Help please, can't decide which path to take. Upgrading from D750

[Freida]

Hello everyone,

I'm thinking to upgrade my D750 which I don't use that often but when I do its usually for travelling and portraiture.
I don't have many lenses, in fact I only have 85mm 1.8 Nikkor so I'm contemplating to change brands.

As Nikon seems to be lagging a bit (from my limited understanding) with mirrorless I started to look around and got 2 recommendations.

1) Sony A7R V
2) Canon EOS R5

I'd plan to get just one lens and that would be 24-70mm which I've found to be a good allround lens that I'm happy with (as it was the lens I've rented few times for my trips).

Now,
do you mind telling me which one is better or what are your experiences with these? Or if anyone jumped from same camera as me (D750)?

I've also noted that some cameras have mechanical and electrical shutter. What does that mean, please? Like in R5 case the mechanical is 12fps and electrical is 20fps so who would want to use the mechanical at all? What would be the point?
And why does the mechanical shutter exist there anyway if its electrical? (sorry, just a bit confused with all these new techs that I wasn't in the loop for a long time)

I would appreciate any feedback, suggestions or general opinion on the topic. Thank you so much.

Or, if any of you feel that something better is coming (I'm not in a rush) then I can wait. I just want to get something that will last me a long time. The Sony looks like its the smallest out of them (and also lightest) which I like

 

[Fishrrman]

Canon EOS R6mkII is rumored to be announced/released in the next few days, you might be interested in what that has to offer when the full specs are known...

 

[Apple fanboy]

Hello everyone,

I'm thinking to upgrade my D750 which I don't use that often but when I do its usually for travelling and portraiture.
I don't have many lenses, in fact I only have 85mm 1.8 Nikkor so I'm contemplating to change brands.

As Nikon seems to be lagging a bit (from my limited understanding) with mirrorless I started to look around and got 2 recommendations.

1) Sony A7R V
2) Canon EOS R5

I'd plan to get just one lens and that would be 24-70mm which I've found to be a good allround lens that I'm happy with (as it was the lens I've rented few times for my trips).

Now,
do you mind telling me which one is better or what are your experiences with these? Or if anyone jumped from same camera as me (D750)?

I've also noted that some cameras have mechanical and electrical shutter. What does that mean, please? Like in R5 case the mechanical is 12fps and electrical is 20fps so who would want to use the mechanical at all? What would be the point?
And why does the mechanical shutter exist there anyway if its electrical? (sorry, just a bit confused with all these new techs that I wasn't in the loop for a long time)

I would appreciate any feedback, suggestions or general opinion on the topic. Thank you so much.

Or, if any of you feel that something better is coming (I'm not in a rush) then I can wait. I just want to get something that will last me a long time. The Sony looks like its the smallest out of them (and also lightest) which I like

Nikon D750 owner here.

Truth is neither of your choices (or a Z6 mk2 from Nikon) are a bad camera. They will all do a job for you.

So the real question is what doesn't the D750 do that you need in your next camera?
I'd also go to a real camera shop where you can handle both and see which you like the feel of. Personally I don't like a Sony as they are a bit to square in my big hands and the Canon has all the buttons in the wrong place! But that's just because I'm set in my ways.

 

[mollyc]

I have Z6 & Z6ii. I have never felt limited by either of them.

My son had a three game lacrosse tournament this weekend. I took 414 photos using the tracking method with the Z6ii and only deleted 13 for missed focus. To me that's a pretty good keeper rate, and I was using a very heavy, non-native lens (Sigma 150-600) with an adapter.

What part of Nikon do you perceive to be lagging? Nikon may not be the right brand for you but the brand is much maligned for no real reason.

 

[Freida]

Honestly, at the moment I think I could do with better autofocus. I feel the D750 is limited especially with the number of 'spots' that it uses. I often have to move the camera, focus on the subject and then reframe it whilst having the AF 'locked' (don't releasing the finger from the half shutter press).
Also, I would like to buy 24-70 lens which is what I think will be using the most and I feel its a bit pointless to buy it for the D750 as Nikon and other brands are going mirrorless and the whole system is changing.
Even if I stick with Nikon I would have to get an adapter or buy current lens but eventually would have to 'lose out' on the gear once D750 dies or I want to upgrade. You see, I'm hesitant to invest more money into tech that is literally killed by Nikon now as they go mirrorless and seeing that I will be doing the switch I might as well consider other brands.

I've heard amazing feedback from Sony users and it seemed that until recently Sony's chip was among the best one in the mirrorless segment (or am I off?) so thats my motivation for Sony. My journey with Nikon was D90 kit and then D750 + 85mm 1.8 lens. Thats my last 12 years of DSLR.

I have iPhone 14 Pro and I have to say the camera is amazing so one would wonder if I actually need new camera at all. On the other hand, I somehow feel that when I look through the viewfinder and take pics its more enjoyable and I feel I take better photos.

So yeah, I'm confused right now as you've probably guessed by now but at the same time I'm contemplating to do more and therefore pick up my next 12+ year camera for the shooting when I want to do shooting.

So the real question is what doesn't the D750 do that you need in your next camera?

What part of Nikon do you perceive to be lagging?

 

[mollyc]

There are a lot of well pleased Sony users, a number on this forum, but I'd definitely include Nikon in your search. You can probably find a good deal on a Z6ii with a 24-70 f/4 kit lens. The kit lens is sharper than the 24-70 f/2.8 F mount I used to have.

 

[robgendreau]

Honestly, at the moment I think I could do with better autofocus. I feel the D750 is limited especially with the number of 'spots' that it uses. I often have to move the camera, focus on the subject and then reframe it whilst having the AF 'locked' (don't releasing the finger from the half shutter press).
Also, I would like to buy 24-70 lens which is what I think will be using the most and I feel its a bit pointless to buy it for the D750 as Nikon and other brands are going mirrorless and the whole system is changing.
Even if I stick with Nikon I would have to get an adapter or buy current lens but eventually would have to 'lose out' on the gear once D750 dies or I want to upgrade. You see, I'm hesitant to invest more money into tech that is literally killed by Nikon now as they go mirrorless and seeing that I will be doing the switch I might as well consider other brands.

I've heard amazing feedback from Sony users and it seemed that until recently Sony's chip was among the best one in the mirrorless segment (or am I off?) so thats my motivation for Sony. My journey with Nikon was D90 kit and then D750 + 85mm 1.8 lens. Thats my last 12 years of DSLR.

I have iPhone 14 Pro and I have to say the camera is amazing so one would wonder if I actually need new camera at all. On the other hand, I somehow feel that when I look through the viewfinder and take pics its more enjoyable and I feel I take better photos.

So yeah, I'm confused right now as you've probably guessed by now but at the same time I'm contemplating to do more and therefore pick up my next 12+ year camera for the shooting when I want to do shooting.

That D750 is a fantastic camera and a classic IMHO, but if you don't want it, you don't want it.

Either that Sony or the Canon would work fine, and so would a whole lot of other cameras. If the goal is to have something more modern and better AF. And all will be "killed" in the future because cameras are tech, and tech improves, and both the Sony and R5 will be replaced by something better.

Neither the Sony's "chip" nor its camera is necessarily the best, nor is the Canon's. Or other manufacturers. What works best depends on the use cases. For someone in your position it doesn't really matter probably. If you're making money from your photos I'd look at which company provides the best professional support, like Canon's CPS. Otherwise, try one out in a store and see which one feels best.

 

[tizeye]

I went a similar route. Film was Canon, but then they made my FD lens obsolete, so I was free to choose when going digital. Went Nikon, starting with a D40, then D90, D7000 and D610. Was contemplating staying full frame and an upgrade to the D750, but in 2014 when daughter was married in the Canary Islands, I borrowed a friend's new (the original) Sony A7. It was like a breath of fresh air lugging the A7 around compared to prior years lugging the Nikons around Europe. Ended up getting the Sony A7RII and currently use the A7RIII, skipping the IV. While you are considering the V, it was only announced last week and not certain anyone has them in their hands yet. It is a very impressive camera and the only thing I dislike is Sony raising the price point from the traditional $3295 to $3995 and as such I don't think the IV may drop much, maintaining i's current price. While I definitely like Sony and will be upgrading to either the A7RV or go whole hog with the A1, but then again, as a business I get a tax write-off with depreciation offsetting income. Canon is coming around and their 'next generation' R6II will be announced this week (tonight???). Sony, Canon and Nikon make great cameras, and in terms of sensors, for many models...including the D750 I think, Sony produced the sensors for Nikon which Nikon applied their software to. Go in several stores and play with them to see which feels best to you.

 

[mollyc]

I went a similar route. Film was Canon, but then they made my FD lens obsolete, so I was free to choose when going digital. Went Nikon, starting with a D40, then D90, D7000 and D610. Was contemplating staying full frame and an upgrade to the D750, but in 2014 when daughter was married in the Canary Islands, I borrowed a friend's new (the original) Sony A7. It was like a breath of fresh air lugging the A7 around compared to prior years lugging the Nikons around Europe. Ended up getting the Sony A7RII and currently use the A7RIII, skipping the IV. While you are considering the V, it was only announced last week and not certain anyone has them in their hands yet. It is a very impressive camera and the only thing I dislike is Sony raising the price point from the traditional $3295 to $3995 and as such I don't think the IV may drop much, maintaining i's current price. While I definitely like Sony and will be upgrading to either the A7RV or go whole hog with the A1, but then again, as a business I get a tax write-off with depreciation offsetting income. Canon is coming around and their 'next generation' R6II will be announced this week (tonight???). Sony, Canon and Nikon make great cameras, and in terms of sensors, for many models...including the D750 I think, Sony produced the sensors for Nikon which Nikon applied their software to. Go in several stores and play with them to see which feels best to you.

I have a friend who is a Sony Artisan and she has posted images from the new camera (A7RV); she had one to demo. The images she shared are very impressive, but as a Sony Ambassador, she also has a lot of skill and access to the best lenses. Posts 2-4 (at the time of this message) of her feed show some images with the camera.

https://www.instagram.com/carolinej/

Freida, you say you don't like the focal point layout of your D750; any new mirrorless camera, including the Nikon options, will give you oodles more FPs spread across the frame. Are you shooting a lot of high action sports or birding? Any modern mirrorless body will likely give you better results than the D750 if your sole complaint is the position of the FPs. Really only sports and birding photographers need the massive focusing upgrades, and cameras that have the most advanced focusing systems (Nikon Z9, Sony A1) are $5,500-$6,500 for the body only. Most pro-sumer bodies will have similar focusing speed once you learn the system, and there is a definite learning curve moving from dSLR to mirrorless of any brand. Again, for me, the Z6ii does everything and more than I need it to, and I have more keepers with it than I ever did with my D700 and D800 bodies.

Ergonomics and menu layout are also big considerations for switching brands, as well as color rendering. I've heard a lot of people move from Canon dSLR to the Canon R series and absolutely hate the color coming from the R cameras. Your mileage may vary for any of those variables, however.

 

[Padaung]

As Nikon seems to be lagging a bit (from my limited understanding) with mirrorless I started to look around and got 2 recommendations.

1) Sony A7R V
2) Canon EOS R5

I'd disagree, the three manufactureres just all have their strengths and weaknesses (I am a long time Nikon user so I'll confess to having a bias). I too was tempted by switching to Sony when I went mirrorless.

do you mind telling me which one is better or what are your experiences with these? Or if anyone jumped from same camera as me (D750)?

Both the cameras you listed are excellent, as are the simialarly priced options available from Nikon. With any current mirrorless camera, I'd say that the photographer is more likely to be the limiting factor regarding image capture/quality rather than the camera.

I'd plan to get just one lens and that would be 24-70mm which I've found to be a good allround lens that I'm happy with (as it was the lens I've rented few times for my trips).

You can't go too far wrong with a 24-70mm lens. I have one on my camera for probably 60-70% of the time. However, if you are looking at the f4 version of that lens, then the (Nikon) S 24-120mm f4 is really worth the extra money (don't get the older Nikon F-mount version, it's no where as good). It's not much more expensive, and has similar levels of optical quality as the 24-70, but offers a lot more far end reach. I don't know if Canon and Sony have a similar lens in their ranges.

I've also noted that some cameras have mechanical and electrical shutter. What does that mean, please? Like in R5 case the mechanical is 12fps and electrical is 20fps so who would want to use the mechanical at all? What would be the point?
And why does the mechanical shutter exist there anyway if its electrical? (sorry, just a bit confused with all these new techs that I wasn't in the loop for a long time)

Mechanical shutter is like the one in your DSLR, it makes a satisfying 'click/clunk' sound when yo take a picture.

Electronic shutter is the same as the one in use in your phone. It doesn't use a machanical device in front of the lens to block the light, instead the sensor is quickly swithced on and off. This allows totally silent image capture and faster frame rates as you do not need to physically move the shutter.

Downside is that apart from with the Sony A1 and the Nikon Z9, with fast moving objects you get what is called 'rolling shutter' and another effet called 'banding'. These two flagship cameras can read the data from the sensor incredibly quickly, almost all the data at the same time. However, all other cameras have to read the data off the sensor in stages. This, for example a golf club swing, the club is oving quickly and when the data is read from a later part of the sensor the club has moved compared to the readout from the first part of the sensor. The result is that the club looks like it is curved. The same happens with aeroplane blades, and building edges when panning the camera.

Banding occurs when taking images under led lights. Leds flicker at a variety of frequencies and this causes the exposure to alter across the image. It is nigh on impossible to remove in post. Thus at the wedding I photogrpahed last week, I'd have loved to use silent shutter, but I couldn't because of the led lighting.

Or, if any of you feel that something better is coming (I'm not in a rush) then I can wait.

Canon R6 Mark II was announced today, and it is widely expected for Nikon to relase a Z6 iii before March next year.

The Sony looks like its the smallest out of them (and also lightest) which I like

To be honest, since switching to mirrorless my kit bag has become heavier. The camera bodies are lighter, but generally I've found the lenses to be bulkier and heavier than the equivalent offering for my old DSLR (however the quality of the new lenses is so, so much btter tan the old ones I'm not complaining!) This is apart from the really big 400mm and longer lenses, some of which are becoming smaller and lighter, and yet better!


All in all, I'm really glad I switched to mirrorless. I wasn't expecting a huge difference from my old DSLRs, but the new cameras are a sum of many small improvements in so many ways that they are a significant upgrade (imo).

In addition, I absolutly love how the Z6 ii handles, and I find I take out for leisure now as well as work (which I never did with my DSLR).

As others have said, it is always good to go into a store and physically handle the cameras you are interested in, as well as have a play with the menu system - they are more complex now with all the extra tech in the cameras.

Oh, and a final point. Imo, using an on-camera flash is not as pleasant expereince with mirrorless - somethig about it just doesn't work as well for me compared to a DSLR. Off camera flash is totally fine though (same expereince as using a DSLR).

 

[tizeye]

A couple things I left out...
1) Absolutely love the electronic viewfinder rather than the reflex mirror. There were complaints initially but they have come a long way in brightness and resolution. Where they excel is WYSIWYG and on the fly exposure adjustments immediately reflected in the viewfinder.
2) Mechanical and electronic shutter CHOICE. While I typically use mechanical not because of the rolling shutter issue but for the audible click. The electronic is great where silence is required - such as an orchestra performance - and they even prohibit the 'quiet mode' slow clunk...clunk of reflex cameras. I demoed it to the conductor and was the only one allowed to take photos during the performance. Of course, forgetting it is 'silent mode', the next time I am taking photos and hear nothing...panic sets in...what's wrong, why is it not working, is my camera busted. Yes, the silence throws me off and switch back to mechanical and all is well.

 

[Clix Pix]

I have been using Sony FF mirrorless cameras for nearly three years now. I use the A1 and the A7R IV, with various lenses. Although in my Nikon days I had used and loved the 24-70mm zoom, when I was deciding what I wanted to buy to start out in my new direction with Sony, I read reviews and found that they were rather "meh" on the 24-70mm GM. I decided to hold off on that and instead purchased other lenses as need arose, budget permitted and time went on. Now Sony has released the new 24-70mm GM II, and the reviews on that one are enthusiastic, with users definitely recommending the lens. It's at the top of my list as the next lens I will eventually acquire after I take care of a couple of other priorities first.

Another lens that Sony offers in a versatile range, slightly longer, is the 24-105mm, which is often purchased and used as an all-around lens for home use as well as travel use. At f/4 it is slower than the f/2.8 GM, though, which in some shooting situations can definitely make a difference. When traveling, if one likes to shoot interiors of cathedrals and museums, a slower lens can be problematic.

With the A7R V being a brand-new camera body, not even available to users yet, you might also want to check out the A7R IV or A7R IVa. I love my A7R IV, which was the first Sony FF body I purchased, and these days use it primarily for macros, closeups, tabletops, etc., while my A1 is the one which shoots wildlife and other things I see around me outdoors.

I absolutely agree with those who are recommending that before making any purchase that you go to a local camera shop or if there isn't one close by, make some time to take a road trip to the nearest one, so that you can have the hands-on experience with the camera bodies and lenses you are considering. Many, many years ago when I bought my first "serious" SLR, I handled both Nikon and Canon bodies, and went with Nikon because it just felt so comfortable to me.

In November of 2019, with Sony's A7R IV, immediately that camera body felt so right to me..... The A7R IV is somewhat heavier, but not much, than the A7 III or A7 IV. The Sony APS-C bodies are even smaller and lighter. For me, one of the most important factors in my decision-making was the appeal of all the possibilities in Sony lenses that were already available, already on dealers' shelves ready for me when I was ready for them; that definitely sealed the deal. Sony now is continuing to provide new, updated versions of some of their original lenses plus offering additional, new lenses that meet users' needs and desires. There's a reason Sony is a leader in the mirrorless camera industry.

One thing to consider with the A7R IV and also now the A7R V is the other half of the "digital darkroom': i.e., the computer which you will be using for reviewing, culling and editing image files. If you shoot RAW, which most people who use the A7R IV do, those files are pretty large, and can take up storage space pretty quickly. I keep only the current files in process and the current year's edited images on my MBP's 1 TB SSD. Everything else is stored on external SSDs. So it is important to consider the tools you will be using to edit your images after having shot them, especially if currently using an older computer and/or limited or older editing programs.

For anyone who wonders, the "R" in A7R IV and A7R V most likely stands for "resolution," as these are the cameras in Sony's lineup which offer the highest resolution in terms of sensor and megapixels. There are other options, too, though: the also excellent A7 IV, which was recently released to update the very popular A7 III, is another camera body to consider, too, although it does have a smaller sensor and fewer megapixels. In some instances the cameras with less resolution do better in situations requiring a very high ISO.

Mechanical shutter vs electronic shutter: the most outstanding feature here is the ability to go into "silent mode," which, as has been pointed out is very helpful when shooting in situations where one doesn't want the noisy clatter of a camera interrupting a ceremony, a special occasion, a concert, a press conference, etc. It's also great when shooting wildlife because there is no noisy shutter sound to spook a bird or animal and one can sometimes get a bit closer to the subject(s). I use my cameras with the electronic shutter setting most of the time, although with the A7R IV shooting macro or closeups it is not as critical a factor, since a flower doesn't care how much noise the camera makes.

Shooting in Continuous High with 20 or 30 fps is terrific for capturing and tracking a bird in flight or a squirrel leaping from place to place, people moving in a dance performance, or active children playing, and there's no disturbing noise. However, one has to have a light finger on the shutter button, as it doesn't take long to zip through an entire memory card's storage when shooting this way!

Speaking of memory cards, the A7R IV uses SD cards only, but the A7R V, like the A1, uses both SD cards and the newer (and more expensive) CFExpress Type A cards. I use two CFE cards in the memory card slots of the A1, although it is also possible to use one CFE card and 1 SD card in the slots. It's good that Sony offers this flexibility in its memory options. I have a dual-memory card (CFE and SD) reader so that it's easy to stick in whichever card I've been using in whichever camera body when it is time to transfer the files to the computer.

It's a big decision, getting a new camera and lens(es) and also especially when considering switching from one system to another. Definitely take your time with this and try out, handle all the candidates, experiment with the lenses, and have fun as you make your choices!

 

[Ray2]

I candidly do not understand how anyone can provide you with recommendations when we don’t know what you photograph.

 

[Clix Pix]

In her first post the OP specifically mentioned "travel" and "portraiture," but of course that is still pretty broad in terms of categorization and description. Travel photography can embrace a number of approaches, everything from landscapes to macro to portraiture (both formal and informal) to architecture. Whether at home or traveling, portraiture can include everything from casual and candid shots of family members and friends to more formal types of portraits, including environmental portraits and head-and-shoulders, headshots, etc. For those interested in working as a professional photographer, which does not seem to be the case here, portraiture can also include maternity shoots, new-baby shoots, family shoots, senior shoots and so on as well.

When considering in which direction to go next with photography, it is pretty important to consider what kinds of images one likes to shoot, what types of subject matter would be preferred, and in what type of context so that one can then choose the camera body and lens(es) which will best serve the purpose right off the bat, with of course allowing for expansion beyond that as time goes on.

At the time I was making my shift to Sony, I chose to go with the A7R IV and three lenses, two of which were macro and the third the fast f/1.8 135mm. I tend to shoot a lot of macro and closeups so it was a natural move to go with two macro lenses right away plus a fast medium-length tele prime as well. I had plenty of time to fill in the "holy trinity" of lenses that many people choose right from the get-go. That little group of three lenses got me started, but I knew that of course I would not be limiting myself to just those, and after a month or so when I'd had some time to become acquainted with my new gear I went back to the store to add another lens to extend my reach, the 200-600mm. As time went on and the need arose for other lens ranges and capabilities I have chosen what would work best for each situation and filled in gaps as I went along. Everyone has their own preferences and shooting style.

So, yes, it is important for the person making the decision to purchase new gear and to perhaps make a switch from one system to another to know right from the start what they prefer to shoot and which gear would work best for the situations they anticipate. Learning of others' experiences with specific brands of camera bodies and lenses can be invaluable even if the shooting styles and preferences are somewhat or even wholly different.

 

[Ray2]

In her first post the OP specifically mentioned "travel" and "portraiture,"

My mistake. Even reading it twice I missed it.

 

[r.harris1]

Thing is, you can’t go wrong with any manufacturer. They’re all exceptional at the level you’re looking at. If you can hold one in your hand and flip through the menu systems and so forth, you’ll be much better off. There isn’t a “better” in an objective sense. Just “better for you”.

EDIT: It’s always about learning well whatever tool you choose. It won’t matter the number of focus points if we aren’t sure how to make the camera choose the one we want or how to override the choice.

 

[IT Provisor]

Hello there, first time traditional camera buyer here, and I, too, am looking to get a mirrorless camera. In my case, I'm using it for both business and personal, doing vlogging along with more professional shots for products, portraits, etc. With that said, I've always been a Canon fan and have been eying their new R10 and R7 models, with the R7 being more attractive since it simply offers more to justify the ~$500 premium over its entry level sibling.

What I'm looking for is uncropped 4K 60 fps, a higher shutter speed for those occasions where I would want/need to get burst shots, the ability to change out lenses that are more current and easier to find in the future, and a good battery life so that I'm not having to change out batteries as much. I don't care as much about full frame over APS-C since I hear that more modern mirrorless cameras with their processors do an EXCELLENT job of utilizing their sensors to the max. I just want to make sure that I get a good all-around first camera to use as my main one for when my iPhone 14 Pro Max isn't the best one that I have on me.

With that, if you consider Canon, I would look into the newer R Series cameras released this year, starting with the R10 and up since they're Canon's newest offerings and will serve you well, depending on your own needs. Also, keep in mind that these cameras natively utilize the RF lenses, so you know that you won't be hard pressed finding and using Canon's latest and greatest! Hopefully this helps, from one newbie to another!

 

[OldMacs4Me]

So much depends on your monitor and what you wish to do with the image after you capture it. My 'good' monitor is an ASUS 1200x1920-24" 'Pro-Art' calibrated monitor. Anything I have sent out for printing has come back an almost perfect match to what I see on the monitor. My Lumix ZS200 camera uses a relatively small 1" sensor and full frame or slightly cropped images easily fill the screen and look crisp. My older Fuji XP90 camera with the teeny sensor, not always.

I love the Lumix with the 1 inch sensor for two reasons. One Leica lens covers the gamut from 24 to 360mm, is permanently attached and the camera easily carried on my belt or in a small bag. Camera and bag easily fits into a jacket pocket. This camera does really well producing great depth of field. That said if you are working with monitors with significantly higher pixel counts, that alone may require larger or even full frame sensors. If you want to isolate your subjects with fully blurred foregrounds and backgrounds, then you really need to be thinking full frame.

If you like the idea of multiple lens cameras then you can certainly get as much or more camera for your dollar than that Lumix 200. If money is no object and the all in one 1 inch sensor would fill your needs definitely look at Sony's offerings. Menu navigation on the Lumix line of cameras really needs a serious make-over.

As to printing, I can count on 8x10s or even 11x14s from the smaller Fuji. The Lumix will consistently give me good to excellent uncropped 16x24s. Beyond that definitely think larger sensors.

As to brands I wholeheartedly agree with the need to actually hold and try before you buy. Strangely I've bought all of my cameras at London Drugs, simply because I can try them in store and return them within 30 days if I'm not 100% happy.

 

[Ray2]

I love the Lumix with the 1 inch sensor for two reasons. One Leica lens covers the gamut from 24 to 360mm, is permanently attached and the camera easily carried on my belt or in a small bag. Camera and bag easily fits into a jacket pocket.

We often forget the end objective and immerse ourselves in gear for the sake of gear. I holiday travel a lot. My kit has gone from a D800 to Fuji APS-C to m43 and now two 1” sensor RX100's (m3 & m6). It only took me 20 years to realize I only traveled to sunny places and rarely ventured out in rain, let alone that white stuff. For low light/eventings I carry a GM1 (body smaller than an RX100) with a fast prime. Some of my most memorable travel pics were taken with the RX100’s.

 

[Clix Pix]

Where's the OP?

 

[Freida]

Thank you all for great responses. I will go and try the cameras I've mentioned but I came here to look for answers that I simply don't have yet.
Being on D750 I probably still don't tap out the full potential of the camera for sure. When I do portraiture I tend to shoot all in M mode as I can control things and there is no 'rush'. When travelling I tend to shoot in A mode most of the time.
The reason of me thinking to update is that I feel that right now I can still get some value back from D750 and the 85mm 1.8 lens whilst the market is heavily shifting towards mirrorless.
I don't use my camera that often so its more of a hobby that I do once in a while.
D750 main issue for me was lack of focus points (and the area is quite small) and the AF would sometimes miss. Seeing the above models they both seem to have amazing eye tracking which I feel would solve quite a bit of my issues.
One could argue that I might still have time left on D750 and it might serve me better to learn more on that before I switch. On the other hand, if there is a body/tool that makes certain tasks easier than why not switch already? When I shoot there is tons of things to keep track off (composition, pose, light etc.) so if a camera body can remove some from my mind (tracking/focus etc.) then I can focus on the other stuff.

I don't know, I'm still torn between whether or not its worth it for me but I'm debating it. Also, after covid etc. I feel it would do me good to pick it up more and do more stuff to keep my mental state in a good shape.

As for monitor - well right now I have 15" MBP with crappy work Dell screen but as soon as Apple releases update on Mac Mini OR Mac Studio I'm getting that + the Studio display most likely.

 

[dimme]

When I started my journey with photography most cameras were manual. Autofocus was not a thing and only some high end cameras were aperture preferred. Looking back this was a great learning experience. I have been using a D750 since it's launch and it's a great camera and so is the others that are mentioned in this thread. I would suggest to take a break from looking at equipment for a bit and explore making some images. You may find what you have is fine or you may see more clearly what you need. Good Luck!

 

[Freida]

Yes I agree but my problem is the future to be honest.
I only have 85mm lens fro the D750 so if I want to get 24-70 do I really invest into old/dead tec that Nikon killed or do I move on and future proof myself with the mirrorless?
Thats part of the dilemma for me

When I started my journey with photography most cameras were manual. Autofocus was not a thing and only some high end cameras were aperture preferred. Looking back this was a great learning experience. I have been using a D750 since it's launch and it's a great camera and so is the others that are mentioned in this thread. I would suggest to take a break from looking at equipment for a bit and explore making some images. You may find what you have is fine or you may see more clearly what you need. Good Luck!

 

[OldMacs4Me]

FWIW I think you should be able to get a used 28-70mm Nikkor F-mount autofocus in the $100(US) range. When I started out in the early 70s, several things led me to choose Nikon and one of those was the robust build of both camera and lenses. So a used Nikkor lens should have a lot of life left in it unless the previous owner was using it day in and out for several years.

You could certainly go that route and know your loss at resale would be limited. Not quite the 24-70 you referenced but it would certainly expand your range at an affordable price.

As to picking a new line, most of the main names do a great job optically, but the earlier advice of hands on experimentation remains crucial. What is comfortable for me may all wrong for you. Also; modern cameras take the bells and whistles aspect to an absurd extreme. You want software that will let you do what you want to do, without periodic trips through menu hell. Again hands on is the best way to tell.

 

[bunnspecial]

FWIW I think you should be able to get a used 28-70mm Nikkor F-mount autofocus in the $100(US) range. When I started out in the early 70s, several things led me to choose Nikon and one of those was the robust build of both camera and lenses. So a used Nikkor lens should have a lot of life left in it unless the previous owner was using it day in and out for several years.

The "good" 28-70 f/2.8 was still a lot more than $100 the last I checked, and the other variable aperture 28-70s I'm familiar with are typical film-era kit lenses. They're passable if all you're using is ISO 400 color film, but kind of crummy otherwise. Even the 28-70 f/2.8 AF-S is still less than great, and was designed in the days of 2mp digital bodies. I think I have one or two lenses in this range, and I'm happy to give examples of them. Aside from that, if one ever wanted to move to the Z cameras, the film-era kit lenses will lose autofocus(the 28-70mm f/2.8 is still safe for now).

If I wanted a budget lens these days that covered this range, I'd look at the 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 VR. Yes, I have one of these lenses and have used it a lot, especially on my Df where its light weight and small size is welcome. The 24-120mm f/4 VR is about the same optically, but also heavier and more expensive. Still, though, either of these would be my suggestion for a budget mid-range zoom for a Nikon full-frame DSLR. The older non-VR 24-70mm f/2.8 is also coming down in price and is a fantastic lens, but it's still also a several hundred dollar lens.