I wouldn’t mind, though perhaps would go for a 2?
Just don’t think I would get a tremendous amount of use out of it.
My GR is properly pocketable so gets a reasonable amount of time on it for out and about stuff and the x100 never comes out of it’s hiding place!
I find the versatility between 28 35 50 at the touch of a well placed button so freeing. Even on my basic Q at 50 the quality still holds up.
I guess it depends what type of photography one is in to. I’m not one for ‘gear’ and am happy to work within the limitations of one camera and one lens.
G
I started to go down the route of contact printing as a way of getting a physical artefact from the black and white work. Loved working with 10x8 but then finally started the transition to digital. That’s a long story!
@Jamiewednesday Yes I think you may be right about the 43 lens size. As an alternative to the £4199 price tag the Sony A7CR and a couple of small primes might work out as it is pretty compact and could be cheaper.
Tim
I wish I had your self control, I suffer from acute GAS and just love having lots of different cameras to play around with, they all get used I’m not one for putting cameras on a shelf and never using it, they are tools to capture memories, and should be fun to use.
At the other end of the spectrum I’m continuing my renewal of my Micro Four Thirds collection with the recent aquisition of a used 100-300mm lens.
It was remarkably cheap bought used from London Camera Exchange, I’m almost wondering if it was mis-priced as it was a third cheaper than their other outlets who were already very reasonably priced.
Due to the doubling of focal length with Micro Four Thirds this lens gives a remarkable 200-600mm full frame equivalent in a very small package.
I’m very pleased with the results, it’s certainly not going to win zoom lens of the year but for occasional use I think it will be just fine. We have a trip to Iceland and Norway soon so I’ll give it a bit of a test. The second picture is a roof around 400 yards away. The 3rd picture was a test shot taken whilst wantering round the garden with no regards to composition and set to 150mm (300mm equivalent) but the flower came out reassuringly sharp.
My son was looking for a 35mm compact p&s camera when I spotted something interesting among a bundle of cameras as a lot in our local auction house - starting at £15.
Took a chance and for £220 I won this:
and this:
and this:
and this:
With a small tripod and all the necessary batteries and chargers in the camera bag! It’s all working, and the Contax looks brand new.
The Lumix will go to a friend of my daughter, the Contax to my son and I might sell the others on for loose charity change.
G
Played with a GFX 100RF when killing some time at Yodobashi in Shinjuku. The small lens appears to be up to the demands of the 100mp 44mm sensor, and the camera is impressively quick for what it is. This was days before they received stock of the new Sony, would have been fun to compare.
The EVF is notable; it appears the same as the one in the 100SII - one of the best I have ever used (once colour adjusted for Fuji’s blue-ish preferences).
Cue for owners of the older Minolta 70-210 to post a picture of it next to a Beer can 
My son just had developed the first roll of film through the Contax and the results are very nice indeed. Beautiful colour saturation and metering. The Zeiss is razor sharp too.
I’m just glad it works! It wouldn’t have been such a bargain if it was duff. Fortune did indeed favour the brave on this occasion.
G
I have owned a Nikon D810 for about a decade and have had a lot of pleasure using it. However, as I have aged, I find I don’t want to carry it far, and certainly not with additional lenses and a tripod. My Sony RX100 VI gets much more use nowadays.
I am thinking of trading in my 810 for a mirrorless system, body plus a single zoom lens (perhaps 24-120mm, or similar). I have owned Nikon SLRs for more than 40 years so am looking at Z6 III, Z5 II or Z7 III. My main use will be landscape but am also becoming interested in bird photography which I guess will be greatly facilitated by modern stabilisation technology.
I know in the end I will have to make up my own mind, but any thoughts/recommendations re specific Nikon models, or, indeed, any other manufacturer, would be most welcome! Thanks
I still use my beloved Nikon D700 and strangely never felt the need to upgrade to a D810 or D850 despite their obvious superiority.
I had similar thoughts about the Z5 II / Z6 III / Z7 III. I use my camera only few times a year so I couldn’t justify spending too much money on that (I prefer to spend on Hi-Fi gear that I enjoy on a daily basis).
If it was me, I would consider a Z5 II and the NIKKOR Z 24-120mm f/4 S or NIKKOR Z 28‑135mm f/4 PZ. Right now I use a 24-70mm f/2.8 and wouldn’t mind more flexibility (I have the 70-200mm f/2.8 but never use it).
If you use your camera on a regular basis a Z6 III could be another interesting choice, the Z7 III is too expensive for what it is in my opinion and you’d also need a proper computer to handle the photos. Also, do you care about videos? That’s another matter to consider.
I don’t know if you have already done that, but I would consider a proper monitor and software to edit your photos. Personally I value the monitor a lot and that gave me great satisfaction.
Thanks very much for your helpful reply. I think I was edging towards the Z5 II before I got your reply. Also the 24-120 lens seems to be bundled with that body by some dealers so it has definite appeal. In fact, the lens that sits on my D810 for 99% of the time is a Nikon AF-S 24-120mm. I find it more than adequate for most of my needs but the combined weight of body and lens is about 1.8 kg! I will need to check the weight saving on the Z5 plus zoom lens. I will also check out the other lens you mentioned. The price of this combination is about what I had in mind, but I will compare with the Z6. And by the way, video is not important to me - I use my iPhone for short impromptu videos only.
I am intrigued by your mention of monitor and software. I have a 24” HP monitor that must be at least ten years old. It wasn’t too expensive and was well rated when I bought it, but I could probably do with an upgrade. I am totally out of touch with the market for decent monitors. I have no idea of recommended sizes/prices for half-decent photo monitors nowadays. Regarding software, at first I used the Nikon software package when it was new on the market and then I dabbled with Lightroom for a while. Unfortunately after a while the files I generated from a new camera (Sony RX100) were not supported by my old version of Lightroom so I gave up on that. At that time I did not want to commit to a monthly subscription to Lightroom, although such charging is now the norm. Around 2021 I found ACDSee which offered a one-off purchase price and seemed to do just about everything I needed. I haven’t looked at any alternatives since, but may well re-evaluate Lightroom. If it’s only about a tenner a month then it is probably good value.
Sorry about my ramble!
What about the birding? Long lenses with fast apertures don’t come, er, cheep.
Groans…….. 
Welcome, I’m glad if I helped you.
My heart would go for the Z7, but reality is that the Z5 is more than enough and much better than my D700. I don’t know you, but I printed very big photos (from A2 to 3-4m tall images) and even my humble D700 made a remarkable job. So that’s why I would say more mpx aren’t the answer. Indeed what you really want, in my view, is the full frame sensor for its superior capability.
I forgot to mention that more expensive bodies also benefit from better AF which might be more suited for sports or wildlife photography in case you are interested. Personally that never concerned me.
I know about the weight, my camera + lens is around the same, my hands hurt at the end of the day. By the way an iPhone with apps such as FilmicPro or BlackMagic can be really that good for making high quality cheap videos.
Talking about monitors, I had many Eizo which is my favourite brand (right now I have a 24" from the ColorGraphic series). I find them essential both to enjoy the photos and to work with them. The gamut is pretty wide and colour accuracy is fantastic (it also calibrates itself). I really got to appreciate these monitors over time and I think it’s just as important as the camera (also many famous photographer such as Steve McCurry use them, no wonder why).
I didn’t want to pay any subscription and didn’t think both Lightroom and Photoshop were good enough to manage colours. Personally I had a great experience with CaptureOne (available both with and without subscription). Editing is much faster, easier and, above all, colours are so much better than the other softwares in my personal opinion/experience.
Well spotted!
I haven’t yet ventured into bird photography so have a great deal to learn. I am not, at least for now, intending to take it as seriously as some on this forum clearly do. I don’t want to carry a tripod nor sit in a hide for hours on end, although I am not too far from old gravel pits and nature reserves in the Trent valley. I am hoping I can get by with a second relatively long lens and benefitting from modern image stabilisation technology which, if the claims are justified, allows use of much slower shutter speeds (4-5 stops).
Any advice for a naive beginner would be most welcome. In particular, recommendations for a reasonably priced lens.
As fast as you can get! Don’t know what the equivalent Nikon Z lens is but I still use two EF lenses on my R5, the 100-400 and the 300 2.8 (with a 1.4x if and as needed). The 300 makes life significantly easier than the slower zoom.
But. If you’re walking a long way rather than sitting down in 2 or 3 spots, then I wouldn’t want to be lugging around something as heavy as the full metal 300 so think about weight too. I would imagine all modern Z lenses are pretty light, even the bright ones.
Oh and forget about slower shutter speeds too. Most birds don’t work like that! Think more like 1/2000 or more for much of the time. Continuous shooting, and try not to crop too tight or you’ll get more misses, you can always crop on the PC if you wish.
Personally I’m not a birder, more about broad wildlife captures, however there is a distinct lack of wild mammals and such around here, so birds it is! I do try and mix it up between pictures of a bird (a bird on a stick, on on the wing) with wider shots with the bird as part of a scene rather than just the bird.
If you can book yourself a place in a hide for a day. You’ll learn lots through practice while rattling off thousands of shots.
And you’ll still have plenty of misses! Even at 1/4000 with missed focus…
Great, thanks for the excellent advice, especially reminding me how birds actually ‘work’. I am so used to photographing stationary objects!
