I can't prove it and you can't disprove it, but I think there are more elderly people in poverty now than there would be if the program had never been created. It has taken from me 15% of the fruits of my productivity all of my working life.
Americans no longer save anything for their retirement and are dependent on others for their subsistence.
I don't think it is a point of pride to have so many of us dependent on government.

I like your pictures and your logging buddy. I grew up on Case tractors. The first one I drove was a 1936 CC Case. We now have a dozen or two ranging from a 1930 Model L to Case IH Magnums.

I always liked the Case o Matics. We have an 830 Case o Matic Diesel.

Enjoy your winter cozy and warm.

You mention IQ of the Nikon cameras. I would like know what I Q is on a camera. You impress me as someone I would like to sit on the back porch, drink brandy, and smoke cigars and talk cameras if I had a back porch if I drank brandy and if I smoked cigars.

I am not sure anyone can give you very good advise. I have an SX50. I used to dislike the camera because of the view finder, but now I don't wear my glasses and like the camera very much. I don't drive with glasses, so you might not get along as well as I do. I wish you could get your hands on one to spend some time before you spend much money.

I would be interested in it. The first digital camera I bought was a Leica V Lux 3. It goes from 24 or so to 600. That was pretty extreme to me at the time. My first time out was an Alaska cruise. I took pictures at both ends of the range. Panasonic and Leica sell cameras with good lenses, fast focusing, and an 1 inch sensor. They take 4k video. I would buy one if they went out to 1200 or so. but I refuse to buy another camera with the small sensor. The Nikon P900 has greater range than I ever need, but a small sensor. Canon makes a G1X Mark 11 that Consumer reports got the best pictures they have ever gotten out on a digital camera, but it goes from 24 to 120. I always thought I would have a DSLR, but I can't imagine what it would cost to buy enough lenses to satisfy me and won't put up with carrying around all that expensive glass. I am not a photographer, just someone who takes a lot of pictures. I am also not smart enough to do very much setting my many cameras.

I keep a camera in each car and in my pick up truck. When we pick corn, I have a camera in each truck.

I will never buy a grey market camera again. I did not know it was an overseas outfit until I got a call from my credit card company. I bought an SX 60 for what I thought was a good price. I did not get the extra long lasting batteries I bought. I called customer service, but could die of old age before anyone answered.
Every time I read a post from someone giving glowing praise of that camera, I wonder if my camera is a camera made to sell in the U. S. A., or a cheaper version meant for another market. I will probably never know.
The salesman talked me into an extended world wide warranty. I suspect it is worthless. Cameras like this are expendable. By the time they go bad, there will be better cameras available and I will be glad to see it crash.

I am a senior citizen farmer. I have many cameras within reach most of the time. I am a picture taker, but not a photographer. I read posts from people who probably know much more than me about cameras. I have looked at the P900, but notice no hood available for it. Some time ago, someone asked about a filter for a camera and someone replied the best filter is a hood. Last summer we took a Canadian Rockies bus tour. It was impossible to set up shots with the best lighting. At times, I shot nearly directly into the sun, but with the hood, I got acceptable shots.
My question is if hoods are so valuable and cheap, why are they not made available for a $550 camera like the P900?

Canada has the oil and wants to sell it. Now we are putting it in trucks and rail tanker cars and shipping it to our refineries. There has been a fatal derailment with a fire. The status quo makes no sense to me.
Canada has said if we don't want it, they will build a pipeline to the Pacific Ocean and ship the oil to China. They want it. China will do what is in their best interests, but we won't. Is that an environmentally superior idea? Put the oil in a ship and refine it in China. I am sure they will so it as cleanly as possible. NOT! Is that in our best national security interest?
Some of you have stated we are doing it for the big oil companies. I don't know about you, but I am buying gas cheaper now than I have for years, thanks to Canada and North Dakota.

Canada has the oil and wants to sell it. Now we are putting it in trucks and rail tanker cars and shipping it to our refineries. There has been a fatal derailment with a fire. The status quo makes no sense to me.
Canada has said if we don't want it, they will build a pipeline to the Pacific Ocean and ship the oil to China. They want it. China will do what is in their best interests, but we won't. Is that an environmentally superior idea? Put the oil in a ship and refine it in China. I am sure they will so it as cleanly as possible. NOT! Is that in our best national security interest?
Some of you have stated we are doing it for the big oil companies. I don't know about you, but I am buying gas cheaper now than I have for years, thanks to Canada and North Dakota.

I don't blame you for your action. You obviously have good equipment and know how to use it. Thanks for what you have shared and I will miss your work.

I have an SX50 which I like, but am not fond of the range finder with or without wearing my glasses. I have been interested in the SX60 or possibly a Sony. In comparing the 60 with the 50, Snapsort gives the 50 a 100 and the 60 a 54. The 60 has more mega pixels, faster focusing and several other new features. Do these sites place too much on the price of the cameras or can the 50 actually be a better camera? I am just mainly a point and shooter.