bebop22 Loc: New York City

Be selective and it won't cost so much.

User ID

Best viewing and culling system for raw files NOT paired with jpgs is to keep a cheap very used entry level camera for reviewing the content of your cards.

Cast or cable that to your giant TV. Now you can view all your raw files, zoom in as needed, and hit “delete” as needed.
(Disable “shoot without lens” and also remove the lens as a precaution.)

REStoffer

The very last statement. There will be some clue as to when and where and who is in your pictures that wasn't in those your left for you, thanks to digital.

BebuLamar

So who wrote this?
"The first consumer digital camera came out in 1994 and few had them. I've owned my own computer and printer since 1982-83 more than 10 years before digital camera became available to the consumer. I guess a few people bought computers just for photography, but I think the majority would own computers and printers with or with out digital camera's, so that's not really an expense assigned to digital camera's, with a few rare exceptions.

Similar to assigning your $100 monthly electric bill to your LED TV."

Assigning $100 electric bill to your LED TV doesn't mean that your LED TV cost $100 of electric to run a month?

User ID

Certainly wouldn’t disagree, since I can’t even decipher your post :-(

coolhanduke Loc: Redondo Beach, CA

Regretfully, I have to agree with most if not all the comments here.
I say regretfully because as a former photo lab owner, the mass exodus from film to digital cost 13 people their jobs and livelihood.
One real benefit to owning a photo lab is I shot film like I do digital with no concern about how many frames I shot.
As we saw more and more digital imaging eroding the film market, we bought less and less film supplies such as sleeving, packaging, paper chemicals etc. causing a domino effect in the industry causing the loss of thousands of jobs.
When a real estate customer brought in the first chip from a phone camera and I saw the resolution of the file, I said, this technology will never fly for photography.
Yesterday I received my Apple iPhone 13 Max Pro. I take many more pictures with my iPhone then my D850’s but that’s just for what I call “snapshots”.
In my remaining time here on earth, or as long as I enjoy photography, I do not have intentions of getting rid of my DSLR’s. However, I do look forward to the lightweight Z9. At my older age, trying to steadily hand hold a D850 with a 200-500mm lens becomes a challenge.

BebuLamar

I doubt that the Z9 is lighter than the D850. Perhaps lighter than the D6 but not D850. Nikon doesn't make a 200-500mm Z mount lens yet but when they do I don't think it will be any smaller or lighter than the F mount lens you have. To use your F mount lens you will have to add the FTZ which isn't heavy but doesn't make it lighter.
You just have to handle the weight. Unless you go for smaller format. Mirrorless isn't going to be any lighter especially you want to use long lens.

coolhanduke Loc: Redondo Beach, CA

Have you seen a z9 next to a D850?
The D850, with battery pack, looks like a tank and the z9 looks like a jeep. I couldn't find any stats on the z9 weight compaired to the D850 but it’s got to be less.
As for the lenses. I will be shedding all of my current F mount lenses and condensing them to 2 or maybe 3 z lenses.

BigDaddy Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

That is no where near your lie:
BebuLamar wrote:
And if you have your TV on all the time it would cost you about $15 a month no where near the $100 like big daddy said.

You are a troll for sure.

REStoffer

I agree with your closing statements. I celebrated birthday 80 and walk with a cain. My Nicon D800 gets very heavy for wedding pictures.