We all have our failures just learn from it and keep trying something will eventually work. Small birds are a particularly difficult subjects maybe you should start with bigger ones.

I think it will be fine, surprisingly it is about the most 'bullet proof' storage media of all as it has no moving parts. I have seen documentaries of cameras recovered from Air Crash Investigations and the CD cards were fine, retrieved from significant time in the sea. That's why I do long term storage with them they are now very cheap and a much better medium than CD's. Be interested to know how you go with it.

Well seriously that's great Dick, I would love a D850 myself so good luck with that... I'm sure you will get plenty of help on UHH. I can tell your not a man to 'do things by halves', must have had some good party's on the yacht.

All the best and I look forward to seeing some of your pics from the D850.

Grant

Hi Dick,
A Canon D850 ..yeah that's the one. eBay one sounds just right. 24-70 nice, should fit the Canon real good. Dick you really do like jumping in the deep end hope you have your life jacket handy!. I'm thinking did your Mrs say ..get out of the bloody house and find a hobby..? Its Ok Dick I'm 60 I know how it can go down, but its a bit like you were thinking to go rabbit shooting and you have bought a tank !!!

Hey Jim I think this guy really really needs your help you should put him on your Buddy List.

Happy Days Guys, all good fun.

Yes big WOW from me to Bob. That is some sky detail and I would be very stretched to remember a better sky I have ever seen in B & W. I also love your placement of the main cacti to the right, masterful in your craft no doubt about it.

Very nicely done Bob I particularly like how you have positioned the flower off center and the flower and leaf color, form and texture are all a great contrast. It also has a 3D feel about it, really pops out.

LOL Jim this time you are right. Poor guy I think he must have said to the Sales person " I only want to spend $500 and the Sales person heard $5,000 as they do, so he walked out with a D850. Hope he read the receipt..maybe its not too late!

Unfortunately, while we all feel for the lady its not a scam and its not illegal. A lot of retailers have what they call 'loss leaders' making low margin on the main product, the camera body, and making up the lost Margin by selling up or overcharging the small items. The same practice goes on in almost every retail sector. In fact the Motor Vehicle Industry is one of the worst. They don't like Cash Buyers as they can make huge profits from Finance Deals way more than the margin on the car sale. New cars are often sold at very low margin because the Dealer knows they will get a lot of Service business for many years if they just get the new Sale. Why do you think McDonald's have a policy that the customer must always be asked if they want chips with the order, its because the chips have very high margin. I have a close friend at Coke and he told me the markup on Coke concentrate is 400%. How would you like 400% on regular photo gear? that's about what the poor lady was charged. She ordered the 'chips'. About the only way to counter the practice is if consumers know prices well and there is good competition close by. Yes travelers are good marks as someone said because the retailer knows they will probably never see them again, happens all over the world. I see it happening on eBay especially for product supplied direct from Hong Kong when I know the local price with genuine warranty is cheaper, but it obviously works well for them they get enough of the high prices to keep doing it.

Yes, I agree was my first thought why are you buying a 50mm for DX as its a bit restricting unless you were thinking of it for portrait use. I have both the 50mm FX 1.8, 50mm 1.2 and 35mm 1.8 DX. I have had 50mm 1.4's in the past but they tend to soften when used at 1.4. In fact most of the reviews I have seen place the 50mm 1.8 sharper across the range than the 1.4. In fact when the 50mm was compared to the Sigma 1.4 it showed just how average the Nikon was.
So if it was a 'normal' lens you were thinking to get you can't go passed the 35mm 1.8 DX and its a steal at the price. I think I have mostly read in every DX kit the 35mm is a 'must have' not the 50mm as there are much better choices for portrait like the 85mm 1.8.

To reply to the core of your question .. does the big heavy lens high dollar lens give more light throughout the spectrum? Well there is not one correct answer. Yes in theory the lens at f/ 1.4 will give more light wide open than the lens at f/4 wide open, that's the simple part.

The second part is harder to explain but the quality of the glass and the number of glass elements may have an impact on gathering light of better quality that is recorded at the sensor plane. Thing is controlling the light as it passes through the lens is highly complex and often requires the light ray to be bent and that is where better quality glass makes the difference. Things like CA, and lens distortion do effect the ultimate quality of the light reaching the sensor and to some degree would effectively reduce the light value. Some better quality lenses produce higher contrast generally because the lens makes a better job of keeping light from the subject more precise. A lower quality lens is more likely to record somewhat damaged light as the result of passing though poorer quality glass and that almost certainly would result in less light on the sensor at the same f stop.

By way of a simple example when you wash the windows of you house you sometimes notice how much brighter a room is, although not for the exact same reasons the total light entering the room increases because the dirt is removed, still the same amount of light outside but the quality reaching the room is better, the path of the light is more direct and more light rays have entered the room without bending by particles of dirt.
So the higher quality lens is like a 'cleaner window' and always stays 'cleaner' because of the higher quality materials to make the glass and more precise manufacturing process and that's why you pay the extra money.

Hi Joe,
I cant comment on the Tokina 11-16 however I have the Tokina 12-28 and am very pleased with it, I use it on a D7100 and D7200. That was after I had done extensive research and every review I found pretty much said the same they put its performance in real world use in the excellent range. Suggest you read Ken Rockwell's review as he claims it is the one that has the lowest distortion. I had the Sigma 10-20 and found the range too limiting. Ken makes particular comment about the better range, he says it is best on the market. I find I can leave it on the camera and use it as a semi normal as well. As for the f2.8 v f4 well unless you have a particular need for using it in low light then its not a great difference considering you can up the ISO a little to compensate and particularly on the D7200 still keep noise at acceptable levels. The 12-28 is big and has a big front element but I find it very well balanced on these bodies and it is certainly pro quality build. I generally don't use 3rd party lenses but the Tokina range is better than most of them on offer in the wide range designed for DX many are too plastic and over priced, dare I say Nikon in particular.

#1 The distant haze takes up too much space in the top left. A tighter crop may improve it or walking more left when it was taken to get slightly more of the building. A little too much wide angle has pushed the building back when it is the main subject.
#2 The problem with the horse is firstly its head is in the roof and because it is the same colour half its head is gone. Had it been down eating grass would have worked better. There is nothing wrong with having good foreground detail, it often makes all the difference in a good landscape shot, but postioning is very critical it needs to be more to the left and more building then both will be in better balance.
#3 Problem with the B&W is the image is too flat lacks contrast. Yes the suggsstion to try sepia may work better but you need to get whites brighter and solid blacks blacker.
So if I had to pick one it would be #1 as it has fewer issues. Quite a pleasing shot a feeling of peacefulness comes from it.

Excellent work Bob the dramatic sky makes the shot come alive often hard to make buildings look interesting. Im also impressed with the tonal range all the whites have good detail and blacks are rich as they should be. The patch work effect of the various panels of the building is also intetesting.

Excellent work Bob the dramatic sky makes the shot come alive often hard tp make buildings look interesting. Im also impressed with the tonal range all the whites have good detail and blacks are rich as they should be. The patch work effect of the various panels of the building is also intetesting.

Yes paralysis is the right word, to be precise its 'Nikon Paralysis' Look how long it took to get the D500 out and its getting worse. Nikon was averaging 6 new bodies per year and now down to 3. Read Thom Hogan probably has the best knowledge of Nikon behaviour and he is saying there is a lot of management discord within Nikon they dont have a clear path as to where they should be going with FX DX or Mirrorless. So there is unlikely to be any great surprises in the next 1-2 years. Worldwide sales of DSLR are down by 50 percent so both Nikon and Canon are trying to assess that situation and move forward. So as many have said above just do the best you can with what we have right now and it has never been better D5 D850 D500.