I shoot a lot of wildlife and have been using a pair of Nikon D3200s for years now.

It’s time to upgrade/update, I think, rather than pay for refurbishment, and everything I’m reading suggests it’s time to go mirrorless.

Given the minimal price difference, and since I’d be buying new glass anyway, I’d probably go Z5 over Z50 for the full frame.

Or… I could stick with what I know, even though everyone seems to be slowly discontinuing their DSLR systems - the D5600 is tempting.

FWIW, I couldn’t care less about video or articulating screens, and I’m pretty sure I’ll continue to use the viewfinder - old dogs, new tricks and all that. I DO take a lot of action shots (birds in flight against various backgrounds and less than ideal lighting), so focus speed is probably my #1 priority.

What says the SigForum photography club?

-Rob

Rob-
The thing to consider is: can you live with an electronic viewfinder? I made a living with SLRs and DSLRs for two decades, and only switched to mirrorless when video became prevalent and still photography (for me) was no longer profitable.
EVFs take a long time to get used to, and improve seemingly every year.
IF I was still shooting college sports, that EVF would be the biggest hurdle. Today, I am 95% video as a full time job, so the EVF is of no use to me.
I switched from Nikon to Sony and honestly, it has been the greatest technical move/benefit I’ve ever undertaken. The cameras today are so good, across the board; choose whichever brand floats your boat.
I wish you well.

Absolutely.

I don't take many pictures with a camera these days but did go mirrorless with a Sony Alpha system a few years ago. Got rid of my Nikon DSLR system here on the forum, a member got a pretty good deal.

The decrease in size and weight has been amazing.

Never

I read somewhere a question that is helping me to not get into the new gear purchase trap: What problem am I trying to solve?

I have two systems:

Fuji x-t1

Nikon d500

I use the Fuji primarily whilst hiking and for landscapes. The Nikon for wildlife. As of this point I see no reason for me to upgrade. If I decide to get a longer telephoto lens then, it might make sense to go with a z6 ii or z8 (in either case, used cameras. In my view lenses are more important by far). I’m going to guess that mirror less lenses will hold their value better than dslr lenses on average.

Focusing speed is more of a lens issue than a camera body issue. For example mounted on my d500 the 300pf is way, way faster to lock on focus than my fx sized 70-300mm.

The Photography Life web site has been very helpful for me. They tend to be Nikon centered. There are so many fantastic cameras out in the market both used and new.

For my style and purposes, I don't regret it. For years, I shot Cannon and then I started shooting a combination of Cannon and Fuji. The stuff my brides loves and were buying was what I show with the Fuji. I love the color science and the style of camera body suits my shooting style (low key, photojournalistic, lifestyle) better. I went 100% Fuji years ago and it was the right choice for me.

Being a Fuji shooter does present more of a challenge for me as a sports photographer. The choices of long, fast glass just are not there. But I manage with it and still shoot football, baseball, softball, basketball, volleyball (and, when I can't avoid it...soccer).

We've had the Sony mirrorless system for a while. Several of my kids have taken photography classes and everytime, the Sony is preferred to traditional cameras. I'd be looking at the available lenses and then decide on your platform based on what platform can best meet your needs.

That all being said, look at the Sony Alpha 1, it is pretty impressive.

Mirrorless systems can have some amazing technological advantages. I have the new OM-1 from Olympus Systems (successor to Olympus).
For, say, wildlife photography, you can set the camera to start recording a still shot in the memory when you push half-way down on the shutter release, then when you push all the way down it saves some number of shots from BEFORE you pushed the button. Imagine wanting to get a shot of a bird taking flight. You will be able to go back on the camera's memory and pick the perfect image BEFORE you "took the shot".
There's a lot more: sequential shooting is amazingly fast, as is focus. The Olympus can take a much higher resolution image in landscape shots by shifting the sensor.
For me, the attraction for micro four-thirds cameras was always the lighter weight and smaller size, not just of the camera but especially of lenses.
Currently if I were starting over I would probably go with a Sony mirrorless system, but the lenses are quite a bit heavier than the Olympus Zuiko lenses.

Real time monitoring of a mirrorless, which allows for what you see is what you get, is one of the most important advances in modern photography/digital imaging. Being able to see immediate effects of the monitored image in the VF has been the Holy Grail to many - it has for me.

I like to get it right in the camera or as much as I can, but all images have at least a little post processing. With mirrorless, post processing time was cut shorter.

Burton - email inbound

I would go mirrorless. I just started back into photography last year after about a 5 or 6 ish year break. I skipped the golden age of DSLR and jumped back into he game with Mirrorless. Started with the Nikon Zfc and Z50 then after about a year, moved on to the Z5 and Z8. The Z5 is an awesome camera for the money and the Z8 is one of the best bodies I’ve owned (film and digital) as far as its capabilities. Nothing still beats the fun of the old Nikon F4s I had back in the film days though. That was one hell of a camera.

Bottom line is I say go for it with the mirrorless and the Z5 is a great starting point for the $$.

Chris

Yes, go mirrorless. I was on the fence for quite awhile and I'm glad I made the switch. I stayed with Nikon and went with the Z8. Great camera and really good for wildlife. You can save money for a while by buying an adapter to use your F-mount lenses and then slowly acquire any z-mount lenses you desire. The z-mount lenses all seem to get good reviews. Although focusing speed is somewhat lens dependent the body controller/software plays a big part. And with mirrorless some bodies also have stabilization that works in addition to the lens stabilization.

Got my wife a Nikon z7ii for Christmas, able to continue to use her previous full frame lenses with an adapter. It’s great, but still figuring it out.

I was thinking about suggesting you move up to the D850 but then realized that you probably have a bunch of DX format lenses. That said at 2500 dollars the D850 is a lot of camera for the money.

If you want to go mirrorless I would suggest that you seriously consider the Z7II. The reason for that is the 180-600 Z Mount zoom for 1696.95. Yeah it's a f5.6-6.3 aperture but image sensors today are so good at higher ISO ratings that it's only an issue if you want an extremely tight depth of focus. The closest that Nikon has in this range in a DSLR lens is the 200-500mm f5.6 VRII. So by going DSLR you have to give up 100mm at the long end and don't have the advantage of the 5 axis sensor shift VR working with the in lens VR. I suspect you could be shooting a hummingbird at 100 feet in the middle of an earthquake and get a nice tight head shot that's sharp as a tack. Yeah, it is a bit expensive but you do get a lot for the money spent. Links follow

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c...7_ii_mirrorless.html

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c...j4ludYhoCUroQAvD_BwE

I keep having the debate about going mirrorless and keep coming back to the same conclusion of it's more money than I want to spend right now. If I were to do it, I'd probably go with a Nikon Z6 II as the gateway drug into mirrorless. If you have a traditional brick and mortar camera shop go in and talk with the staff. Stewart's here in Anchorage is fantastic. They also have a lot of rental equipment available. I rented the Nikon 200-500mm lens for a weekend and ended up buying one for myself when I returned the rental.

I'll probably rent a Z6 or Z8 for the weekend to try one out and see what I'm missing. I'm currently shooting a Nikon D7500 with a D7100 as a backup. The focusing speed of the D7500 is lot faster than the D7100. It works really well with my 200-500mm zoom for wildlife and landscape. Yes, in Alaska you can use a big ass telephoto for landscape shots like shooting Denali from 300 miles away.

The other expense that gets me about moving to mirrorless is the lenses. Yes Nikon has an adapter but, it's clunky and most of my F-mount lenses are DX rather than FX format. It also seems thatNikon has not developed as many lenses for the Z-Mount as they have the older F-Mount. I've got a couple of lenses that I really like and use a lot and would not want to be without an equivalent in mirrorless. One is the DX 16-80 f2.5, it's a great lens, very fast has a hardstop for infinity focus and produces great images. Nikon no longer makes it and only currently available as a refurbished. I've used it a lot for Northern Lights photography and there really isn't an equivalent in the Z-Line to it. Then there isn't an equivalent to the 18-300 either. It's not my favorite lens, but it can't be beat as a do everything lens when you don't feel like lugging the full camera bag.

I'm still waiting, both for the price to come down and for greater lens availability.

Just looked at Nikon's site, they're running a special on the D7500 right now at $300 off. No, it's not mirrorless, but it uses DX lenses which you already have, and the focusing speed on it is very fast.

It was fast enough for this...

My iPhone 6 has been my mirrorless tech for several years. Messed around with a Canon Rebel to get a feel for the technology, but got rid of it, because my needs didn't warrant carrying around the gear. I have seen the mirrorless age get off the ground and it looks like a lot of fun, but I'll probably stick with the spontaneity and ease of use of the phone for the time being, and avoid an approaching learning curve. I've also found the Apple software is just too much of a convenience to bother with an editing product.

I'll still research the latest, though, to keep the door open, plus it's just amazing technology.

Went mirrorless early on.

Pivot around lenses, then pick maker/camera model. Make sure you can get the glass you need for what you want before locking into a mirrorless system.

Unless you shoot professionally, if you get a system that offers you options for the lenses you want, I doubt you'll pick up a big beastie ever again.

I went Olympus/MicroFourThirds years ago - the newest OM-1 is stellar. Here's a review. The viewfinder is great, and you can have it display a bunch of useful info (or not, as you choose.)

I need to get around to selling my old Nikon stuff, couple of great old lenses gathering dust.

I have been a Nikon shooter since my first Nikon F back in 1980. I tried other platforms, but always came home to the big N.

I have been unhappy with the Nikon auto focus and metering for a while and started looking specifically at auto focus performance. I purchased a Sony crop sensor camera for my wife, she does a lot of outdoor photography, especially animals. I can say the following with absolute certainty:

NOBODY CAN TOUCH SONY’S AUTO-FOCUS! NO-BODY!

The Sony auto focus tracking is unbelievable. The wife can photograph a bird taking off and in flight with a high 90 percent eye focus rate.

If wildlife photography is your jive, look no further.

And, “yes,” go mirroless or get left behind.

quote:

Originally posted by Nick:
And, “yes,” go mirroless or get left behind.

Bye