There have been some remarkable advances in the quality of crop sensors. Unless you are a committed pixel peeper or plan to print humongous prints, it’s unlikely you’ll see any difference between a good crop sensor and full frame. The advantage of mirrorless is the saving in weight, both in the camera and its fashioned lenses. A lighter camera bag is often of great importance to those of us on the far side of 70. I have an older Sony a6000 with a Zeiss lens and a Fuji X-T3. The quality of the images I get from both, but especially JPEGs right out of the Fuji, is terrific and gratifying. I have been doing photography for 65 years, know a little about it, and am confident in these judgments.

I moved from a full frame Nikon D750 to the Fuji X-T3. The quality of the images is nearly identical. The great advantage, in my view, is the far lesser weight, both in terms of the camera as well as the lenses. Fuji JPEGs are spectacular and its glass is superb. Weight-wise, I’m way ahead. I’ll never go back.

I’m another older photographer who has signed on to the Fuji system. I still have the Nikon D750 and several pro lenses but don’t use them anymore. The JPEGs come out of the Fuji X-T3 with such brilliance, clarity, spectacular but realistic colors that I don’t shoot RAW anymore, and the Fuji glass is simply superb. I had an X-T2 and moved up. I think Fuji is a niche system, but see an increasing number of blogs by pro photographers who have switched to Fuji. Most of them do weddings, so the demand for quality has to be met repeatedly by whatever system the photographer uses, and Fuji is clearly making inroads into this most popular category of professional photography. You’re not alone, al13!

Like some others, I moved from FF (Nikon D750) to a Fuji crop sensor X-T2 then the X-T3. I have a wide angle Fuji that gives 15mm (finished) and a host of other Fuji glass. The images this camera produces are absolutely terrific and I suffer no loss whatsoever in terms of my personal requirements of either low light sensitivity or wide angle viewing. I’m 78 and have been into photography since I was 15, and have experimented with many different cameras over the years. The great advantage for me of the Fuji mirrorless crop sensor is the savings in weight not only for the camera but the especially the lenses. There is a huge difference in the weight of the glass. Just my two cents.

I think your position makes a lot of sense. I have the D750 and in order to cut the weight of carrying it and a lens or two I have moved for most of my travel photography to the Fuji XT-2, an APC size sensor, and three lenses. Both cameras give me excellent quality and I have no need to move up to the 850, not now and probably not ever. If I ever get another camera I expect mirrorless cameras will, like everything else, get better and better. I might fall for another one of that variety at some point, but I’m pretty much finished hauling around those FX monsters and their associated lenses. Different reasons than yours for not moving now to the 850, but valid for me.

If you are older or tire from carrying around a full frame camera and the assorted heavy lenses needed for a full frame, the move to a high quality crop sensor such as the Fuji X series, the IQ can be astounding and virtually as good as the full frame. There will always be those who disagree, but I can only cite my own experience: I have been shooting for over 60 years, have shot Canons, Nikon crop sensors and FF, and now have moved to the Fuji XT-2, and I am fully satisfied with the results. I am a pixel peeper and very demanding of crisp, lively images, and a fine smaller sensor (but no smaller than APS-C) can deliver the goods.

Understand completely.

I've followed this chain pretty closely. There has been a lot of very thorough and detailed commentary, and just about everyone has a good point to make. I would only like to emphasize the importance of the personal preference in the selection of a camera, be it full frame or crop sensor. For the dedicated purists the FF will almost always triumph, and for those who find more than adequate detail, quality and crispness in a well regarded crop sensor or mirrorless (not to mention the weight) that selection can also be a 4.0 solution. All in all, the original question stimulated helpful debate and, I suspect, it is one that will bounce around out there in this kind of forum for a long time.

😂👍

I second burkphoto's and tradio's comments. Like some others in this chain, I often print the 16x20 often from images taken on a Fuji XT-2 and the results are excellent.

Gessman is a kindred spirit. I'm 77 and the capabilities of a lightweight camera with capacities that closely mirror those of the DSLR category are enormously appealing to me. While I praised the capabilities of the A6000, and still have it, it certainly didn't meet all my needs in terms of imagery quality, and after I deeded it to my wife who is learning about photography, I moved happily to the Fuji XT-2. I won't dwell on it here, but its a great camera and Fuji glass is marvelous, so I'm a happy photog. I added the 50-140 to the XT-2 for those rare occasions where ther 18-55 isnt enough, but don't use it much. This actually, while a tribute to the a6000, is in reality a deep bow to Fuji, which I suspect is the emerging camera manufacturer of the early 21st Century. BTW, I like what you say gessman, and I'd like to meet you. There is a world opening to us now of revolutionary mirrorless cameras - full or crop format - that will rewrite the history of photography. We are witnessing it and will to some extent influence its evolution, but those of us in our late seventies and eighties will only know its full utility in a small way.

The A6000 is an excellent lightweight camera and the kit lens is actually very good, although in zoom mode it blurs a tiny bit at the edges. I purchased the Zeiss 16-70 f4, which provides excellent images and is only slightly larger and heavier than the kit lens. That combination is extremely manageable, fits in a small carrying case and you can slip around all day with it around your neck or shoulder without stress and fatigue. I have seen a few complaints about the Zeiss lens, but I have found it to be a fine piece of glass, if a bird pricey, but find the investment a sensible one. For me at least, the A6000 and the Zeiss lens is a very reliable, convenient and lightweight combination that produces sharp, crisp images.

I have that combination and it has served me very well. I also have the 24-70 and 70-200 2.8 lenses, which are incomparable, but very, very heavy. The 24-120 lens is very manageable by comparison. That said, I'm in my late seventies and have recently gone to the Fuji XT-2 with Fuji 18-55 and 50-140 lenses. When the time comes for you to lighten up, if it does, keep the Fuji X-line in mind as superior in just about every way. You will enjoy the D750 a great deal, though.

I have been shooting Nikon's for 25 years, canon before that. I got a Fuji XT-2 several months ago, and the D750 has not been out of its bag since. The XT-2 is a superbly crafted camera with all the necessary features for everything, including sports. Fuji glass is legendary; I have the 18-55 f4 and the 55-140 2.8. The latter is heavy, yes, but the overall experience of shooting the XT-2 with any of the spectacular, fast primes is easily the equal of the D750 and so much less weight! All their glass is incredibly crisp and the colors in JPEGs right out of the camera is absolutely wonderful. I frarely shoot RAW anymore. From my perspective you can't go wrong with either the Pro-2 or the XT-2. BTW, I had the Pro-2 for a while and traded it for the XT-2. It turned out to be the right thing to do for me. Good luck!

Facing the same issue you are, I choose to go with Fuji's XT-2, with the 18-55 and 55-140. The camera is much smaller and lighter, and it carries all the functions and flexibility of my larger Nikon D750 and its comparable lenses. And, BTW, the Fuji glass is absolutely among the sharpest I have ever seen, and I have been shoooting for some sixty years.