Was your choice the right one?

[stumac]

Lots of issues though...i guess it was an expensive lesson learned.

Cant beat Canon in my experience.

Yeah I've never been a fan boy of any system ....it's my job so I just use what gets the job done . I used canon for 20 years and it hasn't been until this year that I changed that I've learned just how good canons are . I'm now too invested in Sony to change back so I'm just going to have to learn to live them lol

 

[antonroland]

I recently bought a 5Diii to "see what I had missed" with Canon FF.


The 5D with a 28-135 lens 1553g
A GX9 with a 12-60 lens (nearest you can get to the same) 715g. And it does a lot more, with similar image quality under "normal" conditions

Of all the 5D bodies I have owned and still own, the 3 is my least favourite by a country mile. I should have “settled” for the 2 at the time…

What was your experience of the 3?

 

[antonroland]

I can say hand on heart I never in many many years had a single issue with canon . And I've stated my Sony experience above which are all very real and relevant to me . All this is only my opinion so it's all good

Only ever had joy with my Canon bodies from 350D and 10+ bodies later I have 3 and plan to grow the number…definitely no R ever though. Brief flirt with the X-T3, went back to a 5D1. Had to use a Nikon D700 at work for a year or 3…liked it…

But for digital I will deffo stick with Canon D-SLR bodies.

 

[Sangoma]

Of all the 5D bodies I have owned and still own, the 3 is my least favourite by a country mile. I should have “settled” for the 2 at the time…

What was your experience of the 3?

The 3 is a big improvement over the 2, especially in noise at high ISO, and for the reason I bought it, I was not prepared to pay the extra for the 4, especially as it didn't seem to be better than the 3, and comments from others say similar.

It would also depend on use, anything that is a bit distant, moves (especially quickly), and there is good light, I would use a G9

 

[antonroland]

The 3 is a big improvement over the 2, especially in noise at high ISO, and for the reason I bought it, I was not prepared to pay the extra for the 4, especially as it didn't seem to be better than the 3, and comments from others say similar.

It would also depend on use, anything that is a bit distant, moves (especially quickly), and there is good light, I would use a G9

Nowadays I mostly shoot my 5D1 or film and my 4 and DsR pretty much sit in storage.

I bumped into Gary Gough’s youtube channel…if you dig deep you will find a video where he shows the high ISO banding of the 3 exactly as I found with mine. I am too scared to test my 4 for fear of finding the same and so I limit my ISO’s to 1600 and 3200 if I ABSOLUTELY must…

 

[Adam-G]

I think it's really hard to make a bad choice these days as there aren't any markedly poor cameras anymore.

I went into the Lumix S ecosystem (S5 and now S5ii) as I wanted a solid hybrid setup that would enable me to get into video in the future. Now I'm doing more video, the video features have been a godsend.

Live histograms and the multiple exposure tools are super helpful and class leading stabilisation means I don't need to get the gimbal out as often. So many recording codecs/framerates all in 10bit and it actually uses shutter angle which saves messing about with shutter speed calculations. I've no idea why manufacturers who are serious about video don't adopt this.

I was tempted to go the A7IV route but having had a play around with a friends' I'm more than happy with the money I saved and the balance of features I got with my choice.

I'm absolutely loving the lens choices, especially the ones from Sigma (I have 4 Sigma lenses already and they've all been wonderful) and I'm never let down from a photography perspective which is my primary use.

Another key factor for me was the firmware update frequency and usefulness. The S5ii recently got a handheld hi res mode, increased 20x magnification focus punch in and an amazing Live View Composite mode. When I see other eco systems having to pay £150 for some frame lines it cements that I made a good choice for my needs.

Very happy customer.

 

[Sangoma]

Nowadays I mostly shoot my 5D1 or film and my 4 and DsR pretty much sit in storage.

I bumped into Gary Gough’s youtube channel…if you dig deep you will find a video where he shows the high ISO banding of the 3 exactly as I found with mine. I am too scared to test my 4 for fear of finding the same and so I limit my ISO’s to 1600 and 3200 if I ABSOLUTELY must…

I have read about it, but got the impression it was on JPEGs and mainly with the auto lighting optimiser on, maybe I read wrong.
Have seen no signs of it yet anyway.

But then some of the new expensive other cameras suffer from banding due to the phase shift detectors on the sensor, so things never seem perfect

 

[antonroland]

I have read about it, but got the impression it was on JPEGs and mainly with the auto lighting optimiser on, maybe I read wrong.
Have seen no signs of it yet anyway.

But then some of the new expensive other cameras suffer from banding due to the phase shift detectors on the sensor, so things never seem perfect

Yep…nothing is perfect. Purely a matter of finding one with the smallest number of “issues” you can live with.

Unless it is a Sony…THOSE must be avoided at ALL cost.

 

[Phil V]

I think it's really hard to make a bad choice these days as there aren't any markedly poor cameras anymore.

I’ve been saying this for years.

And yet the internet is still full of photographers whining about wrong shaped bokeh, rolling shutters, banding etc etc

Some people either have ridiculously high expectations or just like to whinge

 

[Adam-G]

I’ve been saying this for years.

And yet the internet is still full of photographers whining about wrong shaped bokeh, rolling shutters, banding etc etc

Some people either have ridiculously high expectations or just like to whinge

The fact that reviewers have to go into this absolute minute detail shows just how good we all have it.

I have a device that can de-squeeze anamorphic lenses in-camera and I'm just a bog standard consumer. The high end features and functionality we're getting these days absolutely blows my mind and it continues to get more accessible as those functions reach more sensibly priced models.

When I buy anything I always do an insane amount of research to ensure I make a good choice (the mindset of someone who grew up poor but now has disposable income!). The only commonality I find is that when I find something I like, the reviews are almost always uniformly excellent and they state that any marginal improvement can be hundreds of pounds more.

I can only see the standards getting higher with all the great competition around too.

 

[leaky5]

To be honest, I still really do not have any idea if I am on the right platform.

I had moved fully over to m4/3 for weight and issues with arthritis, but am now over on an older Sony A7 with heavier lenses.
I actually find the larger body and lenses easier to handle and will put up with the extra weight.

There will probably be no more expensive purchase until I retire now and I am just going to enjoy using what I have

 

[ancient_mariner]

It would be interesting to hear how they feel about their choice after they have had chance to settle in with whatever they bought.

Most of the time I'm looking for a system that will get out of the way and help me do relatively simple photography. I normally use spot metering and a single AF point, focusing and recomposing. It's nice but not essential to have an idea of what the exposure is like, and I want low noise, big dynamic range for shadow recovery and a larger sensor plus appropriate lenses for a sense of depth in the image.

It wasn't always like this with digital, and my first DSLR had a cropped sensor, was noisy above 400asa and lacked dynamic range, but still produced some good pictures. Moving from that to a Nikon D610 8 years ago and then 4 1/2 years ago to a Sony A7III has very much helped with my simple approach. It's occasionally nice to have eye AF etc, but I appreciate the Sony for the photographic qualities it has, much more than the programming. It does no harm that some of the best lenses available are made by Sony, but I also use legacy lenses from my '80s Minolta outfit.

So I'm happy with my choice of main camera. I still have a couple of Nikons, 1 film and 1 IR converted (the D70 is the most awful piece of plastic crap) and my Minolta 7000 plus bronica film outfits. However none of these really get used. The Sony A58 that I first bought is my loaner camera, and it also takes my Minolta lenses.

 

[The Duke of Bork]

I started out in the late 1970s with a Yashica Minister III loaned to me by my physics teacher. Graduated to a Praktica L2 and separate lightmeter bought with pocket money. Eventually ended up with Canon AE-1 and A-1 with a selection of lenses. Chopped them in in the 1990s for a Panasonic SLR with 28-300 zoom - was mainly shooting off-road motorsports at the time. Dropped out of photography for a while then restarted in the digital era with (I think) a Canon 300D, upgrading over the years to a 400D, 40D, 7D and 7DMkii as I got into serious birding - cycled through a lot of lenses in that time including Mki and ii 100-400s, 400 f4, 600 f4, Sigma 150-600 and 300-800. Problem always seemed to be that the lenses were either too short, too slow or too heavy...

Decided to try mirrorless towards the end of the pandemic years and on the basis of very little research went down the Olympus M43 route, which seems to have been the right choice for me. Started with a used EM-1 Mkii and 100-400 and progressed from there. Had a great holiday in Costa Rica in early 2022 with the EM-1iii, the OM-1 was announced just after we got back and I ordered one for launch, it's been an absolute revelation - the subject recognition and Pro-capture are ideal for my use case and I bit the bullet and bought the 150-400. Currently osting my Ecuador shots from a recent holiday here from time to time - I'd have had difficulty getting them with the EM-1iii and almost impossible with my previous SLR setups.

I sometimes have a hankering to try full-frame, probably Sony, but the camera I'd want is the Alpha-1 which is of course the most expensive and I can't justify that and a decent long lens to try alongside the Olympus system. Also the (reputedly poor) weatherproofing concerns me - I've been going to rainforests for the last few years and the last thing I need is a camera failure in the middle of nowhere during an expensive foreign trip.

Shout out to the best thing I've encountered recently which is the Spider Holster system - it solves what for me has been a major bugbear, which is - how to carry a camera with long lens and binoculars at the same time and have both immediately usable? I came across it via an American birder on our Namibia trip last year and my neck and back have been thanking me since.

 

[snerkler]

To be honest, I still really do not have any idea if I am on the right platform.

I had moved fully over to m4/3 for weight and issues with arthritis, but am now over on an older Sony A7 with heavier lenses.
I actually find the larger body and lenses easier to handle and will put up with the extra weight.

There will probably be no more expensive purchase until I retire now and I am just going to enjoy using what I have

That's quite interesting, just show that you need to try these things for yourself. In terms of the body though Olympus EM1's and OM1 are marginally bigger than the A7, were these not a consideration?

 

[Phil V]

When I buy anything I always do an insane amount of research to ensure I make a good choice (the mindset of someone who grew up poor but now has disposable income!).

I’d never considered the causality of my obsession with research before spending. But you’ve nailed it for me, thanks.

I’m well aware that the reason I leave extravagant spending to my Mrs is that I often struggle to not buy the cheapest when it’s easy to justify buying something excellent instead.

We just spent more on a front door than most of my cars have cost, and I know if I’d have spent what I was comfortable with I’d never have been happy

 

[Nod]

As far as my main systems go, I'm happy with my choices, as I am with most of my compacts. I could have saved myself a few quid by avoiding the 1 system kit I bought and sticking with 1 Nikon 1 body and the adaptor for my F mount lenses. In hindsight, I'd also avoid any bridge cameras - none of them have been up to what I'd hoped of them.

 

[firewireguy]

My first proper move was a Nikon D50, which I thoroughly researched. In understood I was buying in to a system that would be expensive to back out of. I've yet to regret going with Nikon.

Eventually the slowness of the D50 became a chore so I bought a second hand D2H, which was a beast. Still the best handling camera I've had. But it took a lot to coax a good image out in post processing.

Then moved to a refurbished D300 for the extra resolution and better image quality. It was a solid camera, a big upgrade in terms of IQ, but a slight downgrade in terms of ergonomics. I lusted after the D700, but it was out of reach. Part of me still wants a D3, even though it's not as capable as any half modern camera. At the time it was the holy grail and I still remember seeing the release ISO6400 shots and being gobsmacked how good it was.

Then the D7100 was released and it offered a lot of what I wanted. SOOC pictures were a big improvement, higher resolution, no AA filter. But again their ergonomics were a step down. And that's where I've been living for the past almost 11 years.

Until tomorrow that is, when a new exciting adventure begins.

 

[the black fox]

I started at the dawn of digital with some obscure camera with open sights , no rear screen and about a half a mp drive .but it was a start , many small pocket digitals followed over the years 1mp/2mp 3 4 5 etc then I bought a Sony 828 with the swivelling body and 8mp .. but at the time the first canon DSLR began to appear.
A couple of years later I upgraded to a 40D .. then other cameras one after the other went from canon to Nikon then back again each time chasing marginal improvements in mp / AF / lenses . Till about 4 years ago i was on Nikon cropped D7200 and full frame a D3s then disaster major heart failure when going to bempton … that looked Like the end of game .till I looked at a Olympus omd1-mkii and a PL100-400 stuck with olympus ever since having been through most of the available bodies and lenses my current gear is a olympus OM1 + 300mm f4 and a few lenses and I totally love it . No regrets

 

[snerkler]

OM1 + 300mm f4

That's a lovely combo

 

[realspeed]

The right choice depends on what is available at the time of purchase. With newer models arriving in the market place the question of upgrade or not then applies.

 

[antonroland]

The right choice depends on what is available at the time of purchase. With newer models arriving in the market place the question of upgrade or not then applies.

And the budget at the time, of course.

That being said, my experience of an upgrade has almost always been a downgrade…within or outside the brand.

 

[MK1 Photography]

It all began with an Olympus Trip 35mm about 50 years ago
I have shot on Canon Pentax Fujifilm (still using X100S) Panasonic (G9 was my first M4T camera) and in the last and final I instalment now back with Olympus OMD EM1 MK3 and love doing Macros and birds absolutely brilliant M4T sytem

 

[gramps]

Box Brownie > Kodak 127 Brownie > Zenith > Asahi Pentax ... Nikon D1/D1x/D1h > Nikon D3/D3s > Nikon D800/D810 > Nikon D500/D850 > Olympus M43 > Leica Q/Ricoh GRiii (plus a few odds & ends in between!).

Expensive journey!

 

[Phil V]

And the budget at the time, of course.

That being said, my experience of an upgrade has almost always been a downgrade…within or outside the brand.

Really? I find it difficult to reconcile that your 5d, 5dIV and 5ds are worse cameras than a 350d. The only reason I could countenance that someone would rather use a 5d classic over the newer cameras is that the behaviour is more like a film camera - which I find odd but whatever floats your boat.

I’ve never had a 350d (had a 300d though, so know the layout - and a 20d so I know the sensor) and it wouldn’t hold a light to any camera I’ve owned since then. 40d better, 7d better still 6d loads better and r6 stratospherically better in every single way than the 350d. So definitely all upgrades.

You are free to state that you don’t like ‘technology’, but the reality is a camera is a machine for taking pictures, and a digital one even more technologically complex by necessity. And the latest canon mirrorless are amazing tools for doing just that. The idea that you want to bury your head from this progress is your choice; but I can’t help thinking it’s your loss too.

 

[ancient_mariner]

Really? I find it difficult to reconcile that your 5d, 5dIV and 5ds are worse cameras than a 350d.

Sometimes I think an upgrade can be disappointing initially. Moving from my Sony A58 (crop) to a Nikon D610 (FX), I remember being disappointed at what seemed to be images just as noisy as those from the Sony but apparently made worse by lower quality Nikon lenses compared to the Minolta kit I had used before. It wasn't until I started working with the images that I realised they had much more potential to find the photo I wanted inside than the older camera. Trying the older camera again after some months of the Nikon also made me realise that it was an upgrade.

 

[snerkler]

I find it difficult to believe a newer camera of a similar line is a downgrade, especially one a few generations newer. Whether we like it as much or not is different and subjective, but to say it’s a downgrade is wrong imo.

 

[TimHughes]

I find it difficult to believe a newer camera of a similar line is a downgrade, especially one a few generations newer. Whether we like it as much or not is different and subjective, but to say it’s a downgrade is wrong imo.

+1 I’ve never been disappointed with a newer camera. Looking back I’ve changed every 3-4 years and when a specific improvement that I’ve needed has been available.

 

[gman]

I find it difficult to believe a newer camera of a similar line is a downgrade, especially one a few generations newer. Whether we like it as much or not is different and subjective, but to say it’s a downgrade is wrong imo.

I think this is the important bit to eliminate any confusion that newer must be better (i.e. an upgrade).

 

[stuartm1]

I find it difficult to believe a newer camera of a similar line is a downgrade, especially one a few generations newer. Whether we like it as much or not is different and subjective, but to say it’s a downgrade is wrong imo.

I once bought a Nikon D7100 to replace my D90. At the time the D7100 was 2 generations newer and was actually Nikon's "flagship" DX body (since by then they'd discontinued the D300s), so I had high hopes with a new sensor and the claimed "D4 AF module". I was so disappointed with everything about the D7100 that I got rid of it within a year and swore to never ever buy a Nikon DX body ever again (which I haven't). Granted my D7100 had major faults with the circuitry which caused some erratic performance failures, but the colours and AF performance also left me aghast. Technically the D7100 was better in every criteria over the D90, but I could never get on with the overly orange colours and mushy clarity from that Toshiba sensor, even to this day I firmly believe the 12mp D90 produces better IQ than the 24mp D7100.

 

[snerkler]

I once bought a Nikon D7100 to replace my D90. At the time the D7100 was 2 generations newer and was actually Nikon's "flagship" DX body (since by then they'd discontinued the D300s), so I had high hopes with a new sensor and the claimed "D4 AF module". I was so disappointed with everything about the D7100 that I got rid of it within a year and swore to never ever buy a Nikon DX body ever again (which I haven't). Granted my D7100 had major faults with the circuitry which caused some erratic performance failures, but the colours and AF performance also left me aghast. Technically the D7100 was better in every criteria over the D90, but I could never get on with the overly orange colours and mushy clarity from that Toshiba sensor, even to this day I firmly believe the 12mp D90 produces better IQ than the 24mp D7100.

And this is exactly my point, the D7100 is technically a better camera in every regard, it cannot be considered a downgrade. Your experience is subjective based on a faulty camera and colours which you did not like as much

 

[Tysonator]

Must admit, I miss my Fuji. I sold my T-10 (an upgrade from an M-1) to fund my R7. I love the R7 though, even if it has it's quirks, I do wish I'd kept the T-10 but still bought the R7. I had no fancy lenses for my T-10, the 16-50, a 50-230 (that thing was sharp) and probably the better lens of the 3, the 18-135. I loved the look and feel of the Fuji gear, even the PASM ones.

I lucked into a Fuji flash last week, I was given it, it's the EF 20. It's got me thinking, should I buy a T-5 or X-H2S and some glass, so I could use the flash properly?

I do wish Canon would bring a retro R7 or FF body, and for the love of God improve the line up of APSC lenses. I do like the look of Retro fuji, and the very large range of APSC lenses.
However, Canon technology is very good and that is a big factor as I find the Canon Eye Detect in R7, plus the menu system is easy to navigate.

Canon are like a iPhone, it just works, and Sony are like Android phones as they will bring cameras will bizarre features. Though on the whole work well with quirky menu and features.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

Canon are like a iPhone, it just works, and Sony are like Android phones as they will bring cameras will bizarre features.

I would say quite the opposite. Android just works, and iphones are full of quirks and thoughtless restrictions.

The state of canon offerings right now is appalling across the board. Plastic fantastic.

I was very happy with 5D mark III back in the day. That was really a great camera, that still gets good use in my real estate work, but essentially had to buy R6 for video... so that's how they still share work and I don't see this changing.

Now 5Ds... I have expected a quirky camera, and it really is one. It pretty much made me sell most of my zooms, buy a bunch of Sigma ART primes, spend time tweaking focus every single time, focus stacking, exposure blending, and it's like it still wants more of my time and money. I think I would bare minimum swap to R variant if opportunity came up. No AA filter might mean less problems with resolution, and moire is all over the place anyway, I don't care if it is just a little worse. More likely though it will be A7RIV with MC11 before too long.

 

[Sangoma]

Canon are like a iPhone, it just works, and Sony are like Android phones as they will bring cameras will bizarre features. Though on the whole work well with quirky menu and features.

Interesting comparison.

When my youngest son was about 20 months old, he had an iphone as a toy. He couldn't read, he couldn't talk, but he could make it do things.
Very slightly older he was using screwdrivers to take phones apart. Now at 13 if something doesn't work, he fixes it.
He now will only have Android
He started with Canon, and now uses Panasonic M43.

My second oldest (final year at university) has an iphone.
He started on Canon, and still uses Canon.
He wouldn't know which way a screw goes to loosen it. If something doesn't work, he looks for someone to pay to fix it

 

[Tysonator]

Interesting comparison.

When my youngest son was about 20 months old, he had an iphone as a toy. He couldn't read, he couldn't talk, but he could make it do things.
Very slightly older he was using screwdrivers to take phones apart. Now at 13 if something doesn't work, he fixes it.
He now will only have Android
He started with Canon, and now uses Panasonic M43.

My second oldest (final year at university) has an iphone.
He started on Canon, and still uses Canon.
He wouldn't know which way a screw goes to loosen it. If something doesn't work, he looks for someone to pay to fix it

How bizarre the iPhone & Android ! lol

 

[Tysonator]

I would say quite the opposite. Android just works, and iphones are full of quirks and thoughtless restrictions.

The state of canon offerings right now is appalling across the board. Plastic fantastic.

I was very happy with 5D mark III back in the day. That was really a great camera, that still gets good use in my real estate work, but essentially had to buy R6 for video... so that's how they still share work and I don't see this changing.

Now 5Ds... I have expected a quirky camera, and it really is one. It pretty much made me sell most of my zooms, buy a bunch of Sigma ART primes, spend time tweaking focus every single time, focus stacking, exposure blending, and it's like it still wants more of my time and money. I think I would bare minimum swap to R variant if opportunity came up. No AA filter might mean less problems with resolution, and moire is all over the place anyway, I don't care if it is just a little worse. More likely though it will be A7RIV with MC11 before too long.

I still like using my 7Dii as it feels very natural in the hand.

I also use a Sony A6600 ( purchased with Sigma 18-50 f2.5 glass on e mount ) with a sigma MC-11 to mount my Canon EF L zooms to it, and they well well. The AF is not as fast, about 2 thirds of the screen will work in eye AF. Apart from that the IQ is very good on A6600.
Of course I would like some G or G Master glass for the A6600, however I am not going to run to systems as the cost is just too high. So the Canon glass will just have to do for now.
The A6600 does have the new menu system and dare I say looks more of a solid build than my R7.
I suspect when Canon get round to the R7 Mkii then that is when we will see some decent improvement's, and maybe a new sensor not an old re tweaked DSLR sensor !

 

[ThePrettyDamned]

I've been round the houses with gear and I prefer the tiny lenses of m43 and the "fits my hand perfectly" of the em-1 camera shape.

The lumix S5 comes a close second but the lenses are truly massive in comparison. And they're just not as fun/cute/adorable. Everything is so professional and serious looking, but the olympus 45mm 1.8 and the Panasonic pancakes are just adorable.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

I still like using my 7Dii as it feels very natural in the hand.

Yes, a proper form factor. Now you need R3 or Z9 to get reasonable shape. Crazy money. And I heard some people complain about R3 materials...

 

[redhed17]

I had given up on photography for many years because of the cost of film. Because of the cost, progression was slow. Digital cameras were not really on my radar until I started using PC's. Like a few here, I was drawn to the Fuji S602. That sparked the photography bug again. I progressed at an amazing rate because pictures now cost nothing, and I could quickly learn from my mistakes. There were some things that camera could do that most modern cameras couldn't for many years.

I was lucky to be working in John Lewis when I decided to get a DSLR. The Canon 350D seemed to be the best option at the time, and working in the store I was able to have a play with it. Shock and horror when my knuckles were rubbing the lens! The other option, the Nikon D70 felt great in the hand, so that was it for me. That's why why I always advise people to handle any cameras the are considering.

D70>D300, that was stolen, so on to the D300S. That has been the camera that felt like it was moulded to my hand. I was happy with that for many years, but wanted more pixels and better high ISO. It looked like Nikon had given up on that range of camera. None of the D7*** cameras appealed as in some areas it would have been a downgrade, particularly in ergonomics. I was all set to completely change systems to the Canon 7DII, when the D500 was announced out of nowhere. Wow, it blew the 7DII away in every way. If I had not waited so long, passing on the D7***'s, I could made a very disappointing change to Canon because of bad timing.

The D500 does everything I want or need. It is not quite as comfortable in the hand as the D300S, but it is very close.

 

[justpix]

Hi, starting in 1973 PORST (practica) CX6 > ROLLEI 35 > MINOLTA XD7 > ROLLEI 35 TE > LEICA M6 > ROLLEI 2.8 GX > FUJI GS 645 > MINOLTA F300 > OLYMPUS 5050 > NIKON D70 >
NIKON D200 > OLYMPUS Pen E-P1 > SONY NEX-3 > NEX 5 > NEX 6 > LEICA M9 > SONY A7 > A7R2 > NIKON D800 > LEICA M9 > NIKON D500 > NIKON D850 > SONY A7ii ( I have omitted a few)

Currently, I actively use:

SONY A7 - my pocket camera used daily

SONY A7R2 - for travel, when I need high iso and IS

LEICA M9 - when I want beautiful colours

NIKON D500, D850 - for wildlife, cars and bikes in action

SONY A7ii - playing around and backup for my A7

I am quite happy with my toys. Every now and then I think about the FUJI GFX line. But knowing me (a little after over 70 years) I am afraid I would not use them much because of their bulk.

It was the same with my MF film cameras.

I never sell equipment, to make purchasing decisions difficult. (I may have over 90 lenses, but I have stopped counting ... )

 

[Skypilot]

When I buy anything I always do an insane amount of research to ensure I make a good choice (the mindset of someone who grew up poor but now has disposable income!).

Me too, on both counts.