Sold my Nikon D7100. What should I buy now?

[Bad Badger]

Shot the Nikon D7100 exclusively for the last 7 years. It was a good camera and I really learned a lot from it. Now, I want to make the jump to mirrorless and get into a slightly more compact camera for travel, hiking, etc.

Seriously looking at the Fuji x-T30 w/ 18-55mm lens. $1200 out the door Adorama

I also also keep hearing great things about the Panasonic G85. It's only $700 out the door. Probably a little less premium of an option compared to the Fuji, but again, I've heard good things. It's weather sealed and has in-body stabilization (the Fuji doesn't). It's also a 4/3 sensor and less MP (16 vs 24 on the Fuji).

I'm after sharp image quality and great colors. I don't care about video that much.

I'm open to other suggestions too! Max budget is $1500-ish

Maybe I should wait a bit for Black Friday deals? Also I hear the Fuji X100V should be out at some point in the near future.

Thanks!

 

[Legion]

Fuji, no question.

To be honest, I would probably drop the dough and get the X-T3 with the 18-55, but it depends on how long you plan on keeping the camera, and how hard you will work it. The image quality will be very similar with an X-T30, but the X-T3 is just a more durable, and IMO, nicer camera to use.

Or if you wanted to try one out, pick up a second hand X-T2, which is still a very capable camera, and if you don't get along with it you won't lose money when you sell it on.


But I don't know anyone who swapped to Fuji and then swapped to anything else. I have other brands of cameras that I will use for certain applications, but my Fujis are my go-to.

 

[Bad Badger]

Fuji, no question.

To be honest, I would probably drop the dough and get the X-T3 with the 18-55, but it depends on how long you plan on keeping the camera, and how hard you will work it. The image quality will be very similar with an X-T30, but the X-T3 is just a more durable, and IMO, nicer camera to use.

Or if you wanted to try one out, pick up a second hand X-T2, which is still a very capable camera, and if you don't get along with it you won't lose money when you sell it on.


But I don't know anyone who swapped to Fuji and then swapped to anything else. I have other brands of cameras that I will use for certain applications, but my Fujis are my go-to.

thanks for reply!

I’m also now looking at the Fuji X-H1 w/ 16-50mm lens. It’a a bit over my budget ($1700) and bigger/heavier, but looks like an amazing setup.

 

[dbltrbl]

Have the Fuji x-t2 and xf 16-55 and love it. Sold my Nikon and lenses to get it. Really enjoy the operation of the Fuji with the controls.

 

[hydro-magic]

I've had a Fuji X-100T since those came out and it doesn't disappoint. The glass is really good. Been thinking about an X-T3 with a couple prime lenses but the X-100T still does most of what I want it to do.

 

[malocchio]

I have the model before yours , the 7000....I bought it not only for it's great quality and pictures , but for the all metal sealing, which really does a great job of keeping fine dust and particulates out of the cameras interior...

 

[troy]

For what it's worth I love my Panasonic GX85. The Fujis do look nice though if I had a larger budget when I bought mine I would have looked harder at Fuji. I have a few of there bridge camera and they're great for what they are. There are a lot of great choices out there, really can't buy a bad camera these days.

 

[sneefy]

I like my Sony a6000 quite a bit. But I haven't compared it to any other mirrorless platforms. I came from Canon DSLR.

 

[TFAshaver]

It really all depends on what you are going to use the camera for and what you are going to do with those photos. If it is just to make stuff for social media and small prints like you use to get at a drug store 16MP on a sensor APS-C or full frame is fine. Only get a bigger sensor or more MP if you have to print really big and I mean life size or more. Most cameras out there at that price point will be 24MP and up now days. This will work fine.

If you plan on using it for travel get the smallest thing you can that you like. It only does you good to have a camera if you are going to take it everywhere and take photos. If you find yourself leaving it behind because it is too big or heavy it defeats the purpose of buying it.

If you plan to take lots of burst frames for wildlife and sports make sure you can deal with black out in the EVF on a mirrorless camera. That’s why I personally don’t use a mirrorless for my sports photography, the black out was a deal breaker for me right now.

If you want totally silent shooting make sure the mirrorless camera can do it. Some do not have a completely silent electronic shutter or it is kind of slow FPS (FPS only really matters for wildlife and sports though).

If you plan to use it in dark settings make sure the ISO performance is good. Generally speaking larger sensors do better at higher ISO because the pixels are larger and the noise is more visually appealing to people.

As far as bokeh goes remember that smaller sensors make the Bokeh less, so if you use a f2.8 lens at f2.8 on a full frame sensor and on an APS-C sensor it will look more out of focus on the background on the full frame sensor. So with Fuji they only do APS-C sensors so if you want that really nice shallow depth of field you need to get a faster lens to compensate for the smaller sensor.

Also remember that mirrorless requires a different type of power conservation or you will use up your batteries faster. When I use my Nikon D500 I can shoot an entire football game on one battery 2000-3000 shots. I used an A9 and went through one battery and almost a second. I combatted the problem at other long events by turning off the camera more often. I found that the evf sensor can turn the evf on whenever it senses anything in front of it on a lot of mirrorless cameras and this can kill your battery.

Personally for cool factor and fun I would love a Fuji XT-2 or XT-3. For serious work it has to be the Sony A7-III. For super small my mom has the Panasonic GX-100? It is a point and shoot but is smaller and lighter than her I-phone. I would go to a camera store and hold the cameras in your price range. I find that the feel of a camera is most important to me liking to use it.

Sorry this was a lot, but good luck in picking your next camera. Anything new will probably be exciting so you should come out winning with anything.

 

[sarimento1]

why not consider nikon z50?

 

[Zhang Doe]

Sony a7III. It is basically idiot-proof. I take great pictures and videos, and I am definitely an idiot. It is kind of an ugly camera, but the results make me look way past the superficial appearance. Lens selection is great, whether you like primes or zooms. And you can definitely built a nice, lightweight prime set. Haven't checked the cost, but I think the prices have dropped significantly on the second-hand market in anticipation of an a7IV coming out in the not-too-distant future.

 

[Bad Badger]

Sony a7III. It is basically idiot-proof. I take great pictures and videos, and I am definitely an idiot. It is kind of an ugly camera, but the results make me look way past the superficial appearance. Lens selection is great, whether you like primes or zooms. And you can definitely built a nice, lightweight prime set. Haven't checked the cost, but I think the prices have dropped significantly on the second-hand market in anticipation of an a7IV coming out in the not-too-distant future.

Trust me, I would be all over the a7III, but its just too much $$ for me. The best price I can find on the body is $1800. Add a nice lens and I'm at $2700.

 

[Zhang Doe]

Trust me, I would be all over the a7III, but its just too much $$ for me. The best price I can find on the body is $1800. Add a nice lens and I'm at $2700.

If you can wait, who knows, it may drop in price soon. Huh ... speak of the devil:

Sony A7 III $1530 After 15% rewards at Amazon US – sonyalpharumors

www.sonyalpharumors.com

 

[TFAshaver]

Sony a7III. It is basically idiot-proof. I take great pictures and videos, and I am definitely an idiot. It is kind of an ugly camera, but the results make me look way past the superficial appearance. Lens selection is great, whether you like primes or zooms. And you can definitely built a nice, lightweight prime set. Haven't checked the cost, but I think the prices have dropped significantly on the second-hand market in anticipation of an a7IV coming out in the not-too-distant future.

Lens selection is only good if you are willing to buy new, or deal with converters from Sony to Canon, which isn't great. I think if you want to get great glass, but keep it cheap Nikon is the best option, with the F-mount you can go back really far with lenses, with the Z-mount you get new lenses that work great, but the FTZ adapter allows you to use those older Nikon Legacy lenses. Auto focus will only work with G lenses with AF-S lenses, but if you are willing to manually focus you can use lenses that were used on great old film cameras. My favorite is the Nikkor 105 f2. It is the lens that was used to take the famous Afghan Girl photo that made the cover of National Geographic. It looks amazing on digital as well! Just have to manually focus, but with focus peaking in the Nikon z6 and z7 (not sure about the z50) focusing is easy to do. Plus the video abilities of the Z series is great. But, you are having to pay for those features with a z6 being a bit pricey.

Mirrorless is a new tech with the bigger camera bodies, so things are rapidly advancing from Canon, Nikon, Sony, Panasonic, Fuji, etc. so there will always be another camera you want in a few years. It has always been the advice of mentors to buy great glass, and then worry about the camera body, as the glass will be good for a few generations of camera bodies, where the camera bodies in digital are really only top of the line for about 3 years at max.

I think of my razors like cameras like instruments: There is always something else I want...

 

[MarkM10431]

if you have a lot of good glass, get a Nikon mirrorless if they don't firectly fit there is an adapter you can go with

 

[Basil]

I’ve been really tempted by the Nikon mirrorless cameras. I have a d750 but smaller and lighter is always a plus. I’m too invested in the Nikon f lineup to make it worth it to sell all my lenses and bodies and start over. Might be worth it if I can pick up the adapter though. I figure that the Nikon mirrorless bodies are just too new to pick them up, the next versions will probably have better performance and less issues.


That being said I recently got back into shooting film. I haven’t touched my digital camera in over a month. I shoot black and white and can develop my own rolls in not even 10 minutes.

 

[beddington]

Lieca
Nikon
Fuji

then canon.

Main benefit of the Fuji line is that they have spent some cash to make options to shoot digital photos that are exact duplicates of specific Fuji film stock.

 

[Zhang Doe]

I read that Canon has started doing firmware updates for its mirrorless cameras, and the focus is much better than it was a few months ago. The entry level full frame camera may be worth a spin. The RF lenses generally look pretty prices, but I think Canon and Nikon both have some nicely priced 35mm and 50mm prime lenses, unlike Sony.

 

[beddington]

I read that Canon has started doing firmware updates for its mirrorless cameras, and the focus is much better than it was a few months ago. The entry level full frame camera may be worth a spin. The RF lenses generally look pretty prices, but I think Canon and Nikon both have some nicely priced 35mm and 50mm prime lenses, unlike Sony.

Nikon has unlimited options for prime lenses. they have used the same mount f0r 60 years.

 

[Zhang Doe]

^
Different mount for the new Z line, no? Older lenses require an adapter. I am not a fan of using adapters and adding weight. Plus, focusing speed is also compromised.