I think the problem is that most people see the "auto" part of "M + Auto ISO" and assume that

a) It's leaving the camera to make decisions for them, and

b) They have to blindly accept what the camera proposes.

Both of those assumptions are wrong. Firstly, the camera offers suggestions based on what it determines to be an appropriate exposure level. Secondly, if you think that the camera's suggestions aren't appropriate, you can use exposure compensation (EC) to tell the camera to target another level of exposure.

Whether you dial in an EC value or not, at no point is the camera forcing you to accept a specific value. The user can start off by choosing whatever value of aperture he/she thinks is appropriate, then he/she can use one adjustment wheel to play off shutter speed against ISO. As the user changes the shutter speed setting, the camera automatically provides an appropriate value of ISO, based on whatever the targeted** level of exposure happens to be. By this process the user is in full control of the exposure.

**The targeted level of exposure is determined by the camera itself plus whatever EC value is dialled in by the user.

My suggested procedure is to choose aperture and EC first, because in most situations there will not be a sudden or urgent need to alter them, and the exceptions to that would be fairly obvious and easy to identify.

Where aperture is concerned, you can select what you consider to be the widest aperture that still gives sufficient DOF (depth of field). Being able to estimate that is one of the most useful skills a photographer can have. Going wider than that is something that would be done only in very demanding circumstances, and in a situation where a sufficiently fast shutter speed was more of a priority than sufficient DOF (and where ISO was maxed out). Again, those circumstances would be easy to identify.

The good thing about the above procedure is that it's logical and intuitive, and it doesn't require any skills beyond those which you acquire in order to do basic photography. (OK, knowing when EC will be required is probably a step up from being a basic skill, but it's not rocket science, and it's definitely a skill that's worth acquiring if you don't have it already).

I have several old Nikkor lenses, a 50 mm f1:1.8, a 35-13mm f1:3.5-4.5, and a 70-300mm f1:4.5-5 I used on my N8008. Nikon’s lens compatibility chart indicates they are fully compatible with many Nikon digital cameras suggesting they mount and the auto focus works properly. I’m considering a D7500 or D750. Has anyone had experience using these older lenses on new DSLRs. I know they are heavier than the newer lenses but would like to know if there are any other drawback such as image quality. Has anyone actually used them on newer DSLRs (i.e., D7200, D7500, D750)? Thanks for your help.

Looking at getting an old camera - Nikon D200 or 300.

I have never bought anything on Ebay.

Most gear seems unrated. Some sellers allow return, some not. Descriptions are often internally inconsistent.

Seems to me that buying used via B&H, Adorma or KEH (possibly others - if so whom?) would be best way to do this so as to have some idea of what one is getting with the potential for return.

Looks like this route costs a bit more, but seems worth it to me.

Comments, thoughts, opinions

Thanks

Wanting to buy a used/reconditioned Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro Lens for my Nikon D7200.

Other than on Ebay, I only find this lens used on Adorama. I have purchased used from KEH in the past and was very pleased in the purchase (I believe their used ratings are conservative and what I received was better than expected).

Adorama rating on this available lens (only one available) is “Excellent Minus” which is described as: “Shows signs of moderate wear and/or usage. Unit body may have surface scratches.”

The price is $419 as compared to $569 new.

Any UHH folk here who have purchased used lenses from Adorama and can share their “quality confidence” in their ratings? I am all for saving money, but also want to be happy. I know there is a decent return policy, so that helps if I am not pleased. Just not sure my trust is as high as it is with KEH (based only on never having dealt with them on used equipment).

Also, EBay pricing on this lens model (used) is higher than the Adorama price. Don’t know if that means anything.

About 2-3 months ago our Supreme Court passed a ruling that internet sales can be taxed. (This was before Kavanaugh was posted as Supreme Court Justice). So as long as your favorite internet sales stores (B & H, Adorama, Etc.) don't tack on taxes go for that nifty item you've been eying. But make sure they don't add tax at check out. Otherwise, you may as well shop your local camera store.

My take. When I bought expensive items one a Sony Pro video deck for 7k you bet I bought from B&H in NY lived in PA.
And it is complex for buyers and sellers. Vertex a company that started in PA is not the king of state tax management
for sales all over the world. B&H sells to someone in Seattle how do they know how to configure local taxes.
The reason I think That a lot of the smaller photo stores went out of business is stock. Who gets the Sony a7III B&H sent me an
email they have them. A lot of photo stores became chains and were mismanaged. Some great stores like the one in Bryn Mawr
near where I used to live are still great catering to an area with deep pockets. Costco etc have packaged deals on Nikons etc
that cant be beat. Best Buy has improved their service my store in Aventura Florida has a Sony rep who is an expert.
He gives me straight answers. And we are friendly.
State sales tax has always been a mess. For years in PA when I had a marketing and production company we couldn't get
straight answers about what is taxed. Is the written copy of an ad taxable. How about a still picture of a building? Or advertising
consultation? We could never get a straight answer.