While not at my favorite nursery my favorite flower patch my wife takes care of is just as cool to me. This isn't a Begonia, it's some kind of Lilly but I don't know, I just know I enjoy photographing her flowers.

After looking at your picture of a Begonia I'm beginning to think that what I thought was a Day Lilly may actually be a Begonia.

After talking to my wife she says she didn't tell me it was a Day Lilly and then took me over to what she said was a Day Lilly.

I may not know flowers but I like to take pictures of them anyway.

___________________________________________________________________________________________

I have a son who shoots film and won't do digital, thinks it's silly to go through all the work.

I shoot raw. I actually capture jpeg and raw but any picture that is worth keeping is edited from a raw file. What you can do with raw is amazing especially sky's and water where there are many very close colors. Only in raw can you pull the entire dynamic range your camera captured. Casual shooters that want to share a vacation with family and friends, perhaps jpeg is ok for that but anything you want to print needs to come from raw if you want it to be the best it can be.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Knowing what camera you are shooting with would help me know what to recommend but the 200-500 is a very nice lens. I have taken my Tamron 150 to 600 to my grandson's games and my granddaughter's games. Yes the 150 is a little long on occasion when the action is right up against you but the portraits I have gotten from across the field are spectacular. From one end of the field you can easily cover the entire field, you seldom have to move. I say go long or stay at home.

\_________________________________________________________________________________

I don't have a huge noise problem any more but on occasion it really comes in handy especially if you have to do some serious cropping. I mostly shoot with a Nikon D850 and try to shoot at ISO 400 and below, the pictures come out buttery smooth and never need noise reduction unless I also do sharpening and then I find that might add noise and the noise reduction routine in Photoshop usually does a pretty good job of reducing it but sometimes also softens the image.

I think Adobe has seen a lot of third party software offer things they don't or at least didn't offer and are trying to catch up. The main thing I use Photoshop for is "developing" the raw image. Sometimes Nikon in camera gets the JPEG right but most of the time I like my version better. There are a lot of programs that will edit the raw file in that way, some of them free but when you need the other features it is hard to beat PS.

Of late I have been doing a lot of shooting on Auto ISO, the 850 is wonderful for that. The camera won't usually get any where close to the limit I set until night time. I set the limit to ISO 6400 and never get a blurry picture but at night time especially I do get some noise. I don't notice noise even at high ISO's until I start pixel peeping, but once you see it it can't be unseen so I work to get rid of the noise. I think ISO 6400 is better than 3200 on the 810 and perhaps close to 1600 on the 800. When I shot with the 800 and 810 I didn't worry about noise I just avoided it by using low ISO's, slow shutter speeds and multiple exposures hoping to get one good one. I've gotten a lot of good photo's that way but being able to take some noise out of an otherwise great picture is a real plus. If you aren't using noise reduction but need it there are good programs to help you out and in my opinion well worth the effort.

He actually stated he did not want to changes lenses because of high winds where he was going.

If yoiu must take both cameras and both lenses I would likely put my best lens on my best camera, I assume that means your nice zoom on your "A" camera and your wide angle on your "B" camera.

I don't know what your zoom range or how wide your wide angle lens is. My experience with my wide angle is that you can get a couple really nice shots but then your've had enough. The vast majority of my landscapes are taken with my 24-70, yeah I have the 28-300 and and several other lenses but the 24-70 gets a lot of camera time. I do use the 28-300 on occasion but it has a few minor quality problems so when I need a good shot I use the 24-70 f:2.8. My Tamron 15-30 is one of my favorite lenses and I use it but only in the right place for it which isn't terribly often. The 24-70 zoom however is good for just about anything.

I have heard people say that the Nikon 500 is about the best birding lens they have ever used. I have the Tamron 150-600 G2 that I use on my D850 and I get some great pictures. I have used it with a Nikon Doubler, you really need a sturdy tripod when you go out that far. That is one good thing about the 500, it is easy, at least comparatively easy to stabalize.

Using the D850 is a really good bird camera. Many people say the 500 is better because it is faster and that because it's a crop sensor the lens is apparently longer. Those things are not entirely true. With the grip I get 9FPS and 500 gets 15, so yeah it is a little faster. The crop sensor however is not an advantage. The sensor pitch is the same so you have more area in the viewfinder and if you enlarge to 1.5 you will have the same image only you got to shoot it a lot easier because of the larger area in the viewfinder.

I have heard the Sigma 150 to 600 is a little soft, perhaps you can tune it a little on the D850, I did on the Tamron 16-600 with good effect.

There is a little lens that you will think I'm nuts when I suggest it but I love it, the Nikon 28-300. It isn't a particularry bright lens but it's fantastic for finding the shot you want and then perhaps changing to a longer lens. I've gotten some good results with it and using it as a finder lens.

I have many of the same lenses you have and for birds I think you already have a decent kit but might want to get something a little sharper than the Sigma. The Nikon 500 is about as sharp as you will find. There is a bird photographer in Florida, I think his name is Mark Smith, look him up on YouTube, he uses the Nikon 500 and likes it.

Post is where the magic happens. People that talk about shooting in JEPG and doing it right so they don't have to do anything in post are either lazy, unprofessional or don't care to get the best they can get from their equipment. I'm sure that all of us can get acceptable work from original JEPG's but why get acceptable when you can get outstanding.

Cropping is for what ever media you are working for. My computer monitor is 16 x 9, I print at 4 x 6, 5 x7, 8 x 10, 8-1/2 x 11 and 13 x 19. I don't crop the same for all of them I crop to fit the media. I also light the scene for the media. JEPG shooters are hobbiest that simply are not ready to go to the next level or are too cheap to get PS CC or some other editing software.

If you want great results use all your tools, not just the hammer.

______________________________________________________________

Manual is simply like any other mode, it has a purpose and there are times when it is the best option. Most of us don't start out a session in manual, we will start in another mode and see what the camera likes and migrate to manual from there. I have never used Auto or "P" but "A" and "S" are both automatic modes it just lets you decide one of the 3 pieces of the triangle. If you have a camera that supports "Auto ISO" I highly recommend you give it a try in any of the modes including Manual. When shooting birds or other wildlife we have to get a shot that is not blurry because of movement, with the right shutter speed we can stop humming birds wings. Speeding up the shutter however greatly reduces available light. Auto mode however does not know you are trying to stop motion, so for landscapes or portraiture you might get a good shot, for moving animals probably not.

Linda said it first above and is right, Auto ISO is your friend in this situation. You can go to Shutter priority and set the speed to what you want and tell the camera what parameters you prefer with ISO and it will do it's best to follow them. While in Auto ISO it is possible the camera will stray from what you desire because it has to to get the shot , it will not stray from your shutter settings. Auto ISO makes Manual just another automatic mode with you setting both the shutter speed and the aperture. I don't know about other brands but Nikon lets you set the lowest and highest ISO with the preference being the lowest. Depending on the model you can also set limits on shutter speed in Auto ISO. Some of the best wildlife photographers use Auto ISO and get remarkable results, you can too.

50 years ago you wouldn't have been able to buy a car with the features mine has for a million dollars. 25 years ago you wouldn't have been able to buy a camera with the features my Nikon D850 has for a million dollars. In real dollars both the car and the camera are likely less expensive to produce 50 and 25 years ago because computers and robots did so much of the work. This is called progress. My D850 is the best camera I have ever owned, but before that my D810 was the best camera I had ever owned, before that my D800 was the best camera I had ever owned as were the other several digital cameras before them. I have a hard time thinking there may be something better than my D850 but I'm not an idiot, at least I don't think so, perhaps there are those that would argue with that statement. Anyway, I'm in my 8th decade of life and have been taking pictures with reflex cameras since the 50's. I didn't take me a long time to make the jump to my first 2 megapixel Panasonic digital. It's was wonderful to get out of the darkroom.

I don't miss film and I don't miss my first digital camera, nor do I miss my D810. I expect when something better than my D850 comes along I won't miss it either.

Progress is wonderful. I marvel at the wonder that comes from my D850, it takes pictures better than what my eyes can see. While I really enjoy my photography trips and the great pictures I can take when something better comes along I will likely get it and retire my D850 and never miss it. When I first started replacing my cameras I thought I would hold on to them as a backup but I have found you can't really go back. You get used to the resolution and dynamic range of newer cameras and wonder how you ever got along without them.

I don't own mirrorless, yet, but I imagine it won't be too long till I do if I continue to live and get around.

Progress is wonderful. I remember when the Boeing 707 was the wonder of the world. I remember when the IBM 360 was the wonder of the world. I remember well sputnik and the world as one listened for the beeps it made. I remember when transistors replaced tubes. I remember when radial tires replace bias ply tires. I remember well my first computer, it was a 4k TRS-80 and it was wonderful. I remember well when Xerox came out and revolutionized the office. My goodness does anyone now have a landline phone? I remember when not everyone had a phone in their home and now everyone the world over has one in their pocket. I remember when people still used outhouses in rural areas. I remember when power tools had a crank on them, the power was you cranking the drill or other tool. Remember Brace and bits? Remember foot pedal sewing machines? There are so many things we now take for granted that at one time were the new improved miracle product. Mirrorless cameras are no different, some day they will be old fashioned and then they too will be completely replaced.

You may think me crazy but, I would have to take the 150-600 and borrow a Nikon 28-300 with VC. You should take zoom lenses as you won't be able to get to everywhere you want to take a picture from so, with a zoom you can get to at least more of those places.

The other lens I would take if you don't want to lug the monster 150 to 600 is the 10-24. I have a Tamron 15-35 which I like better than the Nikon 10-24 but you will get mostly the same shots. Many people don't like the wide lenses for vacation shots but once you really learn how to use them you can get some spectacular shots.

The Canon Pixma-Pro series are fantastic however I have come to want pigment inks instead of dyes, the pigments last a long time. I use the Pixma Pro-10 and don't know how it could be better.

Just in case anyone is interested in this lens I have a few thoughts about it. I have one. After I got it I took a picture that I thought was a little soft so I put it away and figured it was a bad purchase. I recently read articles by respected photographers that said this was not a perfect lens but still a great lens. So, I got mine back out and took some spring pictures with my 24-70, 85 1.8 and 50 1.4. On the 85 (my favorite lens) at the same aperture supported on the 28-300 at 85 it is really hard to tell the difference between pictures. The zoom has more viginetting but the color was the same, sharpness suprisingly was the same. The 50 1.4G at the same aperture as the 85 was actually softer. I really like my little 50 but don't use it much since the range is covered by the 24-70 2.8. Anyway, I think it is a good lens and THE lens for street or walk around photography.

Yeah I know my picture is a little dark, chalk it up to a bright monitor.

I think for the listed price it's a pretty good deal.

Here in Kentucky it is still early for blooms but we got one in our back yard.

I was showing a friend the versatility of wide angle lenses so took this one, first of the season.

When it gets really dark my D850 doesn't care.

I would say if your using Nikon now your best bet is staying with it. There are cameras you can buy used that are better than your D7200 but not much. If you want to crop more then you might want to consider a full frame with high mega pixels. The best improvement you will get with nikon full frame would be going to the D810 or even the D850. The 7200 is a nice camera but doesn't have the greatest dynamic range. Both of the 810 and 850 cameras have remarkable dynamic range, the D850 (at about one stop higher DR than the 810) is likely the best dynamic range camera there is right now in less than medium format. If you are going to be shooting birds then the D500 is really nice and you can get one used pretty cheap. The sensor on the D500 has a tendency to clip highlights so you have to be kinda of careful at the bright end. With the 850 You would have to go with the nikon grip and D5 battery to start coming close to the shudder per second ability of the D500 though. That being said the D850 has a crop (or DX) mode that makes the DX lenses work so that you can use your old lenses until you purchase ff lenses if you go that way.

The truth is until you know why you want to upgrade it is hard to say what would be best. I've had 12, 24,36 and 46 megapixel Nikons. The high resolution is fantastic for cropping but once you get past 24 that's pretty much the only advantage, but that is a huge advantage.