Thanks. Well, I figured with a DX the 300mm is equal to 450mm on a 35mm and 400mm is 600mm on a 35mm format. So 600-450=150mm diff. So I zoomed out to 300mm added a 1.4x which would be equal to 420mm which is close enough to 400mm and didn't think it was enough difference in the print to pay $649.
To each his own.

Thanks for the link to the Nikon simulator. Makes it clear what the gain is and with the pixel count of the d500 I think I'll just keep on using my 16-300mm and crop to get the "simulated" increase to 400mm and use that $649 for something else. And for those who rant against cropping, don't. I'm not a professional photographer and shoot for my pleasure! Y'all have a good day now, ya hear.

I've been using a Tamron 16-300mm as my "go to" lens for several years, no problems, good results. Now Tamron has an 18-400mm lens. On my Nikon DX d500, that's a difference of 150mm. If I set my existing lens at 16mm and zoom out to 166mm I can see what a 150 mm increase provides. Now if I zoom from 150 to 300 mm, that is also 150mm increase. The question: is the 150mm increase linear in both settings? In other words, do I get the same apparent increase with both settings? It doesn't appear that it does when zooming in on a ruler and checking the magnification but lens mathematics is not my forte. I don't want to spend the money and find that it really doesn't make that much difference at the far end.

FYI, I shoot a lot of birds in flight and grounded animals. Thanks.

O.K., who is KEH? Not on my list after B&H.

Check out this site, Images in Africa Safaris, <info@imagesinafricasafaris.com> I went to South Africa with Gavin last year and it was the best trip I've ever taken. I know he does the Migration some years but don't have his schedule. I highly recommend these folks. RMJ

I'm 80 and got back from South Africa recently. Do what you want as long as you can do it safely. Age is just a number.

Rising hotter air assumes a rotating form due to the Corilis effect. When it gets big enough you have a tornado.

If you are using PS, set it so that ALL your images go to RAW processing when downloaded. Yes, a jpg is a LOT easier to color correct with the RAW processor.

I've been on a number of workshops since retirement and got some great pictures and training. But I ran into something different 'this week.
Paid my deposit and waited. Received the invoice and noted that I was charged for a single. Hadn't been asked and didn't want a single so when I paid the invoice I just deducted the single charge. Within a day got a reply that my payment was short and he noticed it was equal to the single charge. Wrote back and said I didn't want the single but I would get a check in the mail tomorrow.
Well he hit the roof and ranted he had never had a client like me and since I hadn't paid the full charge by the 90 day deadline, my reservation was cancelled, my credit card deposit refunded and my final check was voided (with a picture of the voided check) Said I should have said something when I got the invoice and implied it was my fault. Well, yes,
It was my misunderstanding, I didn't ask for a single so didn't expect to pay for one. Cost me the air fare and trip insurance but I've never run into someone with such a burr under his saddle. Sort of figured some buddy wanted to go on that workshop so he just dropped me and got his buddy. Probably better off for me, we'd probably spent to much time arguing about shutter speeds and f-stops! Lesson learned, read the invoice very carefully and know what you are buying.(that applies to anything)

Blue Cypress Lake, west of Vero Beach, Fl. Cruised around the lake and got some flying, some feeding and some just there. The black bird is a cousin of the cormorant, an Anhinga. Her chick has her head down her throat up to the eyeballs. And that one bird isn't dropping white string, when you gotta go, you go.
Nikon D500, Tamron 16-300mm, various speeds and "f" stops for a cloudy/sunny day, handheld on a boat or on the road.

Keep your 7000 for a backup, I use my 7200 as a backup for my 500. I've never had a camera go bad get dropped, etc but it's nice to have a backup.

Thanks for the answers, I'll ignore my Spider results and crank down the screen brightness since it applies to all prints. RMJ

I am using a Canon MG/7720 printer. Calibrated computer screens. When the brightness is just right on the computer screen, the prints come out very dark. My workaround is to get the picture like I want it and then boost the brightness by +60 units and that produces a nice print. The color is handled by Photoshop, printer profile is Canon 7700 series, normal printing, absolute colorimetric. Settings are: photo printing, photo paper glossy, high quality, any size paper. These are the settings used on the Canon 8120 before the paper feed went blooey and I bought the 7720. Any suggestions to get correct prints?

Because I don't how to do that!

As GEEPOPS said, you have to turn the flash on in the settings. What messed me up was that I HAD turned it on. The "problem" is that when you remove the WR-10 for storage, the circuit is broken and the menu item is "grayed out". When the WR-10 in re-installed, the menu item returns to normal and it looks like you are ready to go. Nope, once the circuit was broken, even though it returns when the WR-10 is installed, the "Flash Control" in the "Photo Shooting Menu" is now turned "OFF" and must be turned back "ON". I hadn't realized that once "ON" it didn't stay "ON" like most any other switch. And the manual doesn't say anything about this "feature". Thanks GEEPOPS.