bob_flood1

Tell us a little more about your trip - I assume you will depart on the cruise from Seattle or Vancouver and arrive near Anchorage (Seward or Whittier). Where will you go after that and for how long? When I cruised Alaska on an Anchorage to Vancouver route over 10 years ago, I found 200 mm to be quite adequate shooting (film) from the ship. A subsequent trip to Alaska was all land, the lens needs were very different. Are you going to Denali (it is gorgeous with fall color in the 2nd half of August)? Flightseeing anywhere? Taking any excursions from the ship?

When I postulated about considering a camera battery as disposable, I was thinking only of my own situation - retired and going to Europe in a couple of months for our 50th anniversary at a cost of $10,000. If TSA would let me take an otherwise banned camera so long as it has no battery (big IF - TSA would have to let its gate agents have the latitude to make such decisions), I could toss the battery before boarding to come back to the US. But I'd have to be certain I'd be allowed to bring the camera. Imagine seeing on a TSA website that it's OK, but getting a gate agent who disallows it. What do you do with the camera standing there at security with a plane to catch? Another perspective: a few years ago I flew from here (Vegas) to Kalispell, MT, rented a car, and spent a week in Glacier NP. If I won't be able to take may cameras, I'll drive next time, and airlines will only sell me a ticket when it's impossibly far to drive (and I'm retired - I have time).

If the threat is real, it's hard to justify placing the ban only on flights coming in from selected countries - batteries could be replaced with explosives just as easily here. Limiting such a ban would inevitably raise questions about the validity of the threat. Pretty much all of the devices that Homeland Security is considering in the proposed ban are powered by rechargeable lithium batteries, which have already been banned from the cargo holds of passenger aircraft due to fire hazards. Banning them from carry-on bans them from aircraft altogether. The airlines are upset about this because it will heavily affect business travelers, the people who traditionally pay the highest airfares. They see serious money at risk. I suppose I could consider the battery in my camera as disposable - remove it and toss before getting to gate security, but that will only work if TSA allows the gate agents to make the decision to allow the camera without a battery onto the plane. Checking the camera body and taking all my other gear (lenses, memory cards, filters, etc) on as carry-on will only work if the TSA agents understand that those items aren't what the ban is aimed at and if TSA allows the agents the latitude to make such decisions. If this approach is tried, inconsistent decisionmaking by TSA agents would cause a lot of howling. Interestingly, a possible alternate solution is currently being tested at several US airports, including the one here in Las Vegas. Those going through security today must put each electronic device in a plastic bucket by itself to go through the security x-ray, where the items get enhanced examination. If this approach is found to be effective, it may preclude the all-out ban, but the wait times getting through security are taking a serious hit. Lots of tourists who are unaware of the test process are complaining very loudly about the added time required by the security system. It would also pretty much eliminate the Trusted Known Traveler system that a lot of people paid fees for, and those people will probably be demanding their money back (including me).

My experience with dragonboat racing is that it takes place in daylight - low light shooting isn't an issue. Maybe there's someplace that runs the races under the lights, but I've never heard of one. If $2000US is feasible, I suggest a new D7200 plus a Sigma 150-600 Contemporary. It will give you all the reach you need from the shoreline including crop space in your images. If you get rescue boat access, try your 70-300 before you consider buying something else.

Very interesting - the lower D750 price is now the same as the D610. Probably gonna step on D610 sales for a while. If you have been anxiously waiting for Nikon to announce replacements for the D750 and D810, you are now officially authorized to start holding your breath.

My recommendation is always to buy for the future - don't put yourself into the past any more than absolutely necessary. And since the D7200 is a current production body, it has up-to-date features and capabilities, which offers you the best performance going forward. As others have said, the D7200 will handle higher ISOs so much better than your D70 that you'll be amazed, and that's what you need for your low light shooting. It also has a more sophisticated and capable autofocus, something that will also be valuable for your low light shooting. Places like KEH, Adorama, and B&H sell used gear and stand by their gear very well, but buying something from them is dependent on whether they the item in stock at the time you want to buy. I just took a quick look online, and KEH and Adorama don't have a D7200 at the moment, but B&H does does, for $800, which hits your range. They warranty the body, which is a good thing for the customer, and their price can be used as a bargaining tool if you seek to buy a used D7200 locally.

As I recall, one of Nikon's recent statements explained that they are moving away from trying to increase market share (or expanding the market) to improving profitability of what they sell. That seems to be in line with omitting rebates unless absolutely necessary. It seems to me that, given the new focus on profits, it would likely take some fairly intense pressure from retailers holding too much Nikon inventory to get rebates from now on.

The first week of April would be a good time for the Antelope Valley Poppy Preserve, a California State Park. It's near Lancaster, CA. The poppies go on for miles. You could then go a bit south to the valley edge along the San Bernadino Mountains. Lots of orchards along the road through that valley, and they should be in bloom.

<p>The D7100 is a better camera and should be for its higher price. It has a more sophisticated processor that will give you better image quality with better noise control, and the more sophisticated autofocus will help you get more "keepers." Right now Adorama is selling a new D7100 body for $700US. I don't know if that is within your budget plans, and I don't know if similar offerings can be had in Canada, but I recommend you look and consider this. If the price of the D7100 is in the same ballpark at a D5500 with the kit lens, I suggest you hold onto your current kit lens and try it on the D7100 - you may not see a need to upgrade. If you find that you do want to change that lens, you could do so at your leisure as you can use the original kit lens until you can get something different.</p>

<p>Last year's crop of poppies at the Antelope Poppy Preserve west of Lancaster, CA was ho-hum, just an average year for poppies. In an above average year (2005 was an exceptional one) the quantity and extent of the poppies is astonishing. Last year I was a little early for the peak but not disappointed on March 19. Keep poking forums like this one for people with more extensive knowledge than I have, and check the state park system's Antelope web site for updates.<br> An exceptional wildflower crop in Death Valley depends on 2 things, some rain in the fall around the time that flowering plants go to seed (to help embed the seed so they don't blow away) and good winter rains to help germination. So far, it's look pretty good. For seeding in October there was decent rainfall, but essentially none in November. But rainfall since (including today!) is quite favorable. If the lack of November rain has a meaningful effect, it will be to reduce the quantity of flowers, not the quality.<br> If you have the flexibility, plan to go to Antelope and Death Valley on weekdays - if the flowers are good, these places can get jammed on weekend days without rain.</p>

<p>http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/rock-slide-closes-zion-s-scenic-drive</p>

<p>I haven't looked online myself, but you may be able to see when the lodges at Glacier plan to close for the season. Your schedule may find quite a few already closed. I was there for the week that straddled Oct 1 a few years ago, and all but the Lake McDonald lodge were closed. You should check on the lodging in Waterton, too.<br /><br />I don't know what the status is for the repaving of the Going to the Sun Road. It very well could be complete by now, but if it isn't, the work will be scheduled for the period after Labor Day weekend and the first snow cover. Since that road is the only way to cross the park inside the park, its closure causes a visitor to do a lot more driving.<br /><br />The GTTS Road isn't plowed either. So if there's snow at higher elevations, the road will be closed. That happened when I was there - between the repaving and snow, only the low elevation part of the road near Lake McDonald was open.<br /><br />Driving on the east side, watch out for cows in the road. State law requires a rancher to fence the land along roads to keep cattle out of the roads, but the roads around the east side of the park are on the Blackfeet Reservation, and the tribe doesn't have to comply with that law, and they don't. The roads are twisty-turny, and you'll find yourself coming around a bend to find between one and dozen cows on the pavement. Be careful.<br /><br />I agree that, at the end of September, you'll likely find more lodging available on the west side of the park. There's essentially none along the south side. I stayed at a small bed and breakfast on US89 close to the east side of the park. I don't recall the name, but there can't be very many. I can't recommend Browning as a base of operations.<br /><br />Everything you'll read about the scenery inside the park is true. You'll also find excellent fall foliage to shoot (roadside) along Flathead Creek on the south side of the park.</p>

<p>An idea that might help you feel comfortable leaving a lens behind ...</p> <p>Many places disallow tripods because of the space a tripod occupies and the stationary nature of the tripod (as an obstacle to other visitors). Some of these places don't restrict monopods, but some do, and contacting each place you care to visit and photograph to learn their policies isn't practical. I suggest you look for a hiking pole that has adjustable height to use in place of a monopod. Museums, churches, and other photographable places rarely challenge anyone using such a pole. The pole can be kept short enough to be suited to routine hiking use, and extended when needed as a camera support. Some poles actually allow a camera to attach - I have one with a rounded cork head that unscrews to reveal a 1/4-20 thread, but I don't use it. I can rest a camera on the cork top and get sufficient support that way to shoot in lower light than I can handle just hand-holding a camera. It cost me about $30US in a local sporting goods store.</p> <p>The pole can also be used on the ship, of course, which be handy shooting with the longer lens in lower light. However, I suggest you not rest the pole on the ship's deck to shoot. Cruise ships never shut off the engines, and the engines cause a vibration that can transmit from the deck through a pole (or monopod or tripod) to a camera. Resting the bottom of the pole on the top of your foot will take care of the vibration.</p>

<p>Rick, you don't mention which body you would use the TC on, but perhaps you don't need a TC at all. You can test this idea for free.</p> <p>Start with a raw file of an image that you shot at 400 mm and that you consider to be properly sharp. Save the file as a TIF with a unique name just for safety, and then crop the image. You want to keep the same 3:2 aspect ratio of the original file (or very close to it) and crop down so that your image has half the original megapixels. Example - crop a 24 mp original image to 12 mp. What you then have is the field of view that a 1.4X TC on your 80-400 will give you zoomed all the way out.</p> <p>Is the resulting 12 mp image still sharp enough? Enlarge it on screen to the size you would print it and examine the sharpness and noise. If it will work for you, you can achieve what you want by cropping without having to give up anything related to AF ability, loss of aperture, and image sharpness.</p>

<p>Have you looked at KEH for the same lens? If they have it (no guarantee) and in a high quality condition (also no guarantee, but they will classify it honestly), then I suggest you compare prices with Nikon's refurb. KEH offers a six month warranty. When I bought my 300 f4 AF-S, KEH was actually a bit less expensive than the Nikon refurb (but this was several years ago). The KEH reputation plus their warranty swayed me, and the lens I got couldn't be distinguished from brand new. While I like KEH, I won't claim they are always better than others, but I think they are worth considering.</p>

<p>Another opinion - for what it's worth.<br> No one lens is going to be everything you need for shooting basketball up close and soccer from the stands. So 2 lenses are a foregone conclusion.<br /><br />Soccer - an f4 lens would be fine for day games, but you'll want 2.8 for night games. Within your budget, that limits you to a 70-200 f2.8 lens (anything longer than 200 with f2.8 busts the budget in a big way), and the Tamron that's already been suggested is an excellent choice with VC at $1500 new.<br /><br />Basketball - here you'll want wide angle to mild telephoto along with f2.8 or faster. I suggest the Tamron 17-50 f2.8. In this case I think sacrificing VC would be practical with the shorter focal lengths, and the non-VC version of the lens runs about $500. The combination of the 2 Tamron lenses just hits your budget. If VC would be important to you for the shorter lens, too, it would add $150 to the cost.<br /><br />People - both the 17-50 and 70-200 ranges will be useful for people pictures, and the 2.8 will offer the shallow depth of field usually desired for portraits.<br /><br />Video - the 17-50 will have a range from wide to tele that (I am told) is very useful for video, and even the 70-200 could allow you to follow the action in a game if you want to try that.</p>

<p>I've lived in Las Vegas, NV for 16 years and haven't seen anything resembling the problem you describe. Equipment stored indoors seems to fare about the same as my gear did when I lived in the southeastern US (Tennessee and Alabama) for 20 years. So, having lived in single digit relative humidity for a while, I see no reason to suspect that dry air is the culprit.</p> <p>I did live (never mind how long ago) in Florida with its high humidity, and learned that higher humidity associated with the sea shore means that the water vapor in the air has a higher salt content than inland air. How close to the coast do you live? The uncertainty of this idea is that if salt content is the problem, then it should be happening to everyone in your area. That should be easy to check.</p>

<p>First, don't believe anything you've been told about retirement - it's all a pack of lies. Retirement is way better than anything you've heard.<br /><br />Considering what you shoot and your preferences regarding size and weight, a DX camera is clearly a better choice for you than FX. I think a 4/3 system will leave you wishing for better low light performance. The question then boils down to which DX body.<br /><br />I'm not familiar with the layout of controls on the D700 body, but I suspect that is fairly similar to the D80. The control layout on a D500 will seem like a foreign language to you, at least to start with. If you plan to keep your current gear, switching between cameras could become a bit of a hassle because of the control differences. All that hassle is worthwhile if the D500 offers you something valuable to you, but the best features of the D500 are suited to sports and wildlife shooting - moving subjects - and that doesn't appear to be what you need.<br /><br />The D3xxx and D5xxx operate differently from the cameras you have and I expect you'd find the differences very restrictive and cumbersome. That leads to the D7200, or as already said, maybe a D7100. The sensor+processor in the 7200 gives it an advantage at higher ISOs, but it doesn't seem likely that you'd notice it also has a larger buffer than the 7100. But my recommendation would be to buy for the future, making the 7200 my suggestion as the better choice.<br /><br />If you think the faster 16-80 is something you'd prefer to your 16-85, then I'd look at kit prices - you'd undoubtedly save some money buying a 7200&16-80 as a set than getting them separately. But if there's no real saving buying them as a kit, you might try the 7200 body with the 16-85 you now have to see if that setup leaves you longing for the 16-80. You might save the cost of the 16-80, which would be money you could spend travelling to new places to photograph.</p>

<p>I think it's very important to find out what the school is going to expect the student to have, and it's not limited to the camera. If the school downplays the camera capability but expects the student to have a computer with Photoshop on it, that may change the purchase decisions. A friend's daughter took a photography course (local community college) and it turned out to be 98% Photoshop and almost no instruction regarding how to take a photo. Knowing what the school has planned has a big influence, and without any info about that, you could be recommending a $500-1,000 purchase that may ultimately prove unnecessary.</p>

<p>Whether a ball head will suffice depends on what you want the ball head to accomplish. The VR on the 200-500 is sensational IMHO - I haven't hand-held a long lens in many years (arthritis, but I can hand-hold a 200-500 on a DX body and get a sharp image much to my amazement. So the ball head doesn't have to be used to hold the camera+lens steady for you - it just needs to support the weight. Loosening a ball head enough to allow you to follow a moving subject will still support the weight of the camera+lens, but sharp images will depend on your technique and the virtues of VR. That will work.<br /><br />But a gimbal head will offer what I find to be a better shooting setup - I find that panning horizontally works much better using a gimbal than using a ball head or hand-holding the lens. I also use the Manfrotto 393. It's an old design that works very well, but it's a heavy mechanism, easily the heaviest gimbal design out there. It's not expensive, but that weight penalty is probably too large for someone who likes to hike significant distances with the camera gear. I'm partially disabled, and a consequence is that I don't cover much distance, so the weight isn't a bother for me (but that's just my situation).<br /><br />I don't use a zoom with the 393 any more, but I have in the past. Zooming in and out with an 80-400 caused imbalance, but not enough for me to be troubled by it.<br /><br />A gimbal limitation: there's a limit of the range of motion that can be achieved for any given camera/lens combination - when aiming up and down at considerable angles, one end of the rig or the other can hit the tripod or gimbal hardware, thereby limiting how far down or up you can aim. Those limits are pretty extreme and probably won't be a bother (they aren't for me, anyway). This effect depends to a large degree on the weight of the camera body. The lighter the body, the farther out from the balance point the body will be, allowing more movement before encountering the upward aiming limit. Because of this, I shoot without the battery grip on my D610, even though I much prefer the larger size the battery grip offers (there's that arthritis again).<br /><br />A comment on the Manfrotto 222 ball head - it uses a relatively small (about 1.5" square) quick release plate, and I don't recommend a small plate like that with a long lens. Even when the ball head is tightened down, that small plate allows some small-scale fore-aft movement that affects image sharpness. A head that uses a long plate (in the 3.5-5" range) will make it easier to get sharpness when using long lenses.</p>

<p>I can see why you'd like to use the 15-30, so I agree with the recommendation to leave the 50/1.4 if you really want only 2 lenses.</p> <p>Adventures on Sunday are available and can depend on how long a day you care to devote and how much travel (I'm assuming you will have a car based on your Red Rock plans). Zion and Death Valley are both close enough to do as a one-day out-and-back trip. Each is about 2.75 hours driving, depending on your driving habits, so an early start combined with a late return can give a lot of hours at either park.</p> <p>There's a ghost town at Nelson, NV that would make for a much easier and a shorter day. If you look up the town on Google maps or similar web site, the ghost town - an abandoned mining operation - is a mile or so closer to the Colorado River from the town. Bring your lunch and something to drink - there's nothing out there. There's a little bit of river scenery out at the end of the road at Nelson's Landing (no town, just a boat ramp). </p> <p>The Air Force's Thunderbirds are based at Nellis AFB in Las Vegas, and they usually have their last show of the year at their home base. That's this weekend, and it's all free. Attendees are to park at the NASCAR speedway and ride buses to the base. There will be airborne shows all day plus static displays all over. If that appeals to you, check out the schedule of events - Google the Nellis Air Show and you'll find list of displays and aerial events.</p> <p>Have fun. And please contribute generously to the casinos that pay most of the taxes here in Las Vegas :^)</p>

<p>Dima, a simple sanity check for your camera's meter - the sunny-16 rule says correct exposure is defined as f16 at a shutter speed of 1/ISO. So set your ISO at 200, select Shutter priority and adjust the shutter to 1/200 sec, and point the camera at a sunny day. If it tells you f16, the meter is working pretty good. If you get something else, more tests would be in order.</p>

<p>It has been so long since I lived in Florida that anything I could suggest has to be long since obsolete. But I have a suggestion. There are undoubtedly clubs of birders and probably even a chapter of the Audubon Society in your part of Florida. A Google/Bing type search should find them, and most will probably have a website. Some websites can be elaborate enough to list local places of interest, include scheduled outings for members in local places, etc. You can learn a lot about local places this way, including the best times of the year and maybe even the best times of day for viewing at those places. Of course, you can expect to find contact information for clubs, too, and you can expect birder organizations to have many members who are also photographers who share your interest.</p>

<p>Something to add based on another post - about rental cars. At the time we went on our 2 week trip I worked for a sizeable company that was a subsidiary of a very large company, and they had a contract for preferred rates with a car rental company for company travel. On an inspiration, I asked about whether the contract was available for personal use by employees, and surprise surprise surprise it was! I got a code to use when making a reservation, and it cut the rental car cost in half compared to the best I could find on my own! Of course, I don't what your situation is, but it might be worth asking.</p>

<p>My wife & I spend 2 weeks in late August through Labor Day weekend in 2008 visiting the same areas you mention. Northern lights that time of year will be a matter of luck, and we didn't have any. When you are in the Denali area, check with your hotel/motel front desk - most offer a service to call your room (regardless of time!) if a northern lights display happens. Didn't happen while we were there, but it's an excellent service.<br /><br />Kenai - I recommend a day cruise from Seward into the Kenai Fjords NP. Whales, eagles, puffins, otters, glaciers, glaciers, glaciers. Make sure it's the 8-hour all day cruise. The 3-hour ones never leave Resurrection Bay at Seward. If motion sickness is an issue, take appropriate meds - and catamarans have a smoother ride than single hull boats. While at Seward, you can hike (easily) to Exit Glacier and literally stand and touch the face of the glacier. Not a lot of place where that's possible.<br /><br />I had a lot of fun shooting fishermen on the Anchor River (south coast). There's a silver salmon run in August, and fishing was very active. There are also lots of halibut fishing boats going out every morning all along the south coast. Homer is an interesting area for scenery on the bay (best halibut I ever had was at Land's End at the very tip of the Homer Spit). Keep an eye out for eagles everywhere you go.<br /><br />Denali - we got lucky and saw the clouds clear out on our second day there and stay sunny for several days. The mountain was wonderfully visible for the first time in months. I recommend the Kantishna shuttle, a school bus ride from the entrance 90 miles out the the end of the road and back in one long day. Drivers are very knowledgeable and stop anywhere someone sees something to photograph. Long day but well worth it. The sled dog demonstration is also entertaining and educational. You can drive a private vehicle only 15 miles into the park - the pavement ends at the Savage River, where cars have to turn around. Only park vehicles and campers with permits can go beyond there. But there's tremendous scenery and moose to be found in those 15 miles. Late August is fall foliage time in Denali. There are few trees - because of the climate, the tree line is only 3,000 ft, and most of the park is above 3,000. But the valley and many mountains are covered with shrubbery that changes in the fall, which starts in August that far north. So go prepared for fall color shooting.<br /><br />Denali weather - animals that are equipped to survive Denali winters aren't very fond of warm, sunny days. So when the weather is nicest, don't expect to see many animals, and just shoot the scenery. When the weather is crummy (drizzle, rain, fog) the scenery may be poor, but the animals will be out feeding almost all day. At the time of your trip there is an urgency to put on all the pounds they can while they can, so be prepared for animals in poor light.<br /><br />My wife liked a visit to a Fairbanks suburb named North Pole. The whole town is decorated for Christmas all the time, and there's a huge Christmas decoration store that took a half day. They sell (cheap) a service to mail letters from Santa to whoever you choose, postmarked of course North Pole. Sent them to my nephews and they were thrilled.<br /><br />One more recommendation - get a copy of the current edition of Milepost (I got mine at a local Barnes and Noble, but online works easily). It's a large, heavy book with everything there is to know in incredible detail about driving Alaska's roads. It's updated every year and will tell you all you could ever hope to know about what to expect down the road you're on.</p> <table width="117" border="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td align="left" height="20"><strong> </strong></td> </tr> </tbody> </table>