zenagain Loc: Pueblo CO

I am in the process of deciding what to replace my recently stolen gear with. Lost in the theft was, D7100, D7000, D5200, Tamron 70-200 2.8, sigma 150-500, nikkor 18-55, 55-300, 300mm 2.8, 80-400mm.
I loved the 7100, so thinking of the 7200 Or 500. But, cost may come into play so ff may not be a choice.
My main desire is wildlife, BIF, some landscape.
Thanks for any advice.
So,,, what suggestions can anyone offer if you where in my shoes?

SS319

If your house insurance has a $500 deductible and pays replacement cost (as opposed to original cost) then buy what feels right - it will cost you $500 for the top of the line or the bottom of the line. Talk to your agent and find out what their limits are for the loss. Add in the cost of the bag, and every ball point pen, sharpie, mini tripod, and battery in the bag.

Don't have house insurance that will cover the $4000 - $5000 you lost? I'm sorry!

zenagain Loc: Pueblo CO

Home owners insurance will cover $5755.00 after deductible.

Jolly Roger Loc: Dorset. UK

Sorry for your loss. I'm a Canon guy, so I can't advice on replacements.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

One of the DX models... D7200 or D500... would be most ideal for BIF and wildlife shooting.

An FX model might be preferred for landscapes. But you apparently "got by" without one previously. And I'm guessing landscapes aren't a very high priority for you, since you also didn't have any particularly wide lenses, such as most really serious landscape shooters tend to use.

It seems to me like you should start with your replacement lens selection, then work backwards from the cost of replacing those. Cost is definitely going to come into play! Heck, a Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 alone would use up the entire insurance compensation! Or, the Nikkor 80-400mm would eat up close to half that amount.

Once you have the lenses figured out, you'll have a better idea how much camera you can afford. That might dictate your choices.

And there might be some "wiggle room" in the amount the insurance company will compensate, if you dispute their numbers. It's always hard to say, depends upon your particular policy, company and history with them. But some years ago I disputed an insurance company's offer after a car accident and got it increased by almost 50%. I also refused to sign their "medical release" which would have indemnified them against any future claims if I developed any health problems in the future. But, that was a different situation... my point is only that it's sometimes possible to negotiate with insurance companies. It may or may not be wise to do so, depending upon the company and your relationship with them.

Sorry for your losses. It's always ugly and depressing when that happens.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

The answer depends on whether or not you had insurance.

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

Please READ THE THREAD. "Home owners insurance will cover $5755.00 after deductible."

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

???

Original poster stated they have insurance and have a $5755 compensation offer on the table.

zenagain Loc: Pueblo CO

Thank you Alan, I had not thought of that. I have not accepted the insurance companies offer yet, so I'm definitely going to do some more research and go back to them with some more reasonable numbers.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

You're right, I didn't read the thread. I assumed the O.P. would have included that pertinent bit of information in the original post.

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

Maybe D500 and 200-500mm lens

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

I do tons of birds with a D800 and a Sigma 150-600 Sport. The quality is hard to distinguish from my 600F4, and I can hand hold it. I've had it since September, and I have yet to use it on a tripod. I bought it used for $1200 on Fred Miranda's classifieds. You can get a pretty clean D800 with low mileage for around $1100 these days. There is a D800 with an aftermarket battery grip for that price, condition 9 on Miranda.

And here is a recently serviced (by Nikon) D810 for $1700

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1487933/0?keyword=D810#14018473

If you pay with paypal and ask all the right questions and it isn't as represented, Paypal will twist the sellers arm (like by cancelling the sale and returning your money) so that you can exit the transaction cleanly, including shipping costs to you and back to the seller who lied to you. I have been buying used gear for 50 yrs, and have yet to be burned. I have gotten some clunkers, but was able to come out clean each time. This was the last close call I had, with a 600mm F4 several years ago.

http://pixeldiarist.blogspot.com/2012/01/buying-used-gear.html

Just some thoughts - lets say you get the D810, the Sigma 150-600 (or a Tamron 150-600 G2 which is as good in my opinion as the Sigma, and is 2 lbs lighter), you'd have $2700 left over to play with. You could get a used 70-200 and a 24-70 and still have some change in your pocket. You won't believe the difference in quality between what you were shooting with and the lenses I am suggesting.

Here is a thorough review that weighed heavily in my decision to get the Sigma Sport - and the G2 had not yet hit the streets.

https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-200-500mm-f5-6e-vr/

You'll see that the Sport is the top performer, followed by the 200-500, and the Sigma Contemporary, Original Tamron, and the 80-400 trail in the pack.

I've shot with the D500 and the 200-500 and was underwhelmed with the image quality and blown away with the AF performance. Group Area AF is "da bomb" for shooting birds and birds in flight in particular, which makes me want the D500, but the image quality just isn't as good as the 36mp cameras. The only way you could blow the focus when this mode is enabled is if you try to compose the image and track the bird with your eyes closed, it is that good. The D810 offers Group AF, BTW. The reason I like the full frame cameras is that, as you already know, you will be cropping your shots. You can crop a lot with 36mp images, and still have lots of pixels left over to still have a great image. The "croppability" of DX just isn't as good as the FX. But that is just my opinion.

Here are two images taken of the same bird, with a D500 and a 28-300 at a somewhat closer distance and a D800 and a Sigma 150-600 at a greater distance, requiring a bit more cropping. I no longer have the images I took with the D500 and the 200-500, but the results were pretty comparable with the 28-300, when you take the difference in proximity into consideration. Both were at ISO 800 btw.

Buying used and smart may take a little more time, but the results will be well worth the wait. Or you could get lucky and find exactly what you want right away. Whatever happens, enjoy this "gift" of an opportunity to upgrade your stuff!

(Download)


(Download)

SteveR Loc: Michigan

Gene....I would love a D500 for sports, but I'm holding off to see if there will be a replacement for the D810 and if it will have the AF focus system of the D500 and D5, for one thing.

Jim Bob

Now you know SteveR has at least two issues: 1) he rarely reads the threads and 2); when he does read he has difficulty comprehending.

Jim Bob

Come on Gene, you know good and well that 28-300 is no where near the 200-500 in terms of image quality. Don't mislead the guy.