Mike D

<p>Thanks Edward. I also did some additional research and found out that not only does the D500 have to be on single point auto focus (as the directions say in regular print) but also on AF-S. It can't be on AF-C or it won't work.<br> <br> It was also recommended that I perform the test a dozen times and use the median value.</p>

<p>Tried a couple different Nikon zooms and this is the message I get when I try to auto fine tune any of my lenses. Anybody have the same experience and find a resolution?</p>

<p>Based on user experience in forums, the D810 was outstanding. Based on may own experience, the D810 was marginally better than the D7200 and I own and use both. For fear of being blown off the forum, I didn't say anything but it appears that DP Review has confirmed that the D810 score is better than the score of the D7200 but only marginally so. Users forget that in order to get the low noise benefits of the D810, you need an excellent, heavy duty tripod and technique. If your are a scenics shooter, bad weather and wind will quickly negate these benefits very quickly. </p>

<p>Sandy, it was the light weight of the Surface line that made it more desirable. I am now looking for a more traditional laptop, unfortunately at more weight. </p>

<p>I recently got the Surface 3 (WIN 10) 256 gb with keyboard and mouse for around $450. Also bought a 200 gb micro SD card and used it for extra storage. On a recent trip to Patagonia, the Surface 3 corrupted an SD card and then the screen proceeded to go crazy on me. The Surface 3 was totally worthless the rest of the trip. I had enough SD cards to last me the rest of the trip but I wan't able to make backups to the computer or my external hard drive. Needless to say, I was not happy with the Surface and can no longer trust the Surface line of Microsoft tablet/computers. </p>

<p>Unless I missed it somewhere above, didn't Nikon just enter the 21st century with WiFi on the D500?</p>

<p>My children used a MAC 5+ years ago and the file name length was an issue. Sounds like Apple has resolved this. I just know that I've never had this problem in Windows. I do remember the 8 character limitation in Lotus 123. </p>

<p>I have developed my own filing system (since 1999) which sometimes requires long file names. IOS can only handle up to 32 characters whereas Windows can handle 260. Windows has always been way ahead on this one. </p>

<p>My perfect camera is my iPhone 6. I'm in South America right now getting ready to go to Patagonia in a day and my iPhone is in my pocket while my D810 is cozy back in the hotel room. Lots of statues to shoot but my wife and kids don't want a picture of a statue unless I'm in it. Just discovered selfies and a lot more of my friends and family like them over my serious photography.</p>

<p>I own both lenses. I bought the Nikon 24-120 first and just wasn't really happy with the lens on a D800. I later bought the Sigma 24-105, which I currently use on a D810, and it appears to be step up but not as much as I thought. I guess I had too high expectations of both lenses because I can get just as good technical quality (but better ease of use and success ratio) with a D7200 and Sigma 17-70 C micro lens, especially with impulsive shots. The main advantage of the Sigma 24-105 on D810 is that you can just keep blowing up the image because of the extra pixels but you have to use your best technique. </p>

<p>Shun, those are excellent shots. If I didn't already have a D500 on pre-order, I would be getting close to purchasing a D750. Close but not quite there yet. </p>

<p>There is a used Thinktank Shape Shifter on eBay right now for $95. </p> <p>http://www.ebay.com/itm/Used-Black-Think-Tank-Shape-Shifter-Expandable-Camera-Photo-Accessory-Backpack-/301883500488?hash=item4649a8a7c8:g:NBMAAOSwPc9W0j8K</p>

<p>I could really get excited about any of these cameras if they had the same or similar button/dial layout as my D7200s. I don't like reaching into my backpack and pulling out a Nikon camera that has a totally different layout than what I am used to. If I'm willing to settle for a different layout, than all the Sonys are worth consideration. Oh well. </p>

<p>Yes, Nikon is holding out on us. On my D7200, I've learned to use "Live View" when focusing close due to the problems mentioned above. I just discovered "focus peaking" on my Sony 77 II. It is a really helpful tool, especially for older people like myself, but it will be absent on the D500. </p>

<p>Arthur, all your points are valid in Bruce's post and I certainly shoot with other photographers who only use primes and are thoughtful and methodical to their approach to image capture. Their packs are definitely lighter than mine. However, I am addicted to zooms as they fit my shooting style (and personality). As I am only 65, I still have a few years to figure how to appreciably lighten the load and hopefully new technology will bail me out, again. </p>

<p>Bruce, how funny, I saw a Jason Lanier video on the A7RII and I got all excited about reducing weight by switching one of my heaviest DSLRs to a light weight mirrorless model in preparation for an upcoming trip that will require some moderate hiking. I did start another post "Lightening Up on FF Camera". At this time, I'm leaning towards staying with all Nikon bodies after Shun aimed me in the right direction. (humor)</p>

<p>Robert, losing the D7100 body is an excellent option. In past trips, when I know I was flying on a CRJ so I used a slightly smaller backpack that would fit a CRJ's overhead bin, and I was forced to leave the D7100 at home and just take the 10-24 by itself. On this trip, the smallest plane will be a 737 so I am using a little bit larger bag that will fit the 737's overhead bin and I have space for the D7100 with 10-24. I don't change lenses in the field because it is likely to be windy, dusty, and even rainy on occasion. I may still decide to jettison the D7100. </p> <p>Shun, as you are aware, I have also been traveling with the relatively light weight Sony A77 II and 70-400 for several years which turns out to be lighter than the D7200 and 80-400 AFS that I will now be travelling with on this trip. I never had a problem but I was at risk if the Sony were to break in the field. It never did, but I do agree that traveling with two different system is a little more complicated. </p>

<p>Sanford, notice they have to take a break after carrying those big, heavy cameras around, not unlike myself. <br> <br> Dieter, not only can the distance between lens and flange be reduced with mirrorless, the lens size can be reduced further because the image stabilization occurs inside the Sony body (at least with my A77 DSLT). It seems to me that lenses with stabilization inside them are generally significantly larger than lenses without. Of course that means Nikon and Sony must start from scratch on new lens designs for mirrorless to take advantage of the potential size and weight savings. Sony seems to be building a competitive advantage in a number of areas relating to size and weight. Now if only they would hurry up introducing more innovative, high quality lenses. </p>

<p>Craig, good idea. The A7R + 24-70 F4 is 29.53 ounces. My D810 + 24-105 is 62.24 ounces. Ugh. I had read about the fixed lens RX1R2 but it only comes with a 35mm lens. I was thinking how fantastic it would be if it came with a high quality 24-70 or 24-105 F4 lens. <br> Shun, I will be taking a couple D7200's to Patagonia, one with 80-400 AFS (just sold my old 80-400 VR lens) and the other with a Sigma 17-70 C macro lens. I will also take a Nikon 10-24 (accepts ND, polarizer and grad filters) <br> For me, this is an expensive trip and I have learned from previous trips that I need a high res combo for the big view, the 7200 + 17-70 macro for the little view, a 80-400 for isolation and wildlife, and a D7100 + 10-24 for ultra tight/closeup landscapes. Of course the D810 + 24-105 is the heaviest component in my bag so I was looking at lighter options. My back pack is currently 22 pounds and the Sony would bring it down to 20. I never change lenses in the field. Probably not enough weight savings for this trip so I'll hang in there with what I already have. <br> <br> </p>

<p>I will be taking a trip that involves a lot of hiking and I really wanted to reduce the weight of my primary camera and lens without sacrificing quality. I currently use a D810 with Sigma 24-105 which I consider a big and heavy combo especially with my other equipment. I thought this would be a great opportunity to look at some of the FF mirrorless bodies with a more compact and light weight lens in the 24-70 to the 24-105 range. To my dismay, no such thing exists. I don't really care if the lens is interchangeable or not. What am I missing? </p>

<p>I'm planning an upcoming trip that will include some hiking and wanted to lighten my load. I currently use a Nikon D810 with Sigma 24-105 which is big and heavy. I thought Sony might have an equivalent or better offering but I don't seem to be able to find one. If the RX1R came with a F2.8 to F4 24-105 zoom, that would be fantastic but it doesn't. In fact, I can't even find a high quality zoom in that range for the Sony a7R II. While I'm primarily a Nikon shooter, I do use a A77II with 70-400 for sports so I am familiar with Sony equipment. However, I am just stunned that Sony doesn't offer anything in the 24-105 range. What am I missing? </p>

<p>Brad, that truly is a great image. Artistic, interesting juxtaposition, and makes me think about what they are doing. </p>

<p>The 16MP Nikon P900 zooms from 24-2000 optically and 4000 digitally. I can capture quite sharp images from 24-1500 using a light weight tripod although the VR is very good. I can capture tiny little birds in trees far away. Incredible. </p>

<p>BeBu, I suspect you don't like Hawaiian shirts either. (humor)</p>

<p>I just went on eBay and typed in "hippie camera strap". There are a lot of really "groovy" looking straps. If I recall correctly, these were the classic straps of their day. I lived on the South San Francisco peninsula during the late 60's so my idea of classic may be a little warped. </p>