I've had one for quite a few years and am very happy with it. It is my most used 70 and up zoom. I also have the 70-200 2.8 FL but it is way too heavy for general daily carry around use, it is reserved for special times when the 2.8 is desired. I've done some A/B comparisons with mine and while I can see enough differences (by looking very closely) to keep the FL lens, if I could only have one, it would be the 70-300.

These adapters are a great opportunity to use different lens with your gear. I have a Leica M240 and the only Leica lens I have is a 35mm f2.0 Summicron. This is my everyday walk around camera, but occasionally I do like to try different lens. For this I have a Novoflex LEM/NIK-NT adapter. With this I use my Nikkor 20 f/2.8, 50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.4, all are AF-D lens, but of course I don't use them in AF mode. I use them manually with live view and am totally satisfied with the quality of the Leica/Nikkor images using this system. For the little I use anything but my standard Leica 35mm f/2 lens, I am in no hurry to stop using my Nikkor prime lens with the adapter. Someday I may get some additional Leica lens to get the advantage of viewfinder focusing and much smaller size/lighter lens weight, but for now the Nikkors using live view works just fine. They are of course very heavy and bulky compared to the equivalent Leica lens in that range.

"Full Frame" is only meaningful for the camera body in use. Even changing the lens (ie Nikon FX vs DX) can alter the amount of the image that reaches the "Full Frame" of the sensor/film. It's the dimensions of that "Full Frame" that need to be identified. Both my F4 and RB-67 are "Full Frame" but the F4 is a 35mm x 24mm while the RB-67 is 6cm x 7cm (60mm x 70mm). As Linda pointed out, there are ASP-2, Micro 4/3 and many other film/sensor sizes. They are all "Full Frame" for the camera body they are installed in.

176.50 was for the AM/FM radio, not the standard radio. FM was pretty new at the time.

Ah... Fort Sill. I cleared Fort Sill in March '65, drove home to NY in my '60 MGA roadster and within a couple weeks I'd traded it in as down payment on a new/left over 1964 'Vette roadster. Do you remember the Seven Gables bar on the main drag off post into Lawton? Spent a lot of nights in there! There was a used car dealership close by which is where I got the MGA.

Base Price makes sense. The base price for my roadster (convertible) was $4036 and I recalled the coupe was about $200 more.

I'd guess around $5000. The sticker from my 1964 roadster shows $4720 plus $65 destination. That price includes $684 in options, which includes the 327/365hp upgrade from 300hp. If I recall, the price difference was an additional $200 for a coupe, hence my guess of $5k.

It's all in where you live, some services are good, some services are bad. In my case, I live way back in the woods on an old dirt logging road, which has at least been graded a bit over the last 45 years I've lived here. Road can be so bad in winter most people won't even come to visit. Yet I've never had any problem with either UPS or FedEx. I can usually hear their truck coming up the hill about 3 or 4 hundred feet before they reach my house. This gives me time to get outside and meet them coming up the driveway, so I can collect my package. By them "coming up the driveway" I mean they are walking up it to deliver the package, not driving up, it as most of their trucks can't get up the driveway in winter. Someone is almost always home so there is little issue with them leaving anything, they either deliver it hand to hand, or leave a delivery attempted notice. On the other hand, the USPS has the worst record. The slightest bit of snow or icy weather and they won't even try to get up our road, you can see by the tracks in the snow that they just turned around at the bottom of the hill rather than attempt to come up. Just no mail delivery on those days. And when they do come up, they seldom deliver packages, instead just throw them on the side of the road across from our driveway. I read about other people indicating they get lousy service from UPS and FedEx, I guess I'm lucky that I don't have that problem.

I got my 28-70 2.8 to use on my F4 in my pre-digital days. It's heavy but rock solid. I also use it on my D850 now with absolutely no complaints. I tried a 24-70 2.8 at a store to see what I might be missing but just couldn't justify replacing the 28-70. If you NEED the extra 4mm WA and something a little lighter, maybe upgrade. I have VR on some of my other lenses, but I don't miss the VR at all on the 28-70.

I'm holding on to my RB67 ProS and all my lenses in the hopes of getting a 6x7 digital back some day, without selling one of my 60 year old classic sports cars. Meanwhile I still get to shoot 6x7 on 120 film.

I know this will sound like sour grapes, but I have to agree. I've gave up on Sony products in the late 80's. From the end of the 60's on, I had purchased many Sony products, tape recorders, cd players, hifi equipment, radios, TV's etc. They were fine for several years (4 or 5 typically) but then started to fail. In the majority of cases, when I tried to get support I was told the parts were no longer available (proprietary/specialized ic's etc). I switched to other brands and did not experience the failure rate I had with Sony. In fact I still have some hifi gear I purchased after my Sony gear and it is still functioning today, over 30 years later. Now if it failed today, and no parts were available, I could understand that. But I have not purchased any Sony products since that time. While hopefully Sony's product parts life cycle is much greater now especially with high end gear, I am not willing to risk a purchase of very high end expensive equipment based on my track record with them. The Sony items I had originally purchased were also high end gear at the time that usually didn't get me much past 5 years of use. I won't mention what brand cameras I use so as not to start a war, but the only camera I have that had a problem, I purchased in 1989. The failure was the LCD in the viewfinder got too dim to read and this was just 2 years ago. I contacted an authorized repair shop about the failure. They said they still stocked the lcd, and gave me a very reasonable repair cost. I sent the camera in, got it back a few weeks later with a new lcd, plus a list of several other items replaced due to wear, and a complete CLA, for the same quoted price. This for a 25 year old camera (at the time). Comparing this experience to my Sony experience, I'm not about to change brands. Admittedly, my Sony experience is well over 30 years old, but you don't have to be burned too many times to say never again.

I think what it is, is that the old default on updates had the "Remove Previous Version" box automatically checked so any old versions were removed. The latest installation versions have the "Remove Previous version" box unchecked, so now the old versions are kept.

When I get a notice to install an Adobe update, I click on the "advanced" check box of the update, which brings up another menu allowing me to select "remove previous versions". I've tried both ways, first I didn't check the "remove previous versions" selection, and ended up with both my older LR6 and the newer LR Classic on my system. Later after I was comfortable with the LR Classic, on my next update, I selected the "remove previous version" and sure enough, LR6 was removed and LR Classic was updated. We are in control of our systems! This also worked with PS, and several other Adobe products we have at work.

I don't think of it as renting the software. I think of it as a minor monthly payment for keeping the software up to date, not only with fixes and minor improvements, but also with new and significant feature enhancements. The $10 a month (photography plan) is FAR less than I spend on just coffee and bagels (which I could do without anyway). As for other software, I expect there are other programs that do as well, and maybe even better than Adobe in some areas. But I've used Adobe so long, I'm not about to change my whole workflow at this time.

Once is too often if it held that once in a lifetime photo. As for card management, if you can read the first card, there is nothing to manage on the second card. Just re-format both (in the camera) when you are ready. Camera size MAY be an issue if using an XQD + and SD, but two SD's slots? Very minor additional room needed. I've had one SD card failure. Lost a picture of my one royal elk, probably the only time in my life I'll have another shot like that. Wish I'd had a dual slot camera but I don't think they made them that far back. I won't buy another main camera again without dual slots.