Please Disregard This Post

Kisaha wrote:

Are you sure you want to do all these and go full frame? Bigger heavier and more expensive lenses?

Going tele is easier (cheaper and with a lot less weight) on a smaller sensor.

Maybe going m43 is a good solution.

Every Sony except the A7sIII has terrible menu and operating system and subpar ergonomics.

I would be waiting for the A7iv if I have to go Sony (better O.S and touch control implementation,plus even better ergonomics), or the rumored new Canon R cheap camera (just a rumor until now).

There is a rumored Canon RF APS-C camera coming also, remember, the smaller the sensor the easier is to go tele!

Another good/cheap solution is to go with an Canon M camera and the native EF adapter. Similarly small and light to the m43 cameras, cheap native lenses and probably better AF than the m43 ones.

Actually, I am not sure of anything right now. I have almost decided against the a7 lll for the reasons you suggested and then some, and have lowered my lens sights to a Sigma 100-400 instead of a HEAVY 150-600. They make one for Sony e mount and for Cannon. My cheap solutions were my 2 Samsung NX 500s, both of which developed problems in less than a year of use. Great cameras until they aren't . . . light in weight, excellent color, cheap lenses, great menu systems, and sharp results once you learn how to use them, but not fast enough, and low light situations can get pretty noisy.

If I do go for the Sony, it will be the a7 lV, so we are on the same page there, or the Sony Cyber Shot RX10 when the V comes out, but need a lot more research on that one. I have heard great things about it, and the Zeiss 24-600mm equivalent focal length lens sounds real interesting.  The V is supposed to have a friendlier menu system, but not so sure about the color science.  I might consider a Cannon, but a whole new ballgame for me, and honestly, I don't know where to begin.

Thanks much for your input. Appreciated!