I purchased a Sony RX10 III camera off of eBay. I received it Sept. 30th. The seller told me it was in like new condition and it was two months old. I live in Phoenix and have only taken around 15 shots for I also received a book about the camera. It seems to be working fine from the little I have used it. It gets hot here and I have just not gotten out to shot photos. My wife had put the box where I truly had not looked at it before. It had a USED sticker on it. He had told me it was like new. Three days ago I called Sony to have it transferred to my name. They had to have the receipt. So I went on eBay and emailed the seller to send it to me. He had discarded it. Thus I have no warranty. This morning I called eBay and was told I had 30 days to return to seller. I again send another email to the seller and he told me it was a display model he purchased. This tells me I have no idea as to how many actuations are on it. It seems to be working fine, but I want to know your opinion as to what to do. It came with several accessories with it. He told me he was selling because of arthritis in his hands. Knowing he has arthritis and know it weight close to three pounds would you believe him. Gregger

The D850 is giving me real GAS, however I'm going to pass at this time. My D800 has far more capability than I as an "advanced" amateur. The only reason for thinking of changing is GAS. My reason for passing at this time is that at my age I expect I will only get one or two more DSLR's. The only DSLR's I've had are the D90 and the D800, both of which I still have. I entered the world of digital in 2008 with the D90, adding it to my Nikon F4 (which I still use). I was so new to digital I didn't even realize that DX meant a crop sensor, I just thought the D90 was a top of the line amateurs 35mm (FF) DSLR camera. The info I read at the time didn't really describe the crop aspect. All I knew was that it was a lot less expensive than the "Pro" Nikons. I was and am still happy with the D90 and the DX format is absolutely no hindrance to me, has no bearing on the desire to upgrade, but GAS forced me to want an actual FF camera. Didn't need it, just wanted one. Plus I have a lot of FX lenses from the F4 era and have now added more (yes, have used them on the D90). Finally bit the bullet in 2014 and jumped in to the D800. Again, far more camera than I need but love it. So this was a gap of 6 years between my first DSLR and latest DSLR. Now, looking at the timeline of Nikon FX releases I see a span of only 2 to 3 years between them, each offering interesting steps forward, especially in sensor size and/or iso. So my thought is, since I've only had my D800 for 3 years now that the D850 is out, what will Nikon be releasing in another 3 years? If I keep my 6 year gap between DSLR purchases then I'm wondering what Nikon will have for us in 2020? Figure if I start saving now, I'll even have enough money to buy whatever they have to offer by then. If I had a real reason to upgrade, I'd get a D850, but..... I can wait. Anybody else thinking of waiting?

For those of you who are regular churchgoers: do you give of your time and skills to your church for free? I have done three major events at our church (voluntarily) for free -- and now I am about to feel a little "used." Two of these have required getting printing done, which they pay for, but as you know, this is work. I was hoping that my name would become known and that I'd get a few paying clients. But it hasn't happened. A friend told me I should continue shooting these events "with a servant's heart." The kicker is that the school attached to the church recommended another photographer to shoot their senior portrait sessions and another showed up to take their website pictures. Another big event is coming up -- thoughts? (I think they're expecting me to voluntarily shoot it like I did last year.) Thank you!

Hey, I'm happy that you're delighted with your Nikon.

But, as a multi-decade veteran of the corporate world, it doesn't exactly work that way. On the one hand, individual business units rarely subsidize (cushion) other business units - just doesn't make sense. Think of it this way - if a corporation had a unit that was consistently not achieving the required corporate profit rate or, worse, losing money, why would HQ continue to pour money into it? You wouldn't if you were the CEO, you'd put your money into the units that were making more money (otherwise the board would find someone who would - the board, representing the shareholders - wants to maximize total corporate profits, or else the shareholders vote them out...).

On the other, many corporations have centralized R&D units, from which each business unit can draw technology. So, if Canon's and Olympus' R&D units focus on image quality (for copiers or medical imaging), or Sony's R&D focuses on electronics (for televisions, cameras, video games) while relying on lens specialists (say Zeiss) for optics technology, the individual business units can benefit from the centralized research, at a lower unit cost, because the cost of the research is spread over more products. BTW, Nikon makes more than cameras: lithography systems, microscopes, binoculars and metrology (measurement) products and undoubtedly leverages its central research across these products - it no more stands on camera technology alone than the others do.

Ultimately, the competition among these, and others, drives improvements across the industry. As soon as one company comes out with an advance that increases their sales (because consumers now want it), the others are going to replicate - or better - surpass it, so as not to lose - or better - to gain customers. Those companies that don't adapt fall by the wayside - not many Kodaks, Polaroids, Yashicas around these days, except in collectors' hands. What this means for the OP is that it's pretty hard to go wrong with any of the major brands at this price point.

Again, glad you like your Nikon, but keep in mind that the Nikon you have today owes as much to itself as it does to Canon, Olympus, Sony, and others...