For the weary pro (pocket)

f/1.8 primes and f/4 zooms are really good. My problems is Nikon's existing lineup below the Z9, needs refinement. R has more polish on their lower end bodies presently.

the Z7 packs an amazing sensor into a compact and very ergonomic body with excellent IBIS - all it lacks is top flight "Pray and Spray" idiot proof tracking AF but single point single AF is bang on - it does more FPS than dedicated Film Sports SLRs like the F5 and 1V -HS and focusses way better too and billions of high demand images were shot on those fiim bodies ..

Problem is that a mentality has set in that unless a camera can be casually waved about by any clueless erk in the general direction of a bird / athlete / footballer and capture 1000 RAWs in perfect focus in a nanosecond , it`s regarded as a flop - review sites like DPR here perpetuate this .

To your point the Z9 is huge, like the R3. Not ideal. I am intrigued by the low light performance of the R3, it appears to be a beast that no-one can touch.

and most don`t actually need - again I`d guess that most peoples images are shot in the ISO64-200 area

I'm mentally processing that this is "the end" of sorts. I mean it had to come. Between smartphones and hardware vendor and now mount consolidations. Interesting. I wonder, was the G5X II a swan song by Canon?

maybe - it was quite a coup in the lens department , too "Me-too" in the EVF (and dated too, Guessing sony wouidn`t sell them the new auto pop-out one) and too "couldn`t be bothered" in not making use of the PDAF tech the sensor can have as an option - its been out 3 years in a few months , I can`t envisage a replacement , thankfully for most of us its good enough .