chulster

Actually that could be true. Be careful! The BR2A is supposed to obviate that problem. Here's a relevant thread: BR2 vs.BR2A reversing rings Another page that describes a different potential issue: Nikon BR2A

It's a reversing ring, to mount a lens backwards. You screw the ring into the filter threads of the lens (52mm thread size only) and mount the ring to the camera. Good for macrophotography with a suitable lens. Yes, it's safe to use on a D750 or any other F-mount body. Of course, the lens will become fully manual, without even automatic diaphragm operation.

Good question. I think it will reduce the lag a bit.

It's more or less normal. You can minimize the lag by using the fastest compatible CF card you can get your hands on. That would be a UDMA 7 card with up to 160 MB/s write speed, such as a SanDisk Extreme Pro or a Lexar Professional 1066X. The D800 is slower with SD cards of any type.

Very droll. Fortunately, it's not what I thought at all.

I haven't seen that show. Was the writer portraying the character as making a pointless or esoteric distinction? Because that seems like an extremely important distinction to me!

And if you start at 200mm f/5.6 and zoom to 70mm, then as Matthew said (clearly enough), the lens will stay at f/5.6.

I would guess the proportion of users who comprehend this behavior is on the order of five percent.

Nikon broke that classification system by putting the zoom ring in front of the focus ring in the latest 70-200mm f/2.8E. That's just as well. No right-thinking person would accept your apology on this—you monster. /s

You're confusing reproduction ratio with zoom ratio. When people say a 150-600mm is a 4x zoom, they mean that the ratio of the longest focal length (600mm) to the shortest (150mm) is 4:1, or 4 times. It has nothing to do with how large of an image of an object the lens will make on a sensor. That's reproduction ratio. For example, a repro ratio of 1:2 means the lens will project an image of an object on a sensor that is exactly half as wide (or half as tall) as the actual object. Note that this is a maximum. Any lens can of course also project smaller images if you just put more distance between the object and the camera. The maximum reproduction ratio of the 70-300mm lens you have is 0.22x, or 1:4.5. This repro ratio applies only at 300mm and only at the closest focus distance. So if you zoom in to 300mm and get as close to a bird as you can while still being able to focus on it (1.1 meters for this lens; that's a lot closer than 15 yards), you will get an image of the bird that is almost 1/4 actual size. That might be enough to fill the DX frame with the bird head. If it's a big enough bird.

In a similar vein I was thinking rubbing graphite powder or carbon black into a sticky grip would make it less sticky...if you don't mind getting your hands black whenever you use the camera.

The D7500 is a crop sensor body. There is no DX crop mode on it. I assume there are other crop modes to get different aspect ratios, but those are not the same thing. What Nikon web page are you looking at?

The variability of this issue really makes me wonder if environmental or user-specific factors are involved. Different people's hands obviously sweat at different rates, but could there also be variation in what chemicals are present in what concentrations in sweat?

I wonder if whether grip rubber becomes sticky is a function of how humid the air is.

Replacement grip rubbers are available for at least some of those bodies, though full sets are not cheap. Search eBay for "nikon d800 rubber", for example. I've replaced the rubbers on the back and on the battery door of my D810 (because of wear, not stickiness). These were easy. I'll soon need to replace the one for the main grip because it's been expanding and no longer fits properly. That one may be a little harder to apply, but I still think it will be easy.

It's an E lens. Electronic aperture control. The F5 doesn't know how to send the right signal to the lens to set the aperture.

Not a dress, but oh well.

It would appear the 24-70mm missed focus in the 50mm f/2.8 shot. The f/4 shot from that series is also slightly misfocused, so I assume you left the focus alone after focusing at f/2.8 with all the lenses and focal lengths. Thanks so much for doing all these! I agree that the 35-70mm (your copy at least) acquits itself admirably, even if it can't quite match the 24-70mm in most of the shots. There is much to discuss in this comparison, but I'll leave that to the more knowledgeable members, including you. BTW, my compliments on your tripod! It doesn't seem to have budged even one full pixel's width between shots! I'm frankly amazed.

Oh damn, you've got a good one. Why can't I be so lucky?

Oh, this is going to be good! The 43-86mm shots are a great teaser.

Well that's another question—and one that people may actually ask. It's a given that adding a TC into the mix will result in higher magnification than using an extension tube alone. But which yields better results: an extension tube of length l in combination with a TC, or an extension tube of length l + a by itself, assuming both setups yield the same magnification? I think this question has been investigated, although I haven't searched for any findings in the internet.

I should know better than to try irony on the internet.

I have the Kenko 25mm tube. It's great to have a tube that provides pass-through communication and even screw-drive AF between lens and camera. I'm too much of a cheap bastard to buy the full set, though.