has reignited my interest in the hobby. Hope you experience similar results!

Cheers!

xt2 Loc: British Columbia, Canada

In fairness, I didn’t really answer your question. Yes, I tried the Sony. I didn’t buy it. Great camera, however, there were a couple of issues for me. It is not small or light enough for me to swap the Nikon gear. I prefer the IQ of Fuji. I prefer dials to menu driven systems. In my opinion (purely subjective), Sony tends to replace hardware often rendering hardware that has a short life span. Others such as Oly and Fuji for instance, offer a comprehensive updating program via free firmware improvements that maintain improved operation and resale value of their hardware.

Hope this helps.

Cheers!

Smudgey Loc: Ohio, Calif, Now Arizona

Weight difference is no longer a major reason to buy a mirrorless camera, I bought the Canon EOS R and it is smaller than my old DSLR, but it is indeed smaller and much easier to handle.

RosiArt

Yes, I replaced all of my Canon gear which comprised a 5D MkIII and many L lenses, with the Sony RX-10 IV, and now by "kit" weighs a bit under 2.5 lbs. and has a range of 24mm-600mm at 2.4-4.0. All of the rating are very favorable.

a6k Loc: Detroit & Sanibel

I, too, resent that and similar comments on previous threads about the weight of cameras. Getting old and/or infirm is reality for many. Wanting a lighter and/or smaller rig is valid and being told to get stronger is disrespectful.

markngolf Loc: Bridgewater, NJ

I'll be 82 in a month. It is not that I cannot handle the weight, but I did not yet replace my 5D MIII, 7D MII & lenses. I have exclusively used the RX10 IV since purchasing in July. It is extremely more convenient than lugging 40 lbs of equipment for my photography needs. Still learning the Sony and have considered selling the Canon equipment, but I'll wait until I am sure it is the right move for me.
Mark

User ID

Yup. Every time I think I just might lug my
[not so huge] SLR, with one lens, I feel it on
my shoulder and swap it for my a7-II before
get out the door. Feels MUCH better !

OTOH, like many who have mentioned m43,
if I really wanna take it easy, I just start out
with my m/43 and one, or occasionally two,
lenses.

Here's m43 at ISO 12800, a GX7 ... not the
newer GX8 or latest GX9, IOW "Olde Tecke".
All shot as jpegs ... no raw files for applying
advanced tech-noise reduction apps. IOW if
you're not as lazy as me, you could do a lot
better, not that I have any complaint about
what I get from jpegs.

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)