I have been buying from B&H and Adorama for many years and never had a problem with either.

I'll be there as soon as my new Sigma 150 macro arrives. great image. I know tri pods are not allowed, but how about mono pods. anyone using them?

that is freakin awesome.

mustard, relish, onions, and optional sport peppers. nothing else. and no ketchup.

I am an Italian and a Chicagoan all my life. I prefer thin crust pizza and no, we do not eat pizza with a knife and fork. that mess pictured is not Chicago style pizza.

I'm "only" 68, but severe back problems gets worse every year. can't walk like I use to but I refuse to let it stop me from enjoying my hobby of 45 years. I now use a rolling camera bag when going out with more than a few lenses. it sucks for dirt trails but doubles as a backpack. I retired at 58 because I couldn't drive a semi anymore. sold all my Nikon gear two years ago. I figured I could do with a bridge camera. I bought a Lumix FZ 1000. great bridge camera but I love doing macro and the camera sucks at macro. sold it a got a D7200 plus a few lenses. I'm happy again although I don't get out much anymore. doing more and more table top photography. I'm also an avid bass fisherman. standing on my boat for hours is worse than walking but I'm not giving up on fishing either. I just suck it up and take the pain.

I have both shades for my Sigma 105 macro. I only use the ff shade. using both is a bother and makes the lens really long. the apc shade will not fit by itself. it connects to the other so if you want to use only one it has to be the ff.

and I thought this was about us northerners shoveling all this white stuff.

buy the body and then choose the lens that you really want. can't see getting that great camera and using the cheapest lenses that Nikon makes. the 18-140 is a good choice but the price is going to be higher.

I have read many reviews on the Tamron and Sigma . both great lenses. sorry Canon fan boys, but the Sigma has tested to have better sharpness than the much more expensive Canon. for build quality it's Canon by far but at almost three times the cost. even more for the Nikon. I'm not a pro and do not play rough with my equipment. I have the Sigma and couldn't be happier. no, it does not have a tri pod collar which seems to be a sticking point with some. I use this lens handheld and at 68 years old it's light enough and well balanced for all day shooting. I'm retired and can't see spending 2000.00 plus on that lens when there are two others that are just as good for most of us. some just have the very best and think only the best will give you the images they are looking for. I have seen beautiful shots taken with "lesser" equipment including cameras. the Canon and Nikon are awesome lenses. I'm not denying that. it's just that some people think that just because a lens is from a third party it's junk or not up to par. I think that in time Canon, Nikon, Sony, and others will have to come down on their prices as Tamron and Sigma are turning out some pretty impressive lenses at much more affordable prices.

I don't use flash much so I couldn't see spending 500-600 on one. I have two Neewer 565 flashes that work great with my D7200 and commander mode. 50.00 each and I'm pretty happy.

you can have the most creative mind, but if you don't know how to use the tools you will probably never be anything special.

at "only" 68 I don't need one but with my back problems I can see one in my future. man, growing old sucks.

I have a cpl filter stuck to a step up ring. tried the filter wrenches and everything else I can think of. I should have bought the brass step up ring. serves me right for attaching a cheap step up ring to an expensive cpl. lesson learned.

use the shade and you can ditch the useless uv filters.