I gave away the D200 and the lens to a kid who was interested in photography about 10 years ago.

I got that lens for my first DSLR, a D200. I used it for a few years until I got a D3. I had to get FX glass then so I sprung for a 70-200.

I found then that the 70-200 was noticeably sharper than the 18-200. But the 18-200 was a nice lens for flexibility and range. I got a 28-300, which the equivalent for FX. It’s great for casual work but for important shots I use the 24-70 or 70-200.

The biggest problem with the 18-200 was creep. I got a rubber band and put it around the lens barrel to minimize the creep.

Depends on what I'm matching. I'm not always trying to match the same thing, and the matching attempts are rare. (and I'm really bad at keeping records).

My post was really directed at NJFrank, who said that work flow steps are a personal choice. I was agreeing with him. I generally approach every image de novo when it comes to processing. I don't try A first, then B.....

My workflow is mine. Your workflow may well differ. No problem.
I will admit that occasionally I will try to match images in some way.

I have a set work flow from shutter click to LR import. It places meaningful file names on the files and loads them into a well defined folder structure, loads them into LR and backs everything up.

Once it's in LR, it's free form from there. No fixed workflow. Stochastic.

Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

If you want to refer to a specific post, look at the top line of your post, where your name is. On the right side there is a '#'. That is a link to that specific post. Click on that and it will load your post (along with the others in the thread. The URL of that post will be displayed in your browser. You can copy that and direct someone to that specific post. It doesn't have to be in this thread or even in this section.

Your post is at https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-804749-4.html#14569459

It is always good to be in danger of learning something new.

If everyone thought that way, nobody would ever learn to use raw.

One has to risk failure to learn anything. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Modern GPS systems take traffic into account.

My wife is addicted to GPS. She uses it for 95% of her trips. She didn't get a drivers license until age 39 so in her youth she missed out on the art of finding your way by landmarks. She's map-challenged (and I don't know how we ever really managed using folded maps to get around while driving).

I had a D3 but it disappeared from my truck one day. Got a D4 to replace it and eventually a D5 to satisfy a GAS attack.

The D4 was a distinct improvement over the D3. Advances in technology gave better high ISO results (I shot a lot of events and high ISO was important for indoor shots). Between the D4 and D5 there was an improvement in high ISO but I would call it incremental rather than a big improvement. I believe the D4 has slightly better color than the D5 all other things being the same. My D4 is my go-to camera for normal stuff but the D5 gets a lot of use also.

Being an experimentalist, I would recommend that you do some comparison shots between your D3x and your D5 to see what you like better. Include normal and high ISO shots and pay attention to the color. You might want to take a look at the Blink Test for comparison of images (it works best on identical images, so take your test images with a tripod and just switch cameras {with the same lens} to get the shots to compare). It's always good to understand the differences between your cameras when it comes to choosing the one to use.

Have had one for about 8 years now. Why?

That works but doesn't solve the NOx pollution problem

There is mixed opinion on extended warranties.

I generally ignore them. I got one with my first digital camera (1999). It quit in 2001 and was under warranty so I went back to the store and they honored it. The old camera was 1.2MBytes and was out of production and the equivalent was 3.3MBytes so I got an upgrade. That time it worked.

My rule of thumb is that the extended warranty should cost less than a couple percent of the purchase price per year of warranty. The actual number really depends on the MTBF of the item in question. Of course not all warranties are equal. There's fine print in there which is really important.

You also have to determine whether an extended warranty is really necessary. Maybe I'm just lucky but I have spent probably $25K over my lifetime on photographic stuff (cameras, lenses, peripheral items). The high ticket items have not failed. A couple of small items have had infant mortality covered by the initial warranty but generally my cameras and lenses have continued to perform as well as they did originally. They even sometimes take better pictures than they did originally.

I have never purchased an extended warranty for a vehicle. I maintain the vehicle and don't abuse it and it performs well.

And we'll have fusion power commercially viable in 20 years (that time estimate has been the same since around 1960).

It doesn't matter what the vehicle power source switches to. It will be several decades before it's the norm.

And, IMHO, the future of hydrogen is in fuel cells, not ICE. Fuel cells are not ready for prime time.