Completely agree with this! I'm looking for a good quality, light* straightforward camera too. I don't need video, vlogging accessories, 10 different jpeg effects or 20fps burst mode etc etc, just a camera with a good viewfinder that I can operate on top of a hill in bad weather with gloves on. I'd definitely trade a 3" tilting and rotating screen for big controls, something like the Canon G5X looks good apart from the small controls. Any suggestions?
* I have an EOS 5D mk2 / 24-105 which is a great indestructible camera but it's 1600g, plus bag, and it's getting harder to carry it uphill!
My experience with recent cameras is limited to a couple of tiny and basic Canon DSLRs: the 100D and 200D. You might like to look at them. Not as small as a G5X but I'll describe them anyway as they're smaller and lighter than the 5D II at least, with good sized controls.
Compared to the 100D, the 200D has more features like a twisty-turny screen; 24 MP instead of 18 MP; greater dynamic range; about a stop better noise performance in shadows and ISOs above 800; and a larger more traditional grip. I'd say both can be operated with gloves on, but you really need to check this for yourself. Fingerless, no problem. Neither camera is weatherproof, unfortunately. They should survive reasonable exposure to all but pissing rain, I'd think.
Both cameras have the same viewfinder. Not as big and bright as a FF camera's of course, but good enough IMV
and better than some others in the same category. Their screens have similar if not identical resolution and are touch capable. The 200D is faster to focus in live view. Each has a selection of metering patterns. The 200D has an awkward power switch but you can leave the camera to turn itself off anyway and let it restart immediately the shutter button is pressed halfway.
From a strictly personal perspective I prefer the 100D. As in post #16 its handling really does remind me of my lovely old A-1. I find the grip a good size and all necessary controls fall naturally to my thumb and fingers. The ISO button in particular is much easier to access than the 200D's. And since I find its real life raw IQ quite acceptable, the 100D gets my nod much more often. If you have large hands you might prefer the 200D.
Used, the 200D is great value but I reckon the 100D is an incredible bargain.
The EF-S 15-85mm is the crop equivalent to the 24-105mm and somewhat smaller and lighter but beware as sample variations are rife. A good one though is very good and considered equal in IQ to the 24-105mm L. I'm thinking of having my own used one serviced by Canon as it has an apparent tilt. Cheaper than buying a new lens and should be vastly less faff than making sample comparisons. The 18-135mm STM is well regarded, as is even the humble and very light 18-55mm STM kit lens. The 24mm STM pancake (38mm FF equivalent) is fantastic. Used EF and EF-S lenses are abundant, and I feel that along with Nikon they're the best value of any system if you choose carefully. In addition to the 15-85mm that I never use, I have a 18-55 STM, 24mm STM, 60mm macro, and a very old but good EF 35-135mm f/4-5.6. I tend to take out either a zoom or prime combo.
Of older DSLRs, I really like the ancient 6 MP Nikon D50 which also has great handling. It makes really lovely jpegs at base ISO. The viewfinder is really small, though. The battery life is phenomenal. The D90 is a good step up in IQ. Both are much heavier and more substantial than the tiny Canons. There are no wide DX primes AFAIK.
Except for once holding a Fuji X-T3 and an Olympus OM-D something, I have no experience with mirrorless cameras, sorry.
Blah blah blah. HTH.
