My RB67 Pro S does have a dark slide holder on the body, left side (non-shutter cocking lever side) above the focus knob. A quick search of the web shows lots of 220 film available. Much of it is frozen/expired but some new/current is also listed. As for frozen/expired, I had purchased a large quantity of rolls of 120 and 220 (both BW and Color) back in my pre-digital days and always froze it. Although I don't use the RB-67 much anymore, it does get occasional use, and I am still using film from my freezer. I do my own film developing and I find no obvious deterioration in quality. I'm talking film with late 1970, early 1980 expiration dates.

Started with a Canon F1, added an AE1. Then newer Canons came out and I couldn't use my collection of FD lenses on the new bodies. Ouch! Investigated Nikon, found much better lens compatibility between models, traded my Canon gear for a Nikon F4 and some lenses, and haven't looked back. Not dissatisfied with Canon, just the inability to upgrade bodies without losing use of all my existing lenses caused me to flip. Yes, I know Nikon has some new lenses that don't play well with my old cameras, but I'm now up to a D800 and can still use all my old lenses with the new bodies. Not ready to go to a D850, I'll wait and see what the D900 brings.

How about this?

https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/flashes/r1c1-wireless-close-up-speedlight-system.html

FYI, consider eye surgery. I had cataracts, as well as focus problems, some astigmatism. Could only use my Leica M with a set of glasses over a quarter inch thick, hated the glasses. Even then tough to focus the Lecia. Finally got the surgery, both eyes, with corrective lens implants after cataract removal. A whole new world has opened up. Everything is brighter (whites are white, not muddy brown) and both eyes are now 20/20! Do need reading glasses for very fine print up to about 12" but beyond a foot, everything is clear. What a pleasure to use the RF Leica without glasses! Total cost was less than a new Leica M body, so I don't have to change the system I love along with all my lenses. May not be for everyone but wish I had done it 8 to 10 years ago when vision started getting real bad.

Gee, I missed that, but it wasn't me as the only time the top was up was when I was parked! :)

Property owner too, via Laphroaig. Also have Lagavulin on the shelf but go thru more Laphroaig than any other single. Smoky peat, either you love it or you hate it!

Shucks, I was hoping you got a picture of me driving thru times square in my '64 corvette roadster on my way to the fair where the NYNG/Army reserve drill team I was in at the time was going to perform for a week. Got a ticket for going thru a red light that was a block away. Turned out not all streets had red lights at each intersection, but did have a sign that said if you saw a red light at the NEXT intersection, you had to stop at the current intersection. Officer on foot chased me down to give me the ticket when I stopped at the intersection with the red light. This was when I got into Queens, heading towards the Jamaica Armory where we were to stay while performing at the fair. Do they still have that law in Queens?

I'm sure I'm repeating what's been said many times before, but.... always shoot RAW, then, if you think you will need to turn in a photo quickly without time to post process, also set the camera to save a JPG version (using the appropriate camera setup for processing in the camera before saving the JPG). This way if you get a JPG you like, you will probably be able to make it better by post-processing the RAW later. The only problems might be if you are buffer limited and need to shoot many rapid shots, then RAW+JPG might take too much time to process once the buffer fills. In that case you probably would want to shoot JPG only. But when possible, shoot RAW, then you have the most accurate "negative" to work from.

42nd trying to capitalize on reputation of 47th which was a great place in the 70's, bought all my Canon gear (F1 and AE, plus lenses) way back then. Excellent place, but 42nd? No Way!!!

There is concern about paying 2000 for a digital and 1000 for a lens? My Nikon F4 (without lens) cost $2400 in 1988. That translates to $5,240 in 2017. For that much money I could buy a new D850 and a good lens with change left over. I still use my F4 but nowhere near as much as my D800 or Leica M. The wet darkroom activity was just getting too much for me. The dry electronic darkroom is FAR more convenient and controllable. Back in the day it could take hours and multiple exposures of time, dodging (and with color, filter pack adjustments) etc to get just one really decent print. Even though I still shoot film (because I just love the feel and action of the F4), I now just do a hi-res scan of the negatives and manipulate the digital versions for printing. By the way, my nearly 30 years of lens purchases started with the F4, those lens are still in use today with my D800 and in most cases I expect will still provide me years more of service if I ever upgrade to a new Nikon FX body. They may be getting long in the tooth but they still work and provide excellent results.

Web storage only, I'd have to switch to something else. Web only is not an option for me.

Classic, often off the grid for a week or more at a time, seldom even have consistent cell coverage, cloud support would be impossible and not worth trying for those times I could have access.

I have had a 1tb ssd dedicated to digital images in my desktop for a couple years. Backed it up weekly (time varied based on number of new/updated files) plus cloned the entire ssd once a month to an external 1tb hhd. The clone took about 7 hours to the hhd using a 3.0 usb connection. About 6 months ago I bought a Samsung 850 evo 1tb SSD to replace the 1tb external HHD. Didn't know what speed gain I'd get but it was on sale so thought I'd try it. My clone operation, 1tb internal ssd to 1tb external ssd via usb 3.0 has reduced in time from appx 7 hours to less than 1 hour, more on the order of 45 minutes. Significant improvement and well worth it in my view. My new laptop has two internal drives, a 1tb ssd for the OS and a 2tb ssd for the data drive. Absolute blistering speed. Lightroom/Photoshop is almost instantaneous on the laptop.

On this site, people asking for advise for equipment suggestions. The word is advice, not advise.

Next time you're in Washington, DC, get some photos of politicians in (in)action.