Having both d7200 and d810, I find image quality similar. However the difference in speed of focus, facial recognition, low light capability eas well worth upgrading to the D810. The D7500 and the D500 are similar to the D810 those three areas. I tried the D500 against the D7500 and was more impressed by the D500. I'd suggest getting the D500 and in time upgrading your lenses. Your current lenses are not that good, but adequate for non professional use.

I dropped Dish a year ago when their rates went up to $150/month. I now just use an antenna and get the major networks through local tv. They are as much as I need or want. Occasionally I miss a football game broadcasted on ESPN, so I just go to the local bar and watch it while having a burger and beer with the rest of my friends who have dropped satellite/cable. Aside from the cost of the beer and burgers, I'm up $1800 this year. That represents a lot of date nights out with my wife this year.

I've trained about a thousand truck drivers in my life. About 10% of them were women. Most common reason was availability of jobs and equal pay. No one cited the good food, social life, or stress of the job as a reason. A few wanted to spend more time with their husbands/partners. A few for the travel. And a large percentage to get away from men.

At the time of this video, we laughed at the drunk. Today we are seeing the pain drunks have caused themselves and others. They're not so funny anymore. That's why there are no drunk comic act today like there were then.

I'd keep all three. Your brother knew what he was doing when he chose those three. The D700 is professional quality and will last forever. The D7100 is almost as good as the D7200 which is also a classic. I've though of getting a D5xxx series camera for its fold down screen. Sometimes the right shot requires to get low to the ground. The fold out screen can do that for you. Another option in my opinion would be to sell the D7100 and D5100 for a D7500 or D500. Dump the moldy lens quick. Good luck.

Excellent work. Some of the best I've seen on the Hog.

I have and use the 17-35 as well as the 20-35 on both the D700 and D810. Exceptional captures with either camera. Personally I prefer the 17-35. My copy had the motor replaced a week after I bought it so squeaking is not a problem.

Bought one from National Camera in Minneapolis. Shortly after purchase it started to squeak. National Camera sent it in to Nikon, and Nikon put a new motor in. As per their policy covered by store warrantee. Great lens and one I will keep forever. Call Nikon and see if motors are still available for the lens.

I am content with quality older lenses. For wide angle on FX, I use a Nikon af 17-35 2.8. Its fast relatively light weight, and sharp. If you find one, make sure the motor doesn't squeak.

My son at the age of eight was given a ticket from a game warden. He was going hunting with his bb gun after getting off the school bus. The ticket was for transporting a fire arm on a vehicle (his bike) without it being in a case. The game warden made no friends that day.

When my wife and I took the cruse to Alaska and side trips, she used a D70, 18-70, 70-300 non VR. The combination took wonderful pictures which we enlarged for the wall. Some are still hanging. Others she used in a scape book which won several awards. Your equipment is plenty good to do the job without buying one new thing. Enjoy the trip.

Really curious. What is the breed of Maggie? Great picture of her.

The f4 is not the only version that has vibration reduction (vr). This is probably why the (3.5- about 5.6 vr) seems to get a bad rap. The original 24-120 did not have vr. It was soft but got the job done for the newspaper industry. It was referred to as the street sweeper. Pictures in newsprint didn't have to be sharp as long as it told the story. I own the second version and still use it and it is a vr and its not the f4. As I previously stated I also own the 24-85 3.5-4.5 vr and its a better lens, but doesn't have the range.

I got the 24-120 VR 3.5 when I got my d700. Aside from some softness at the corners, I was happy with what it could do. Usually I'd just crop off a little around the edges. I tried the f4 model and it was a better lens. I was also impressed with how fast it focused. I still use the 3.5 model and don't own the f4. I didn't want to spend the extra money. Now I use a 24-85 vr as a walk about with my D810. Aside from 35mm less of range, it is just as good if not a better lens, in my opinion, as the f4. It is cheaper, lighter, has less distortion, and smaller, than the f4. I would not say that the 24-120 3.5 should be used as a professional lens, but aside from corner softness, is a nice beginner lens.

The list totally fits Minnesota. Here is more:
When your lawn tractor costs more than your cars combined.
Everyone owns berkas called snow suits.