I currently own a D7000 with multiple DX and FX glass. I am a amateur, shooting general photos and not trying to become a professional. I am considering upgrading to FX. First I have no problems with my D7000 and can not give a good reason for wanting an FX other then 'want'. Budgets (and my wife) will not allow me to consider a switch to mirrorless or a new FX body! So I began thinking about upgrading to a D600, but then started reading back issue articles on UHH and the web about dust and oil issues on the sensor. With no backup from a Nikon warranty, is this a risky move? Am I asking for potential trouble? Thank you for you input.

I have taken 35 millimeter photographs since 1968 shooting mostly Kodachrome and fujichrome slides. About 6 years ago I decided to make the switch to digital . I have regretted it since. I originally bought a Canon Rebel which serviced fairly well a point and shoot. as my focus was elsewhere I wasn't real serious just recording events. Somebody liked my Canon more than I did or it grew legs and walked off so I decided I would replace it with something more serious that I could manipulate the camera and the images. After talking to my camera guy he assured me the Nikon D 3200 would fit the bill so I bought one. to say I was disappointed is being mild. I have had the camera for 3 years now and I think that I'm fairly familiar with the menu and the manipulation of the lenses and the camera. I will start this conversation with the focus of the camera. I shoot Birds and I shoot macro mostly flowers so I set the camera up with fairly small f stops and slow shutter speeds and shoot with a tripod and electronic release. I used live Focus and zoom in on my focus point. on my screen it looks sharp. the finished image looks more like a cloudy piece of mud no matter what I do with the image I have tried different computers to see if the screens were the problem and the images are just not Sharp. the stamen in the flowers are not Sharp.. I focus on the bird's eye and the eye is fairly sharp although it looks dull but when looking at the head there is no definite definition to the feathers. the overall effect of the picture is like I'm shooting through a mild fog. I have thought for a while now that my camera guy was BSing me and the Nikon D 3200 is nothing more than a glorified point and shoot. I have thought about buying a new camera but as I'm retired on it fixed budget I'm leery to do that so I would like to get a little input as to things to try or to scrap the camera thank you

I know that I should have used a much higher f-stop as Linda suggested but even so, something in the photos should have been in focus. I took another more critical look at them and truly can’t find one thing in focus. Camera shake has been suggested but at 1/1000th of a second, I really doubt that’s the issue. I also took a few which I didn’t post with my Canon 10o-400 L lens. There is no comparison between the two. With the L lens, it’s east to see what I focused on. It’s tack sharp. Consequently, although I’m going to try the existing lens again, I think I’ll be purchasing a new lens before our trip.
Thanks so much for taking time to respond. I really do appreciate your time.

Hi

Well, now taken lots of pictures, and have been working on improving those skills (thanks to help from many of you). I am an amateur, and while I would like to be a good amateur, I don’t aspire to go further than that. Will be a hobby for me, not more.

On the post processing side, I feel stuck. for the last year, I have been shooting jpeg+raw. Starting with the jpegs in photos on the Mac, as I knew it, but dillegently saving the raws for when I would take the next step. I have taken advantage the basic editing capabilities of photos, but want to move to the next step (and get off the family shared MAC)

Well, I now have a windows machine capable of running post processing well (along with good backup routines) but I just can’t seem to pull the trigger on picking a post processing system and learning it. I know many of you use LR for organizing and it has a a good basic editing program (or at least more than I will need for a while). But, feel intimidated by LR for use by an beginner, and worried that if I start down that path, with what appears an elaborate library system that stores the raw “edit files” separate from the raw file, that I will be stuck there forever.

Should I feel this intimidated? If I start with LR (likely Classic via the Creative Cloud photo subscription), is there a path to something else if I don’t like it without losing all of the edit efforts up to that point?

Is there a good alternative? I have tracked and reviewed the threads here for about a year, and while there seem to be good basic alternative editors (e.g. affinity), but have not seen much discussion of on the other side of LR, its organization/library function.

So, what advise do you have for a beginner trying to pull the trigger. Should i just try LR and see if it seems to work for me? If not, what SIMPLE alternative library/basic editor software(s) would you suggest?

Thanks in advance for your advise (and indulgence)

Well I received a call from my friend, he had an VIP photo shoot scheduled for tonight and was unable to do the shoot because of personal reasons. He recommended me for the shoot. I got the call and was hired. I have to do 35 to 50 (5X7) portraits in 30 min with Sec. Of Education Betsy Devos and print the photos on the spot. Mad rush to acquire the needed supplies. This will be a chance to put my portable printer to work (Epsom PM400) and see how it performs. did a couple of test shots at home . The printer did a great job. Now if the lighting is good I will not need to use a flash, if not, well, I guess I'll use the flash. Wish me luck