The sheer difference in marginal costs between film and digital makes any comparison pretty much irrelevant.

After a day of shooting, all I care about are the keepers. I couldn't care less how many shots it took to get them. Have you ever seen an amazing photo amd then dismissed it due to how many shots the photographer took that day?

Seems to me that a lens you never use is essentially useless. Either try using it, which could be a good learning experience, or sell/trade/gift it to someone who would get some value out of it.

To each their own,
rules are meant to be broken.

Totally disagree about limiting oneself to a single image of any given subject. Keepers are keepers regardless of whether they are variations on a theme.

Have taken great shots where the eyes, even the whole head are out of focus.

I like the point about forcing creativity by bringing only one prime, but if I'm going somewhere for a once-in-a-lifetime shoot, I'm bringing my whole kit and trying out as many different angles and perspectives as I can.

Going on vacation with two cameras is sort of the same as brining multiple lenses, which contradicts your less is more rule.

But as I said, rules are meant to be broken, and as you said...

... to each their own.

To each their own,
rules are meant to be broken.

Totally disagree about limiting oneself to a single image of any given subject. Keepers are keepers regardless of whether they are variations on a theme.

Have taken great shots where the eyes, even the whole head are out of focus.

I like the point about forcing creativity by bringing only one prime, but if I'm going somewhere for a once-in-a-lifetime shoot, I'm bringing my whole kit and trying out as many different angles and perspectives as I can.

Going on vacation with two cameras is sort of the same as brining multiple lenses, which contradicts your less is more rule.

But as I said, rules are meant to be broken, and as you said...

... to each their own.

I have the D500 and have been very happy with it for almost 4 years now - have my eyes on the D850 once I can afford it, and will keep the D500 for sports and birds.

If I could only have one, I'd probably go with the D850, simply because it's full-frame and newer.
And then I'd probably sell those old lenses to get an FX lens worthy of the D850.

I'm finding that the money spent on good glass relegates the low-cost lenses I purchased at the beginning of my foray into photography obsolete, and I really never use them anymore now that I've acquired better lenses. Sell what you don't use so you can buy stuff you will use.

For lenses, definitely (and I already have).

I saved over $600 on the Nikkor 105mm f1.4 - a lens I couldn't really afford without going into the 'grey'.
Is the 1 year warranty coverage worth $600+?

I'd rather put that money towards something else.
Like maybe buying a new body from a US dealership... but am equally tempted to delve into the 'grey' again for the saving offered on the D850.

NOTE: In the 5 years or so that I've been spending money on cameras and lenses, I've had exactly ZERO items that needed to be repaired. If anything, I kind of regret not having purchased more grey market items earlier, as I would have easily saved enough to buy 1 or 2 mid-high end lense with this money.

This article was written in 2016... reports elsewhere indicate that Nikon changed this policy within the last few years.

This is FALSE, and it's starting to drive me crazy that people keep perpetuating this myth.
I personally called Nikon support last week to get clarification, and they explicitly told me that Nikon USA WILL REPAIR any Nikon body or lens - as long as they have the required parts.

This means that if a different part was used in the camera body manufactured in a different country, they will NOT order that part, but if they DO have that part, then they will repair it.
The service technician also informed me that this problem is much less of a problem with lenses than camera bodies.

You can also change the White Balance with the button marked "WB" in the top left dial - then use the front-right command dial to adjust the white balance. No need to press "OK" once set.

I'd think about getting the Nikon D750 - it's a great full-frame DSLR which you can buy refurbished for about $1000 (or get a new one from a grey market distributor - despite the myth, Nikon WILL repair grey market cameras provided they have the right parts in stock).

As others here have mentioned, it's worth increasing your budget to the $1,500ish range to get something significantly better than what you're going to get for $1,000 for a body + lens.

I see a D750 + Nikkor 24-120mm f/4 G bundle for $1,500 that would make a pretty solid starting kit.

Arsenal was originally funded as a Kickstarter campaign, and like so many ambitious ideas promoted and crowdfunded on Kickstarter and Indiegogo, the sales pitch far out-promoted the final product... many failed to even deliver a product, leaving the project backers empty-handed.

I personally lost $800 on a failed campaign promising to re-create the Myers-Optic 75mm "P 75 II f1.9" - suffice to say, it was the last crowdfunding campaign I funded.

Similar disappointments in other campaigns led me to abandon my faith in crowdfunding altogether, though there were a few that worked out, including the Litra brand portable LED lights.

As for Arsenal itself, just think about it: companies like Sony, Nikon, and Cannon have decades of experience, teams of engineers, and pretty deep pockets to fund the development of the algorithms that go into developing the software in their cameras. I'm not convinced that some lone-wolf engineer could develop a product that vastly improves their AUTO settings, with a one-size-fits-all device that could otherwise be built INTO a camera body: were it truly as remarkable as claimed, it seems like a camera company would license it or otherwise build the software and sensors into their camera bodies.

Nothing like a wife to temper your GAS... ~sigh~

I concur - I carry a bag of lenses when we travel and my wife laughs at me when she covers 90% of the range I get from my whole kit with just her 18-400 Tammy.
It might be the most practical travel lens ever.

... then again, it's the 10% of images I catch with the wide angle, fisheye, and telephoto that make her most jealous :-)

Just got my wife the iPhone 11 Pro --- am pretty impressed with the cameras (there's three of them).
The telephoto is much better than my Samsung Galaxy 8, though the wide angle isn't as 'wide' as I thought it might be (doesn't stand up to the 10mm on my D500).

The video is also really good.

Oh, and it's not just a camara BTW - it's also a pretty loaded little handheld computer...

... and it even makes and receives phone calls!

I don't see how I could have made the transition from Auto to Manual without Chimping, and since my brain is still not capable of determining the exact settings for each lens in every lighting situation, I intend to continue Chimping unapologetically.

Detractors will say that you might miss a shot while admiring your own work, and it obviously will affect your battery life, but to the idea that it doesn't 'look cool', I couldn't care less - I just wanna make sure my settings are optimal.

It's probably not a good idea to Chimp purely to admire your shots in the field: particularly if you're shooting live events where you'll miss the action, but in other cases Chimping will ensure you're capturing the image as you envision it. For example, I'm gonna Chimp and adjust relentlessly when I'm doing a long exposure at a waterfall with an ND filter until I get the shutter speed and aperture settings how I want them.

Some will point out that with MILC format cameras, you're less likely to need to Chimp to check exposure/histogram (since you can see these in the electronic viewfinder), but I personally prefer DSLRs (which I know, is another debate entirely)...

... and so I Chimp.