It's 2024 and you're still shooting with a full-frame DSLR? Me too. Here is why I feel no pressure to switch from my DSLR camera body to a mirrorless system any time soon.
Digital photography has come a long way since the Fujix DS line came to the fore in the late 1980s as one of the first fully digital cameras featuring a tiny 0.40 MP capability. Fast-forward to 2024, photographers and enthusiasts are spoiled for choice with the amount of digital camera systems that are available on the market today. From DSLR and medium format, onwards to mirrorless; your budget and area of practice will have largely determined which system you have bought into over the years.
On one end of the spectrum, there are photographers who covet the rapid evolution of technology and upgrade their gear whenever they can, which can be compared to those who regularly upgrade their phones with each new release. Driven by enhanced features and the promise of cutting-edge innovation, these photographers find excitement in staying at the forefront and maintaining a current edge in the industry. On the other end, which is probably where I sit, another group of photographers adopt a more pragmatic stance, viewing their cameras as indispensable tools that are integral to their profession—taking a measured approach and upgrading only when their current equipment no longer serves its purpose.
Everyone is different, and I don’t expect all who read this article to agree with me on this. In terms of my equipment, I feel invested, and it's more than just a financial investment. I chose the Nikon D850, and it was a deliberate and calculated upgrade from my previous Nikon D800, as there were features of the D850 that attracted me, such as 45.7 megapixels of effective resolution, far superior low light performance, and the focus shift feature for product and macro photography. The tilting touchscreen was a bonus too. All of these reasons for choosing the D850 still stand today – they haven’t gone anywhere just because new cameras have been released, so why would I upgrade before the camera ceases to meet my needs? I am not a gear-driven photographer; for me, it's all about the image.
For full disclosure, I almost switched to mirrorless during the pandemic, but held off, and I am very glad that I did. This was the first time that I was tempted by a mirrorless camera as my main body. Nikon announced the Z9 in early 2020 which, I must admit, really piqued my interest. Delay after delay, the initial excitement around the release faded as I continued to use my trusty D850. When comparing the spec of the Nikon D850 and Z9 side by side, there just wasn’t enough to justify the switch. I realized that the main draw of the Z9 for the majority of photographers who were switching was the 8K video resolution. At that time, I rarely shot video.
By the time the Z9 was finally released amid the pandemic, I could not get my hands on one anywhere to even feel in my hands. Online retailers quickly sold out of the limited stock that they had, so I took the money that I would have invested in the body and lenses and upgraded to a new kitchen instead! I am still satisfied with that decision today.
The images I make are very intentional and important to me. Upgrading my equipment is not something that I do more often than is necessary because I form an attachment of sorts to items in my kit. My favorite lens, for example, is the Nikkor 70-200 2.8E FL ED VR, but this is not because I use it the most often, this is because of a specific series of portraits that I shot using the lens back in 2014. If I upgrade to mirrorless, I have to deal with parting with that lens. Yes, adapters are available, but if I’m switching, then I’m fully switching, and that lens is too costly to just hang on to as an ornament. I only just sold a camera I had hung on to since 2008 last year, the Fuji S5 Pro, because that’s what I used when I started studying photography at college. I hadn’t used it in years, and it is better off in the hands of someone who will use it than being packed away in storage.
A camera becomes a part of your routine, and finding your way around it becomes automatic, meaning you can just concentrate on what the camera is pointed at. Knowing your camera intimately can only be of benefit to the photographer and whatever the lens is pointed at. I like to think that this is similar to learning how to drive; at first, you have to think about every motion from controlling the gearbox to indicating, and which way to turn the wheel when reversing. Once you are an experienced driver, there are many parts of your process that become second nature, allowing you to concentrate on the road ahead.
Mirrorless camera advancements have come thick and fast in recent years, with more rumored to be released in the months ahead if you look at some of the recently filed patents and discussions of leaks in various Reddit threads. There have been rumors of a Nikon Z9H circulating since late 2023, and I would bet on some new fast shutter systems being released to coincide with the Olympic Games, which will be held in Paris this summer. Do I need to shoot more frames per second than I am currently able to? I do not, and so I can't imagine that there will be any camera released in 2024 that will cause me to switch.
I still appreciate the optical viewfinder too much to make the jump to mirrorless, which provides a direct optical view of the scene, as opposed to the electronic viewfinders on mirrorless cameras. DSLRs have longer battery life compared to mirrorless cameras, which can be advantageous during extended shoots, which I find myself in often. In a market dominated by high-spec mirrorless cameras, ultimately, the decision to upgrade or stick with a DSLR will be decided by camera manufacturers and what they choose to bring to the market. The Nikon D850, although first released in 2017, is still in production today, which lets me know that I am a long way from being labeled a dinosaur. I will switch when the time is right for me.
Have you switched or stayed with your DSLR system? What is your reason for doing so?
But this is the complete opposite of my experience. DSLRs do not have the same focus consistency, accuracy and precision as modern mirrorless cameras. First, while yes, mirrorless cameras often focus at working aperture, this is usally only up to a certain point (Nikon, for instance, stops at f/5.6 for working aperture focusing)...I've never had an issue with focus accuracy on my wide angle lenses on mirrorless.
In fact, I have essentially never had an issue with focus accuracy on ANY lens on mirrorless. Front and back focus are non-existent, and the consistency of focus is just miles better in my experience. And it's especially true for shallow depth of field situations, where nailing eyes with lenses like an 85mm f/1.2 is quite easy to do on mirrorless, and quite inconsistent on a DSLR.
--- "How does an EVF camera decide the magic spot of focus with a wide angle lens set at f/11? They often hunt or focus incorrectly in these situations."
Sounds like you lack knowledge of the new tech. You were probably using Wide Area Focus instead of using Spot Area focus. There's no magic to it.
--- "Further, this theory that the EVF is truly showing you what you will get is misleading."
EVF is 99% close what you'll get compared to 0% close on an OVF.
--- "Besides, if a tool worked effectively one, two even 5 years ago, why shouldn't it continue to do so?"
Different people have different needs. If you are the type to shoot at a slower pace or at smaller apertures (f5.6, f8, f11, etc), what you have is fine. But, if you are shooting at a faster pace, especially at wider apertures, mirrorless will benefit you.
Let me explain the issue in case it wasn't understood. EVF cameras often hunt when trying to lock on focus with wide angle lenses regardless of how many points. The camera must decide on best focus. If the camera exposure is set at f.16, a 24mm lens can offer a lot of DOF or generally in focus regions. An EVF looks for best focus at f.16, an OVF looks for best focus at maximum aperture. Try this this a manual focus lens. Put on a manual focus 24mm lens, set it to f.16 and try to determine the area of best focus. Then change the aperture to maximum and redo the test. Makes a huge difference.
So are you saying that a camera that did its job effectively 5 years ago now doesn't? A persons needs may change at any time, but that doesn't change the performance of the camera as it was in the beginning. Needs are independent of the camera's function.
Further re. EVF accuracy, is that with effects on or off? The Sony 16-35mmPZ lens may look perfectly rectilinear and free of any chromatic distortions through the EVF of a Sony camera. Check your raw files and they are completely different. Put that lens on an OVF and you will see what the lens is really doing.
Sony cameras boast high res viewfinders. But the res drops at time of focus. Does this mean your image res has too?
Set the camera to a very high ISO. You know the image is going to be full of noise and artifacts, but they don't appear in the EVF.
There are many other instances where the EVF simulates rather than showing what results really will be.
--- "EVF cameras often hunt when trying to lock on focus with wide angle lenses regardless of how many points."
You are still not understanding. EVF does not hunt, your selected focus mode does.
a. If you are in some sort of wide area mode, the camera will try to focus on the nearest object. It'll usually start at the center, but, not limited to it if there's objects on the side that are closer to the camera.
b. If you select something like a single/spot point focus, it will focus on the area you dictate so it's not going to hunt all over the place.
It would behoove you to learn about the camera you are using.
--- "So are you saying that a camera that did its job effectively 5 years ago now doesn't?"
No, that's not what I'm saying. You seriously need to learn how to read…try reading slower or have someone read to you. Go re-read what I said. The 3 sentences pretty much spells it out for you.
--- "A persons needs may change at any time, but that doesn't change the performance of the camera as it was in the beginning. Needs are independent of the camera's function."
Oh, really? Try doing with your DinoSLR:
Watch at fullscreen at 4K:
(https://www.youtube.com/clip/UgkxTJeZv8qP49GnBG8cXI8H_k_Kbj_VzCur)
(https://www.youtube.com/clip/Ugkx_b8sHVJOTx56bVV1w9pLu2o1CDXdIWfy)
--- "Put that lens on an OVF and you will see what the lens is really doing."
You can do the same with EVF by turning off the corrections in camera if that's so important to you. Which, is a moot point because at the end of the day, if you are editing raw files, if you want it corrected, you are going to have to correct in post regardless if shot with an OVF or EVF. At least with EVF with the corrections on, you can see what it could look like.
--- "Sony cameras boast high res viewfinders. But the res drops at time of focus. Does this mean your image res has too?"
Why in the world would you even think the image res would drop based on the viewfinder res? The answer is no. A 24 mp file is 24 mp file. A 33 mp file is a 33 mp file, etc, etc, etc.
--- "There are many other instances where the EVF simulates rather than showing what results really will be."
Of course it simulates, it's electronic. If I've said it once, I've said a million times, EVF is still much closer to the output than OVF. Which makes it very efficient, especially in a fast paced or constantly changing environment.
You win!
I am a retired prof photographer. First camera was a Nikon ftn(still have it). I’ve shot with dslr since the D1. I now own 3 D850 and have no intention of going mirrorless pretty much for the same reasons you wrote about.
Its not that I never intend to go mirrorless, I just really look forward to the camera that tempts me away from my D850, I cant see it happening in the next few years, I'm happy to keep using them until they cease to meet my needs.
My 2 cents here. I use the D850 in the studio with Capture one where I can really finely tweak the focus on a big monitor. When Shooting outside with something like a 200 F2 on the adapter and a Z series camera, the focus is superior. I always feel like my D850 never really locked in a sharp focus with any of my good glass, but the Z cameras seem to be right on. I'm guessing it's because they focus exactly on the sensor that captures the image and there is nothing to put them slightly out of whack like the system in a DSLR.
Still love my DSLR and will keep it for the studio, but for outdoor shooting I will eventually go all mirrorless.
Thats an interesting perspective Donald. The focusing does seem to be super sharp with the Z series. I dont currently feel like I am missing out. I shoot a lot in controlled environments, but when I am out and about I cant really miss what I dont have. I am used to working with the D850 and dont have an issue with missed focus.
I have a Z8 and I had a D850. I realize that there is a learning curve with new tech, but frankly, I have found more success with the D850 focus than my Z8, especially on water. It loves wave sparkles somewhere other than the subject. It will switch from eye to eye. There are too many focus options that overlap. If you want to focus on a bird sitting on a branch above a dog sitting beside a child held in their parent's arms, how does the auto subject af know which you want? Yes, I know, switch to single point focus and cancel the auto af subject bit. Back to square one!
YASSSSSS!!!! 🦖🦕🦖🦕
Best comment. If only I could pin it to the top.
This kind of opinion piece is like anything to do with Trump. It is easy fodder for opinions. The D850 is a great camera and will be one of those by which set a digital standard. I had one for several years, but I missed being able to use vintage lenses. Along came Sony and all that changed. I consider buying a used D850 every so often, to use my PCE lenses. I bought the Z8 and, of course, it is a great camera, but I haven't taken a photo with it that I would easily say the D850 couldn't have taken just as well. What really sells the EVF cameras is the ease of video and truly seeing what the sensor will see. The zoom focus is also handy. I've decided to trim down my equipment horde. More lenses and bodies doesn't mean better pictures. It just means more money out of my pocket. All these reviews and the energy to buy new is a sickness that is easily addictive. The world in saturated with images now. It may be depressing to think, but I'm increasingly finding less "joy" in learning software vs using a camera. Pick up an SLR from the mid 1970's like an XD11 and note how bright the viewfinder is and how easy it is to focus with split image. Has the "art" of photography really progressed or have we just been lured by the magic of marketing?
How on earth did one of my articles elicit the T word? I'm just sat here over the sea in Scotland minding my business, sharing my genuine thoughts about the love of my camera.
Amazing, isn't it? Seems the "T" derangement syndrome will manifest anywhere even without provocation. I'm with you on this.
It's ok to completely miss the point.
No, I got the point of your thread just fine. Everything from the first sentence onward. Just would like to (for once) not have the "T" involved in completely unrelated topics/conversations. I think that would jive with Ms Simpson's reply. There's literally hundreds of other opening statements you could have used to make the same headline without bringing him into the story. That's all.
Like I said, you missed the point. Next up, who thinks B&W photographs are more artistic and that B&W photography takes more creative focus?
Next up, who thinks the nifty fifty is a waste of time as a focal length?
Next up, who thinks that motor drives or high speed shooting is just the lazy way for getting the shot?
My 2nd camera was a Minolta XD-11 35mm film camera. It is compact & I love the split image focusing screen. Why can't the MILCs have that (or even the DSLRs) screen for manual lenses? You are right about the 'sickness that is addictive.' I took out money from my IRA to pay for my divorce lawyer, but spent most of it for used SLR & DSLR cameras!
Return camera user, photographing from a container ship, using a 1.4 or 2x teleconverter on the D800E, psssing islands, the gold coast of china, skyscrapers, sea turtles on the beach and the like.
My setup is 17-35 tokina, sigma 150-600 C (but want 60-600), and i'm in search of learning about a good macro and extension tubes\bellows NOW for microcapture product/ personal business avocation, busines project-Work.
Day to day photos for regular-joe items' sales, distance from thw moving ship with a compact mini tripod, and macro/microphotography grab me. If i do wildlife i'd be in a canoe in Florida, Guam, Honolulu, so nothing has steered me definitely onto the mirrorless Stage yet. No terribly fast moving subject material or deadly need to capture every last shot right now. I think the D800E is barely fast enough in burst mode, and i have a wifi card to sync pictures with the phone and computer. I'm relatively happy with where it is at for the time being!
.....
If anyone has microphotography advice for F mount, let me know, do please steer me in a good direction. I want to fill a frame on a 18mm square inch of frame material. Does anybody have reccomendations getting there? :) thank you very much for tips or suggested bellows, extension tubes, or macro lense(s)
Posts here are nice reads
Glad to hear your equipment works for you! I had just purchased the D800 when the D800E was announced and I was kicking myself.
either Nikon 85mm or 105mm macro lens sounds like they would be the right lens for you with 1:1 magnification. Prime lenses will make all the difference.
I am happy for you enjoying your toys.
I am staying with my Canon DSLR system, even though I have a Sony A7R3 with a lens mount for Canon EF lenses. The features of Canon DSLRs satisfy my needs. From the 50mp of the Canon 5Dsr, to the articulating screen of the Canon 6DM2. For some reason, the photos takes longer to load after taking a picture with a MILC camera.
Outside of people who own and use mirrorless or DLSR cameras - and sometimes even them - very few are probably aware that there is a difference between these technologies.
Most (but not all) understand that interchangeable lens cameras are superior to smartphone cameras, but then many also think that point and shoot cameras are equally superior - judging the quality of a camera by its optical zoom reach as opposed to anything that actually matters.
The largest barrier is getting past the feeling that all cameras - mirrorless and DLSR - are overpriced, over-complicated relics and the average person is better off just sticking to their cell phone.
It's a shame really, because literally anyone could learn how to use either type of camera - and there are many good quality cameras that cost a lot less to own and use than the latest smartphone.
The worst thing for me is when I see someone who thinks interchangeable lens cameras are too complicated, take genuinely great photos with a smartphone. People who have a natural talent and are not realising the full potential of their artistic ability.
How is something equally superior? The best camera is the one you have in hand and for most people, that is a cell phone.
You can have my D850 (and significant lens collection) when you pry it from my cold dead fingers. I've never owned a camera that just felt so right.
Yes! This energy until something mighty comes along to tempt us away.
I don't own one but I totally get this. I have an old D3200 and I love what it does for me. I'm a retired film photograher from 1968-2008. I also have an old D200 which feels better in my hands.
My first love is an AE1 in my teens that I still use. Later I bought a D5100 Nikon when my daughter was born and put it to work. I still carry it in my car every day as an "opportunistic moment" camera that I love dearly. But when my large hands took the D850 out of the box I knew I was home. It also didn't hurt that it's an amazing piece of photographic equipment.
So true. I still love the D200 because it never fails to deliver what I want. A solid camera is the ultimate experience.
I do not think that wireless is the next evolution, just another option.
Personally, I cannot understand why anyone would buy a range finder in today's world, more than fifty years after the dawn of the SLR, but some people still prefer it. It my case, it is not a matter of how much I like the SLR and OVF, it is how much I dislike the EVF.
Will I ever switch to mirrorless? Maybe, if one day they develop an EVF which mimics an OVF, (no bright light in the eyes in dim locations, with high dynamic range still preserved), then maybe. For the foreseeable future, just an some still embrace the only range finder manufacturer to this day, I will still embrace the only manufacturer committed to the SLR and OVF.
I do not need to upgrade my K-3, but considering the K-3 III and/or K-3 III Monochrome. I also do not need an F-type camera, but I may one day purchase a digital 645 SLR, (either Pentax or Hasselblad).
Also, grew up on film (K1000) and still have one, but not considering going back to film.
I do own a rangefinder mirrorless, but I wish it wasn't. It's a minor annoyance really, but having the view finder central on the body definitely makes the camera feel better balanced, especially if you have a heavy lens. As for EVF vs OVF - I prefer EVF. I used to own a Nikon DLSR and since switching to mirrorless I found the EVF beats it hands down. What I will say though is that is massively dependent on the quality of the view finder. I'd take my Nikon's OVF over a low resolution EVF.
Oh, the horror, the horror. I shoot with a Nikon FM2n and Nikkor Ais primes. What FUN to be a dinosaur! Hope the asteroid doesn't hit us anytime soon. Then the camera wars will finally end. In the meantime, let the good times roll. Forgive me if this post is off topic. I love the smell of napalm in the morning, ha, ha...
Not off topic at all Richard, enjoy your prehistoric photos. The FM2 was my first camera as a 10 year old. Lucky me.
I recently put my D850 and 6 lenses on the market, but nobody has shown any interest. I think I shall now follow Kim's example and hang on to it. I don't need a Nikon Z whatever.
Use the camera thats right for you, whether that be the Z series or your D850 :)
I have my trusty Canon T6i with my Nifty Fifty and my 18-135.
Out does exactly what I need it to do. Now when I want to go video I may consider getting mirrorless
Yes the video capabilities of the Z9/8 are phenomenal.
I have a D850 and D800 and love them! I would consider moving to the Z8 series (and S lenses) someday but I cannot justify the expense to do so right now - the ROI just isn't there for me. Doesn't help that this crap economy is increasing all my other expenses (insurance, permits, and other business expenses) while causing client's to put off doing professional photos as they are feeling the burn as well.
The Z8 is a beautiful piece of kit! I'm happy with my D850 for now though, it more than gets the job done.
It’s something I’ve never understood this obsession about if the camera you use has a mirror or not. My cameras don’t have mirrors, but so what! People have been taking perfectly good images for years with cameras that do. Ok some newer features are lacking in cameras with mirrors but again so what. If you have been using a camera successfully for years and it still does the job, why change! My old Canon5D mk2 had an unfortunate accident that demanded it be replaced. My friend had a new Sony with no mirror that I liked the look of, someone offered to buy my lenses. I made the switch. My new Sony like the old Canon took pictures and it did have features lacking in the Canon, but that did not make the camera without the mirror a bad camera. No. While these new features are good to have they are not a must have for a competent photographer. I wish it was a discussion that could quietly die away.
When I shoot events I like using two bodies, when one of the dslr’s died I bought the EOS R to partner my 6D. Like Matt says , I like the focusing on the mirrorless and especially with manual lenses ( focus guide is a treat) In some situations I still prefer the optical viewfinder and when shooting sunrises or sunsets I’m always worried about the sun burning into the sensor in between shots , because there’s no mirror to shield the sensor.
Kim Simpson asked,
"Have you switched or stayed with your DSLR system? What is your reason for doing so?"
I absolutely need an advanced mirrorless camera to amass as many keepers as possible on my photoshoots (wildlife). But due to very limited financial resources, I am still using my DSLRs.
I think two things your article did not even mention that are integral to such decisions are:
what genre one shoots and ...
what one's objectives are
I shoot wildlife, much of which is wildlife action such as birds in full flight, running deer, jumping rabbits, etc. And my objectives are usually to capture as many marketable frames as possible of any opportunity that presents itself.
Each time I go out shooting, my goal is not to capture one truly great image. My goal is to capture as many quality frames as possible. My DSLRs limit this objective because their focus systems result in a lot of misses compared to only a few hits when the action is erratic and rapid. Back weeny colleagues and Were all shooting DSLRs, if a few of us shot the same deer as it ran by and all of us ripped off 30 frame bursts, we would all have 2-5 keepers ... I would have about as many keepers as the other photographers.
Now that my colleagues (actually, my competition) are shooting mirrorless, if we all shoot a 30 frame burst of a running deer, me and my DSLR will have a few keepers, but the other guys will have 70%-90% keepers, netting them 20-25 usable frames.
Why?
Because of the animal eye detect autofocus on the mirrorless bodies. It sticks like glue and doesn't let go, which allows the photographer to focus his/her efforts on more important things, like positioning, framing, and anticipating changes in the animal's behavior.
In terms of AF and keepers, your deer story reminded me of a recent a9iii birding video I watched. It shows this tiny little bird in flight capturing this tiny little insect while going towards the camera. Appears literally all of the frames were sharp at the bird's eye. At minimum, a very high keeper rate.
This clip starts off at normal speed to show real time view. Then, 4x slow motion. Then, frame by frame. It's about 40 second long.
Best viewed fullscreen:
(https://youtu.be/0MjX6B_bH58?si=5ajlgYLD3wQlBt8m&t=9)
Eddie,
That video is an excellent example. That kind of stick-to-the-critter's-eye-like-glue is becoming commonplace for high-end mirrorless users, but is practically impossible to accomplish with a DSLR, no matter how skilled the photographer is.
But for photographers who shoot "normal" things like weddings and portraits and products in the studio, I can see how they can get along just fine with their DSLRs.
In fact, one of the wildlife genres I shoot are herps, a.k.a.reptiles and amphibians. Think snakes, turtles, frogs, salamanders, etc. My DSLRs are just fine for these mostly-stationary subjects, and I could go for decades shooting them with the old "dinosaur" bodies.
But, for fast-action wildlife when I want tons and tons of keepers, a mirrorless is going to allow me to accomplish my objectives, whereas a DSLR will not allow me to do so.
Genre and sub-genre is really everything when it comes to this decision DSLR or mirrorless.
I have heard this issue over and over for many years. First I still have all my cameras from film to the first 5MP point and shoot then I then took the big step in '10 for the Canon T2i in that year camera and two kit lenses was $850 a very large amount for me at the time as with others also but I enjoyed it but also carried a film camera off and on. Getting and upgrading is tuff for beginner's as well as long time users. by story of upgrading is based on software programs to edit even I had to use Canon's SW. I read about Sony in '13 the main attractant was Capture One for $30, on camera apps and I could use all my film and T2i lenses with just a $25 adapter while I saved for what few lenses available. The camera cost was another thing. I was blessed beyond belief, I was given a credit card 10 years earlier that gave points I never knew about which I used for the A7S, it was HDR days that did 5 @ +/- 3EV and three lenses all I got most of my points back. I should of waited for the Mod 2 with IBIS but a saved till '17 for the A7RM2 and the new 12-24mm for a long trip to Az. But even then Lr and many others were still below par especially for noise but today everyone is on top of it.
For the normal person following the trend is not in the cards and to let all know there is really no need to do. It was strange to see the military holding to Canon's and there is little or no Sony cameras on big box stores. An example Best Buy has a hole table of Sony and the rep did not know the still selling A7M2 has on camera apps/programs. The simple fact is the very most do not need a better camera and reviews are just pulling cords but the cost is very untouchable but for the big businesses.
One last thing moving to another maker is expensive with camera and lenses but what many are doing staying with their brand when going mirrorless from DSLR is also leaving or selling everything but maybe with adapters able keep using the lenses for awhile so either a company or someone with a big bank can do it. There maybe a lot of bragging but some empty pockets for a while!!!
Next explain why Kodak is now doing three shifts 7 days a week, Maybe some are doing film for not wanting to edit digital and a fast print in a box is great enough, some are bailing on digital too many $$$!
Yes I still Play with film!
Kim, I fully agree with everything you said!
I was using a D500 & D7500 as my cameras. I'm a part-time professional photographer, shooting weddings, Portraits. Free lance. But last year I was Able to Purchase the D850 when B&H had promotion and gave me a great trade in for my 7500. I got the Body 2 FX lenses and the MB D-18 grip. Like my D500 it's built like a tank and balances in the hand with great ergonomics. It has moved my photography to a new level of quality. I will never switch to Mirror less. Can't stand the EVF and all the mirror less Nikon's I have held feel to small and don't have the same solid feel or heft to balance long lenses. I am planning to trade in my D500, and purchasing a 2nd D850. And switch all my lenses to FX size. Lenses in excellent condition purchased used save a lot of money. By the way I have been a Nikon Nazi Scene 1979 when I got the Nikon FE. Thanks, great article, Take care
Brian Thomas