I don't know whether or not to believe or not believe in Extra Terrestrial beings. I do know that to close your mind to anything that can't be proved or disproved is not a logical thing to do.

Reasonable thought says that there are billions maybe trillions maybe more by a factor of millions of stars many of which have planets and the odds of only one planet having life as we know it is not a reasonable thought. No way to prove or disprove that.

They are fine on the D850, they are FX not DX.

I use those lenses plus a 35-70mm f/2.8 D with my D100, D200, D300 also on my F4 & F5. They are my Trinity plus 1. They are FX and as they are known to be Full Frame, lenses.

They work as the best of their day for professionals on FX cameras and even better on DX cameras because DX cameras only use the center of the glass which is the best part.

Older but quick story. A lot of people had joined my company in California from the Midwest and had bought new houses that needed landscaping. Some got together and decided that one rototiller could do the job for everyone. 1978 the one guy bought a 5 HP Montgomery Wards front tine tiller. 9 people in the group had tilled up their yards. I moved to a new house and asked about the tiller. The guy who owned it said he wanted to sell it for $100.00, so I bought it. It tilled my back yard a couple of neighbors backyards and 3 friends who lived not far away. For a front tine tiller it was a workhorse and had paid for itself many times over. I stored it for over 20 years and finally had to empty the storage because I was moving about 150 miles away.

I hired a guy, my step son had received help from , to empty the storage. I told him the tiller was working very well when it was put away. He said if it works, I won't have to rent or buy one to use in my part time landscaping. That was over 5 years ago, and my step son told me he talked with the guy who told him the tiller does everything he needed and to thank me. The use has spanned almost 50 years, and still going strong.

I remember as kids working at the local baseball stadium for night games. A few would let fly while walking down the middle of the dirt road and see how far they could go while walking. Never tried, because it was never a goal of mine.

Now while skiing, I do remember trying to write my name and not succeeding, surprising because it's only 4 letters. .Once I remembered the snow is our drinking water later in the year, it wasn't to happen again. Lol . . .

btbg

Of course you are correct. Most people are happy with the lenses they have and don't realistically look at the ones that are exclusive and too expensive for their pocket book OR are not happy with their lenses, but can't do anything about it (not enough money,) because of the exclusive lenses being just too expensive.

Comparing a 24-70 lens of one company with the 24-70 lens of another company is comparing equivalents. As would be comparing workmanship on finished lenses or how well one company's lenses attach against how problematic another company's lens attachment is.

Chevy vs Ford
Boeing vs Airbus
ad infinitum

We have another quality assurance,/control issue with those two737's. The software obviously controlled the aircraft once it determined the airspeed was too low and caused the aircraft to go into a dive to gain airspeed. Lack of airspeed is definitely a serious matter and the pilot has to take immediate action. The aircraft were lacking adequate altitude for the action the computer took.

A software rewrite is in order. (And was probably done). If Software Quality had done their job, they would have required the software to prevent the possibility of diving below a certain altitude above the ground.

"If altitude is less than 'xx,xxx" feet (meters) and airspeed is less than "xxx" then alert the pilot else dive to regain airspeed.

A simple "If then else" software test.

I know my comment here is too simplistic, but I doubt they had something in their coding to represent that.

I was on a software development team that developed software for targeting munitions strikes. A product of a different company was praised for their ability to do one shot one kill. They said we get our targeting information from XYZ products because they have superior software. I was only a contributor.

From a quality perspective Boeing shared the responsibility, but the biggest responsibility is with the airlines. If you remove something or task another company with that task, you have that responsibility to the shareholders, customers and others to verify the work is done satisfactorily.

I would have required that my company's inspector visually verify the work appears satisfactorily done and check the torque on 25% of the bolts. If doing the inspection myself, no matter what their inspection requirements are I would have checked the torque on 100% of the bolts, probably no more than an additional minute of time. And we know that anyone arguing against that would waste at least 20 minutes.

Having worked in quality assurance/control for many years, I can vouch for the fact that almost always after a product is accepted by the customers (the general public) product quality gets pushed into the background.

Quality doesn't put money into corporate pockets until there is a serious problem (door plugs blow out of the side of an aircraft, . . .). Then in order to make a visible effort to keep the customers and avoid the company being shut down, the corporate hierarchy pulls out, what they claim is, "All Stops" to show how their quality system is second to none! Meanwhile they terminate the senior management in their quality system, hoping that the customers believe that solved the problems.

I did work for Boeing years ago, but not in a quality capacity. I do remember in 1959 or '60 a couple of their 707's had a problem with one manufacturers tires so Boeing asked the FAA to ground ALL the 707's, C135's & KC 135's until it could be verified that the aircraft had tires from other manufacturers. All of their employees that had access badges for all shop, taxi ways and runways were ordered to inspect all Boeing 707's, C135's and KC 135s for the tires in question. Of course we had to record all tires serial numbers and tail numbers so Boeing knew that all the aircraft in question had been checked.

The Boeing Company used to be so overly redundant about records keeping that they recorded all details of every aircraft they built or modified. They could research and tell you how many shims of a specific part number had been installed and where on every aircraft they had built or modified. Every serial numbered part or assembly was recorded as to what aircraft it was installed on, removed from and where it was stored while it was not on an aircraft.

A landing gear strut had been unaccounted for for over 20 years and I had been tasked with finding it, wherever it was and it's condition. It took me only a week, and people had looked for it for years. I had to get a Security Guard to open up a Boeing building that he said nobody had been in for 5 years. Leaving no stone unturned, I looked in every place that was large enough that it could fit.

I asked the Security Guard about access to a balcony above the shop floor which had a locked doorway that wouldn't allow access. He said nobody has been up there in at least the 20 years he worked there. He had the key, opened it up, of course there was a 4 inch coating of dirt and dust on everything. I found a landing gear strut, and after removing about 10 or 11 hands full of dirt and dust, the Serial number was a match.

Not really, I use them both and I really like the 35-70 D lens better, but I can't tell which lens I used for the photo. I got the 28-70 because it had a bigger range and found it is only a bit faster in auto focus.

I have a 35-70 non D lens, but I only kept it because of sentimental reasons

I use f/2.8 zooms because of their versatility, no need to change lenses when you can capture objects that appear for only a moment. In the case of low light I do have a 50mm f/1.2 and a couple of other primes, but I don't think I have used any primes for at least 2 or 3 years.

The 14-24mm f/2.8, 28-70mm f/2.8, 35-70mm f/2.8 D and 80-200mm f/2.8 cover 99% of what I photograph. The other 1% are covered by the 50mm f/1.2 or my Tamron SP 250-500mm f/5.6-6.3 manual focus oldie.

It is a fact!
The lake is in the mountains at about 5,300 feet and we are around 300 feet elevation, there are at least 25 major hills to ascend, maybe 30. The truck was loaded for a weekend of camping. It was a Rivian. His family, wife and 3 adult kids were in it. The boat and trailer exceed 10,000 pounds, and he drives every day so he is conscious of speed.

The EV manufacturers use ideal conditions for their mile estimates, like a 120 pound driver, flat roads, no hills, 60° F to 70° F, temperature ,speed about 40 mph, nothing in the truck except the driver and with a 20 mph tail wind.

I'm not a fan of electric, battery powered trucks due to what I have seen with people that I know who have temporarily had them.

One bought a Rivian which supposedly has a 400+mile range which was what he needed for his small business. The first weekend he had it he charged overnight to be sure it was ready to go Saturday morning. He hooked up his 22 foot boat loaded the necessities for the weekend a started for the lake in the mountains about 60 miles away.

A couple of hours later a friend of his came and borrowed my portable 10kw generator because there are no charging facilities at the lake and the truck was almost without battery power. A 400+ mile range out of battery power 60 miles away???

He was able to tow his boat back after recharging and went to an ICE truck dealer, took his losses and got rid of the Battery powered truck in favor of a new 3/4 ton diesel pickup. He said in his business he has to have a truck he can rely on at all times. He does have a trailer he tows much of the time.

Incidentally the service vehicles the Tesla uses are ICE because they have to be ready to go at all times to take care of the Teslas and they carry and use a portable ICE power generator for recharging. [ICE = Internal Combustion Engine]. That should tell us something.

Some friends an family live about 150 miles away and in the last year and a half a couple of them acquired Teslas. The have a range of about 340 miles and at first they thought the could drive to see us and return home with no problem then plug it in and ready to go the next morning.

Nope, reality set in the range of the cars must be being determined with a 120 pound driver alone in an otherwise empty car on flat roads with a constant 70 to 80 degree temperature and travelling at 40 miles per hour. Maybe add in a 20 mph tail wind.

The don't come to visit very often anymore because they have to recharge for an hour before they can get home. The don't want to use a couple of local recharging stations because they use a diesel powered generator for recharging.

You are correct about it being more in the consciousness, the more it is repeated to you. When I notice the repetition, it is then a turnoff. When it becomes a turnoff I refuse to buy and even turn to other things. I have stopped buying many things altogether once they saturate the advertising venues by several advertisers. I know some people who seem to be stimulated by the constant hounding and eventually they too avoid buying what has become annoying.

Marketing 101 includes knowing when you become annoying. If people are still drinking the kool aid I know a company that sells auto warranties.

Your post is telling us what we really should do, and thank you for that. The reality is, many of us won't do anywhere near what you suggested, at least until we figure out that is what we should do.

I'm an experimenter, and learn better from my mistakes so class room instruction and reading are for after I have made the mistakes. Sort of like saying I engineer more by reengineering than I should. I should have figured out that the obtuse angle created by a road surface and the rear of a VW beetle has to be more than the 115° that it is before trying to ride the bicycle over a VW beetle it needs to be closer to 165° to 170°. Evel Knievel I am not.

As an Engineer I studied Physics concerning light, lenses refraction, reflection, all the stuff that gives us lesser intelligent folks headaches. I know enough to be dangerous. Those folks that build camera lenses really know their stuff. Same with the people who design and build the light boxes we use with the lenses.

So they write instruction manuals that we should read, and I swear every time with a new to me camera or lens that I will read the manual cover to cover. After all this time I just may follow your direction the next time I pick up one of my cameras and really learn how it is supposed to work.

My Nikon D300 is likely the newest camera I will ever own. It and my D200 are capable of everything that I need to do. As to which one is better, it depends upon what I want from the camera, technologically the D300 is the better of the two.

Occasionally even the D100 gets exercise though it is not even close to the other two. It is mine mainly for nostalgia, then so are my film cameras.