tony_demonte

<p>Thanks for all the input. great stuff.</p> <p>I looked at the 300mm also. but, I would worry about the fixed focal length. I also looked at the 80-400 but the overlap and the 100mm less than the 200-500 was a factor. I also looked at the sigma 150-600 sport. it all came back to liking the nikon 200-500 the most.</p> <p>The buffer of the D7100 is def a factor. I do believe the D500 is everything I would like in a camera for what I do. eventually I will pick one up. that's certain. I do believe the smart money is picking up the lens first. </p>

<p>Mary Doo, I would but i have the 70-200mm f/4. it would be repetitive. I think right now the smart thing to get is the 200-500mm and wait on the D500 for a little bit. </p>

<p>I guess the right path to take would be the lens first and than the camera a year from now. </p>

<p>thanks so much everyone. I think the "score" is 10-0 in favor for the lens. good point, Keith.....I do want to get the lens and I would be able to get it today if I wanted. lens today, D500 down the line. the price of the camera probably won't come down for a while. the bigger reason to wait would be to see if there are any issues with the camera. seems like there's always an issue that Nikon needs to fix.</p>

<p>Looking at either or. I really only want to go for one for now. </p> <p>I currently have the D7100. lenses are...sigma 10-20, nikon 16-85, 35, 50, 85 and the 70-200 f/4. I originally had the D300 and waited for the D400. I ended up going with the D7100 since I thought the successor to the D300 would never come out. </p> <p>I like to shoot outdoors stuff. wildlife/sports. landscapes. BIF sometimes. the normal stuff. </p> <p>any opinions on the matter would be greatly appreciated. and I almost forgot, if I go with the D500, I plan on waiting to see if there are any issues and/or a price drop......i'm sure it's inevitable.....the price drop I should say. </p> <p>thanks everyone</p>