Best budget system (35mm emphasis)

No way I would go that way with M6 II and 22mm f/2 already in my paws(lens around the corner).

Indeed! Obviously. The issue is, that it usually is not "something" but a lot.

Canon R5: Big, heavy, expensive, no 35mm pancake, third party lenses not allowed.

Csnon R: Big, no IBIS, no 35mm, third party lenses...

Canon R6/R6 Ii: Big, expensive, no IBIS, just 24Mpx, no lenses...

Canon R8: no IBIS, just 24Mpx, no lenses.
Actually, given all the shortcomings, it seems it is least troublesome camera in the choice. If only it had IBIS, it would be certain choice.

Sony a7R III: little on the expensive side, little compromise in lenses. I would need to get Sammy AF f/2.8 AND fast 35. That would make it even more expensive, but if price is the only factor, this seems at the moment as an inevitable choice.

Yes, M6 II with 22mm f/2. 😅

I think you all did everything that was possible to do for me. For that I am thankful. Now I will consider M6 II, R8, Z6, and A7R III choices, and pick one.

Thank you!

[quote="@UsherFellig"]
Z6 weight is par with Z5.

Sounds as if something's gotta give with your wish parameters. If you want smaller than the Z5/6/7 form factor and FF, and a small, light prime faster than f2.8 or f2.5, your choices are:

Canon RP (485 grams . . . but is there a small fast prime for it?)
Sony A7C (what about those little Samyang primes?)
Sony RX1Rii (fixed-35mm lens, over $3K, no IBIS)
Leica M + 'crons (you know the prices)
Sigma FP (and . . . ?)

There are plenty of L mount lenses that will work on the fp. Look on the Sigma web site. The "kit" lens for the fp is a 45mm.

Don

These cameras do have IBIS though...

Aha! That changes things a bit. Thanks for correction. Going to look into it. 👍

Wowza!

So-ho-ho. Long story short:

It would be quite a story, but it is all done. Learned with my wallet. Trying it at home, I am positive that I could not possibly figure it all out in the shop, where I tested all bodies for like an hour.

The Z5 has some big shortcomings and disadvantages, but for the time being, I matured enough to accept these.

After owning this piece for few hours, my message to people in my position would be:

1) Indeed, go check it out and handle it.
2) go through wanted/available lenses.
3) make a sacrifice and make up your mind about it. It might be inevitable.
4) Nikon has awful menus too!
5) Nikon still did not master display feature. It is terrible compared to the competition.
6) grip the camera lightly, no squeezing.

Next days will tell more. But I guess it is for Nikon forums.

Thank you all for participating and helping me.

Curious to see how you like it.

I'm late to the party and was going to add the Pentax K-1 with 43mm f/1.9 (which I think is a great lens) but I can see not wanting to go that way if you already have an investment in another brand.

There are some snippets about that.

First of all, I am often too resentful about anything, so take my notes with a big grain of salt. Also coming from Vanon, I have some learned memory about that, expecting the same stuff elsewhere.

My notes:

HW/body:
The Nikon style ON-OF switch is little annoying. I like my shutter button cleared from other controls. Not a biggie, but noticable.
The strap holder blocks my finger from reaching ISO button a bit. Maybe I figure it out later.
The grip is little too big for me, and is better handled "vaguely, neglectfully".

HW/features:
Enough buttons, handling rather intuitive. EVF is great. Good enough so I maybe start using it again.

Handling performance, UI:
Generally good, EVF big, smooth and sharp. But there are striking performance issues - both EVF and LCD can get quite noisy in dark, making it hard to evaluate focus. Not for night and astro, certainly. And typical Nikon issue - upon magnification, framerate drops rapidly and delay is added. It really makes manual focusing aid less useful to useless at times. That is THE BIG one for me. Other thanthat, stuff is great and responsive.

AF:
Generally strong, and step up from M6 II.
Occasionally focuses with too much emhasis on closest subject, and hunts little more in dark scenes. It is that Canon gets slower, while Nikon hunts faster, resulting in overall same time of correct focus. The way I use it doesn't make it a serious issue. It generally focuses well, fast, accurate, and gives much more choice and settings.

Sensor performance:
To be evaluated more closely. Of course it has low burst speeds and poor video for todays standards, but being about third cheapest body on market, second with IBIS and first at noise performance, I think we cannot have it all. Single shot performance is very high.

Menus:
Now that is some mess! I have no idea where advanced WB settings is, how to turn of touch shutter, how to setup review histogram, live histogram, zebras and few more things. This is proper "Sony disaster menus".

Overall: There obviously are issues and dislikes, but except for low framerate during zoomed LiveView and menus, I can't be angry at the camera. It is a step up.

More current Sony might be considered as better, but it hags around double the price, and in my opinion button layout is miserable, so...

No, f2.8 on 35mm format actually gathers 1/3 of a stop more light than f2 on APS-C. Plus, the a7RIII delivers 42MP rather than the M6 II's 33MP. This is a nice walkabout combo, as is the a7RIII with unexpectedly sharp Sony 28-60mm f4.0-5.6.

...Oops, too late.

AFAIK, f/stops are about intensity, not about amount. So that is quite irrelevant, although I believe I know what you mean. That was not my point.
Well, Nothing is lost, I am exploring my possibilities, and it might happen I jump to Sony still. Though, I have another lens already, and I am learning how to bypass the issues I have. On top of that, I don´t have to stick with 24Mpx of Nikon Z5 either. Upgrade is possible later on.

I will certainly work with primes only though. That´s the way of working I appreciate. f/5.6 is a no-go.

Thank you for input though, more disussion on light and lenses is welcome.

Happy you found something you can adapt to.

Yes, after a few months, I'm still lost in Nikon's menu.

Two conflicting options in separate branches ....why.
Some options greyed out ...why.
Some options NOT greyed out anymore ... why.
Cannot activated error ...why.

( ? ? ? ? )

will we learn them enough??

( a lot of headaches for now - not too much pleasure )

Bhaha, yes, exactly that.
Also I have to re-google features and setups quite often. It is a pain. But I am getting used to it, and most of it has a solution. Certain things at Canon do not have any solutiin, so that's that.
Hope you make it with Nikon. It's bad, but not a showstopper.

Yes, because it's concentrating the light on a smaller area, f2 APS yields greater light intensity per square mm of sensor than f2.8 35mm. But, if you're thinking about DoF or noise, the relevant factor is total light gathered. f2.8 on 35mm will gather 1/3-stop more total light than f2 on APS, and it will yield slightly shallower DoF and slightly less overall noise.

Although I am "better is better = better" guy, and I am aware of this, you might need to realize that it is not to be expected to change the whole system for a whopping 1/3 stops of noise performance. While technically right, it is a nonstarter for discussion and $$$$ decision really.

Point taken, not gonna act on that.

Today I was in the lical big camera shop again. Oh boy, it didn't end well. 🤭

I was so ready!
...To put down the pride and money for Sony A7R iii system.

Went to the local shop again, to have a much longer session. Testing, trying, handling, discussing.

First round, Canon. I let the ergonomics grow on me a little, to familiarize. Got some good suggestions. But it ended with too big, heavy and expensive R5 and "no native lenses" I would appreciate. So, re-denied yet again.

So I took my angry ass to Sony department. Oh boy. I mingled the memories and feel of the Canon and Sony system. It was Sony that was hard for reaching clickwheels and some controls. Then viewfinder. The reptilian shiz. Quite laughable compared to Z5 size and clarity, although no offence to Sony users. Also the display felt even worse, being jittery with low FPS feel. It was obvious no-go, because I could not knowingly take the picture I wanted / good picture with these controls and display output.

So out of spite, I bought macro tubes and 7Artisans Z 35mm f/1.4 II. That lens has some character to it! 🤭

The journey is finished. I might make change here and there, add or change some lens, upgrade for higher resolution body, but Nikon is my new home, absolutely unshakably and certainly. Still not sure about the 35mm solution, as Nikon Z 35mm f/1.8 is too big and expensive for what I expect from it, but it will sort itself out one way or another.

The thread can be considered as "closed", unless someone would like suggestions and experience back.

Many thanks everybody for info, help, participation, knowledge and encouragement.

That's fine. I just wanted to make sure you understood that f2.8 on 35mm format is not "dimmer" than f2 on APS. If I had an APS kit I liked, I wouldn't change to 35mm format just for 1/3 of a stop, either. In fact, I stuck with Micro Four Thirds for seven years exactly because I'd get only 1/2 stop by moving from f1.7 primes on that system to f2.8 zooms on 35mm format. Ultimately, though, I did move to 35mm format with bright primes for a 2-stop gain, as well as a jump from 20MP to 42MP.

Wait a second. I believe we have some terminology wrong. Yes it is dimmer. Because the light is spread on larger area. f/stops to my knowledge refer to intensity. That is not the same thing as amount of light. If that was the case, f/1.8 compact lenses would be dim as hell. They aren't.