Peter_in_PA

<p>Chuck,<br /><br />That's idle speculation at best. To change the aperture at both ends would really imply a different design, not a "slightly tweaked" one. And Chip's links point to a VERY big difference in the two lenses.</p>

<p>Interesting mix.<br /><br />24mm f1.8 - fairly priced so that even DX users will consider it if they like that range.<br> 24-70 - pro price for pro lens. VR finally. A winner, imho.<br> 200-500 - very nicely priced. If I were still a Nikon shooter I'd be scraping up for that lens. Real bargain.<br /><br />Usually I think these announcements are hit and miss. Not this one. Jealous of you nikon shooters again...</p>

<p>Why not a D7200?</p>

<p>Ice-packs? GEtting something cold in a place that's gonna get hot?<br /><br />Condensation city.</p>

<p>fwiw, according to Dan's 122F number, if the inside of the trunk probably doesn't get as hot as the cab (which is most likely the case, Check this out: http://www.cockeyed.com/science/car_interior/car_interior.php), then the trunk might be the COOLEST part of the car and might be the BEST place to store something like this. There's no sunlight coming in through windows, heat isn't going to build up.<br /><br />I still wouldn't do it, though...</p>

<p>Not sure a car trunk, if it's separated from the vehicle, gets as hot as you think it does.<br /><br />I like the idea of a cooler, but I'd never leave camera gear in an unattended vehicle anyway.</p>

<p>Owen,<br /><br />The D7100 gets you: more pixels on the view-screen, noticeable increase in linear resolution (double the megapixels), better low light, ability to meter with AI (-s) lenses, better AF, more video options, and a few other things.<br /><br />D5200 Landrum mentions is nice if you don't want CLS control, don't want to use legacy non-AF lenses, and don't mind your 50mm not being AF.</p>

<p>7000 will probably be an incremental improvement over the D90 in most ways.<br /><br />7100 or 7200 will be much bigger improvement. I'd go with one of those. Refurb D7100 Dieter mentions would be where I'd go if you are very price-limited.</p>

<p>I'm weird. I would bring a lot more than some. I'd bring that 18-140 and the big zoom.</p>

<p>Ikka,<br /><br />But they are singling out a very small number, and very specific. There are others they are ignoring.</p> <p>You gotta wonder why?</p>

<p>I'm not saying there's any risk anywhere in this.<br /><br />I am saying that I suspect that there is some kind of "secret recall" or some such that Nikon is trying to pull off with this. Or some kind of "test market" thing.<br /><br />Wouldn't it be better to say WHY they want to fix your perfectly good camera?</p>

<p>Q.C., it's legit from all indications.<br> but...</p> <p>Why are they really doing this? I agree with Thom Hogan on this. What's behind it?</p>

<p>I'd still love to hear from someone who has ACTUALLY mixed and matched and KNOWS it works.<br /><br />Because if you mix and match lenses, some of the cameras features don't do everything they do normally (like Olympus' CA correction doesn't happen with Panny lenses and vice versa).</p>

<p>As I've been told, flash compatibility is part of the standard. They should be brand-agnostic. Either will work with both.</p> <p>I've also been told that some of the Panny flashes are just re-branded Olympus flashes with reduced feature-sets.</p>

<p>Consider Fuji's series. The kind of control you are used to and like is possible on some of them and they are a delight to use... and have some great lenses available. Not a "DSLR" and not the best if you'll be shooting quick action and sports, but a delight to use.</p> <p>That said, when I moved from an old manual Pentax MX (my favorite camera ever, btw) to digital, it took about 15 seconds to get used to and like the Nikon system (still my favorite user interface out there).</p> <p>So you should get to a good camera store and try them all.</p>

<p>Fuji X and Olympus µ43 are really good options, too. I moved from Nikon to Olympus last year and am happy.<br /><br />If he's printing pretty big, I'd stick with DSLR, and imho, Canon and Nikon are neck and neck. He should buy the one that fits in his hand best.</p>

<p>I use a 55mm f3.5 that's almost 40 years old I think. It's wonderful for static subjects. And it's cheap.<br /><br />For Jewelry, you might need extension tubes and good lighting, depending on how the image is being used. For online and printing small, the 55mm cropped in would be perfect. For large prints, you need to be more careful and picky, especially with lighting.</p>

<p>I went with Olympus µ43 for the small size, but the Fuji stuff also has fantastic fantastic lenses, probably much better assortment than Sony.</p>

<p>Okay... brilliant or BS?<br /><br />http://www.getolympus.com/us/en/digitalcameras/olympus-air/air-a01.html?gclid=CJLT8M3yvMYCFQYvaQodXj0C8w</p> <p>I'm going with brilliant.</p>

<p>Rich, why not a D5X00? There's another option. The only tangible thing the D90 buys you over that is CLS control. Do you need that? If not, it's a good option.</p>

<p>The entry level DSLRs from Nikon and Canon are so teeny these days. I wouldn't rule them out.</p>

<p>If I had to choose, it would be the D90, easy. Good up to 800, usable to 1600 and in certain circumstances beyond that. I wouldn't shoot anything serious past 400 or 800 on the D200. Plus, that camera would be about 10 years old at this point, wouldn't want to rely on something that old for an event.<br /><br />Either camera may come to you with an old battery or two that don't hold a full charge. There's that, too...<br /><br />But... if I could swing it, I'd do the 7000 as Shun recommends.</p>

<p>I never saw this one, though. Thanks for sharing, that is funny.</p>

<p>awesome photo!</p>

<p>never stop down to f16 or f22 on a high density sensor like that unless you like diffraction and don't want to print very big. Otherwise you're wasting the capabilities of that particular fine camera.</p>