The full frame version is my travel lens, resonably light, versatile and sharp. The DX version I have was a second kit lens with a D3400. It is amazingly light, small and very very fast focusing and sharp. Way better than I would expect. The focus is almost instant. Mine is the non VR model. The P model only works with really late models and some require firmware updates.

You have a really great set of lenses and a very decent camera, and like you mentioned several won't work on the FF cameras. If money means anything just stay with what you have. There are some advantages to FF but replacing your lens line would cost a lot. Just my take, and I use both.

There were not the computer electronics in old film cameras to keep count. We had to go by overall condition of a camera and just guess. I think people shoot much, much more with digital since we aren't paying on a per shot basis for film.

The Canon 40-2.8 and 24-2.8 are tiny gems that are very sharp, light and small. Since the camera is really small, I like to keep the lenses small, also.

The Canon 40-2.8 and 24-2.8 are tiny gems that are very sharp, light and small. Since the camera is really small, I like to keep the lenses small, also.

I use older legacy micro lenses which are plentiful and cheap. I adapt them using inexpensive adaptors. As long as the lens has an aperture ring they work great on Aperture priority mode. I don't even use autofocus on lenses that have AF when doing micro work. Nikon 50-2.8 and 3.5 micros are great. Minolta MD Rokkors in 50 or 100 mm also really good as are the Olympus OM series. Most of the lenses I have came from thrift stores for $10-$20 with original camera. Ebay is full of them at higher prices. Older lenses from the 50's on were designed to last a lifetime and are jewels even today. Put the Sony on A Mode, adjust the aperture, focus using the C3 button for more accuracy if needed and exposure is done automatically through the actual diaphram opening (stop down metering). My results compare favorably to the most expensive micro lenses available today...and it's fun using legacy glass! Sony cameras are awesome, but lens choices have been limited and expensive compared to other brands.

As stated above you need to stay at a SS of 1/250 or less (sync speed on the D7100) It will likely mean a lower ISO outside on a relatively bright day. My way is to shoot in A mode and 100 ISO, or lowest possible, change the aperture until you are under 1/250 sec. If you have really fast lenses and are going for shallow depth of field at large aperture openings you can find yourself unable to stay under 1/250. One shutter curtain will block the light of the flash at speeds above 1/250 but it may not be too noticable in really bright light. Some cameras sensing a flash through dedicated contacts won't even allow the shutter to release over 1/250 sec. BTW, the light meter still exists in almost all cameras, now just looks different. Here is a video showing the light meter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4X993aqAkBY

This is one of the first things I have students do in class...adjust the diopter. Have the camera autofocus in a contrasty subject, like a sign with text. Next, without moving the camera or touching the release/focus button again, turn the diopter adjustment until the viewfinder image is as sharp as possible. Done. As the day goes on and lighting conditions changes, as well as things like blood sugar, you may need to tweek it from time to time. The diopter has no effect on the final image, rather allows you to see what it's doing or makes manual focusing easier and more accurate. I've had students who exclaimed "Wow" when doing this because they'd never seen a sharp viewfinder image. I'm 74 and wear bifocals so I adjust with my glasses on. There are real advantages to manual focus and even with AF I often need to touch up the focus using the MF override that better lenses provide. Another rough adjustment is to concentrate on any lines or boxes on the focusing screen and change the diopter until they are crisp. Good shooting!

I use both DSLR and mirrorless models of several different brands. The biggest difference to me is battery life. I shoot a lot, day in and day out, so battery life is a real issue. When I take a trip with mirrorless I've got batteries charging in the car and hotels at night. Other than that I don't really care which I use as long as the finder and screen are high resolution. I love adapting legacy lenses to mirrorless. I use almost all brands. I'm a photography teacher and need to know whats going on in all cameras so I buy, trade, and sell in order to keep up with technology. Mirrorless is definately a coming trend, but I think DSLRs will be around for awhile.

I shot jpegs for years out of necessity, because I didn't have software to read all the RAW files from many different cameras and formats. Once I got Creative Cloud I started shooting RAW and will never go back. When a jpeg is produced by the camera both important highlight and shadow detail are deleted and can't be brought back. With Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) a huge amount of both highlight and shadow detail are retained and easily brought back using simple slider adjustments. RAW changed my world for the better and doesn't require any more time to edit. Once you finish in ACR you can open to a jpeg or other format as wanted. I mostly adjust for wanted highlights and shadows in ACR and do most other adjustments in Photoshop, just because I'm used to it.

The lab I use in Dallas prints on "wet lab paper." The digital images are scanned onto old style color printing paper and developed using the old technology. He claims better shadow detail and longer image life. The images look great! He has ink jet available, but says the wet lab process looks better to pretty much everyone.

I use both and one thing I'll say is if you go mirrorless, keep extra batteries and a charger handy at all times.

I had a real problem in Iowa while photographing a solar car cross country race, because of corn sweat humidity. It was too hot to go without AC. I usually carry a sleeping bag or blanket to cover valuables from sight and I simply covered the camera. It doesn't take much.

Something not yet mentioned yet is that you'll get an 18% grey reading (meters are set to interpret whatever they're pointed at to middle grey. Snow will be much more grey, blacks will be lighter. Remember that the meter reads that way and then adjust exposure accordingly. I rarely use spot metering except for the moon or spot lighted subjects and usually have to open a stop or more to get the subject (moon) to proper brightness either using exposure compensation in auto, or by changing SS or Aperture in manual. While other meter readings like average and matrix do some averaging, the spot meter reads directly to 18%. Having said all that, I have to say usually, because camera technology changes constantly so I don't like to speak in absolutes. I used spot metering in Vietnam in 67-68 on a Pentax Spotmatic and you have to choose the area you read very carefully. In film days spot metering and the Zone System were often used to determine the number of stops different between the chalk to charcol range in a scene, and then exposure and development were used to get the best possible range of tones in a final print. Photoshop can usually get the moon back to proper brightness, but getting it right in the camera to begin with is better. Hope that's not too much info. I rarely ever use spot metering anymore. The other way to use the spot meter is to point to a middle tone in the scene and use that reading.

The entire area is full of great views. I agree with the above, but if time permits also try Capitol Reef and Goblin Valley a few hours drive from Moab.