I would think you could get a refurbished 80D for less than that. I bought one from Canon about 10 months ago for $850 so I'd expect them to be less than that 10 months later.

If you can afford a full frame camera then it's up to you if you should buy one. If you have EF-S lenses for your 70D they will not work on a full frame body. I have both full frame and APS-C bodies, including the 70D and I still use my 70D quite often.

I buy reading glasses from dollar tree and they work just fine. I usually buy 4 or 5 at a time because they tend to crawl into hiding places way to often. I like to have them strategically placed about the house where I need them. I've never bought sun glasses from a dollar store. I ride a motorcycle and want something better than dollar sun glasses protecting my eyes.

Sounds good to me...
The Canon 5200mm lens has a minimum focus of 400 feet.

And after all the testing and charts and graph that DXO, and all the other so called experts publish, the bottom line is the final product, the images taken with the cameras. All the high accolades and amazing numbers are great for the pixel peepers and the my dog is better than your dog crowd but realistically, does it really, really matter?! The D850 is a great camera. It was designed to be a great camera. But how much of its advanced technology is really geared towards marketing?! I know I'm not about to go and sell my 5DSR or my 5DIV and buy a D850. If I had the spare money in my budget I'd get one because it looks like a really fun camera to learn, but I don't see me owning one in the near future. I guess all my Nikkor lenses and Nikon mount lenses will have to settle for my D7200 and D500, and my Canon's don't care what position they occupy on some chart, as long as I continue to use then and they continue to work.

I don't know if anyone has answered the question this way but, changing the ISO is like changing the volume on an amplifier. You turn the ISO down and the amplification of the electrical signal coming from the image sensor is decreased. The lower the setting the less electronic noise. Turn the ISO up and you increase the amplification of the electronic signals coming from the image sensor. Doing this increases the electronic noise. One of the advantages of todays high end processors, like the DIGIC 6 or DIGIC 7 processors in Canon cameras is, the processors are able to recognize electronic noise better than older processors. Being able to tell the difference between good data and unwanted data makes it possible to create cleaner images at higher ISO settings.

Interesting question. As the telephoto lenses get larger, the speed of the lens decreases. To make an extremely fast super telephoto would be next to impossible due to the size requirements of the glass. The faster the telephoto lens, the larger the glass elements need to be. Canon makes a 1200 mm f/5.6 lens that costs around $100,000.00 USD. Leica makes a f/5.6 1600mm lens but that's about a 2 million USD piece of glass. The largest and most ridiculous SLR lens made, and there is more than one of them, is a 5200mm f/14 monster made by Canon. I don't know if they would still make one but it a bargain at half a million USD.

Like jmvaugh said, it's used, and it's most likely out of warranty anyway so grey or gray doesn't matter at all. Unlike Nikon, Canon will service what they make, for a fee, regardless of who the importer was. They are in the business to make money and repairing Canon gear for a fee makes them money. As long as the camera is in really good shape and doesn't have a gazillion shutter actuations and the seller is asking a fair price, and it's not stolen, how it came into the USA is quite irrelevant, it's a nice camera (I have one), buy it...

I don't quite understand your statement about missing to many shots because of changing lenses. A good zoom lens on a decent small DSLR will out perform the two point and shoot cameras hands down. Something like a Nikon D3300 or a Canon T5i will do a much better job than the point and shoot cameras, for one reason, the image sensors are much larger.
The B700 may have 20 mpx but it is a very small image sensor and that many pixels crammed onto a sensor that small is not necessarily a good thing. The Canon may have only 16 mpx but the sensor is of similar size to the Nikon so the individual pixels are larger.
The Canon has more zoom than the Nikon, is wider at the wide end, shoots faster, has better light sensitivity and can shoot high speed video and has a jack for an external microphone and supports external flash units, so the Canon has a few distinct advantages over the Nikon. The Nikon is newer, smaller, lighter, shoots HD video at 30fps vs the Canons 1080 at 60fps (which isn't bad), has a slightly wider max aperture (3.3 vs 3.4) and has twice the max shutter speed (1/4000 vs 1/2000). The two biggest advantages the Nikon has over the Canon is, it's newer and it's cheaper.
I own many cameras; brands such as Canon, Nikon, Olympus and Sony so I'm not brand oriented. I do not own a B700 but I do own a SX60HS.
It is a nice DSLR like point and shoot, as is the B700. Feature wise the Canon is better than the Nikon but if you want HD video and Bluetooth connectivity, the Nikon is the better pick. The Canon does have better optical zoom than the Nikon, better light sensitivity and EA bracketing, a definite advantage in tricky light situations. If you do not plan on using any of the features the Canon offers over the Nikon then the Nikon is definitely the better choice. If you do use settings other than full auto, the Canon would be my choice.

Welcome. I've been learning for many years. That's one of the many aspects of photography I enjoy, learning something new then applying what I've learned and getting better. I've learned over the years one of the best ways to learn is with the right books. Read some then practice, practice, practice; then repeat. Someday I hope to even be good at photography, but for now, learn and apply and have fun.

I have the 5D SR, and it is an amazing camera. It is not a fast camera and it enjoys a good bit of light but the images it produces are stunning. It's also more comfortable sitting on a tripod but in the right light it certainly does well handheld.
I came to the conclusion that although it is a fantastic camera it's not really a good general purpose camera, for that I use a 5D IV.
Go for the R version. The S has mind boggling resolution and the SR is just a wee bit better and I've never had any real problem with moire.

Welcome aboard

Depending on how fast the lens is, an f/2.8 could get away without IS or VC or VR but an f/4 lens may benefit from it.

I guess it depends on where you are in Canada...

Looks like you had a nice weekend.