Chuck Yadmark

Narrow DOF is nice when you can do it BUT at the same time it will likely lower keeper percentage for rapidly moving things due to, of course, narrower uh, depth of focus.

D200 (used for 100 dollars) is the cheapest camera that will work with all your stuff. D7100 (400 dollars used) is the camera I would recommend if you can spend the extra money edit:  actually the ...

I did it once with a plain old regular backpack.  No problems

I think you'll find "upgrading" to 7000 or 7100 to be largely disappointing as the 300 is really good. Maybe a little better high ISO performance with the 7100 If you are choosing between the two ...

I think the 200-500 is amazing, I sold my massive 600/4 prime because I found the 200-500 to be "good enough".  Others are happy with the various 150-600 choices out there. Either way you'll be ...

I always used AF-Continuous and really don't see any situation where AF-Single is a significantly better idea than AF-C. Certainly in what you're describing AF-C is easily the best choice.

H is, I believe, gen 1 XQD.  It is unlikely to be reliably usable with a current gen XQD reader. This whole XQD thing is a mess. I got rid of all my gen 1 stuff because keeping the cards and ...

I think if you can afford it, the jump to 55/5600 is a good idea for better focus module.

If the future direction isn't clear or if you're pretty sure you want a Z, I'd just get some 18-x or 16-x lens.  The 18-55 AFP is actually really good and if you search around you can find it for ...

I use a D4s and 200-500 to shoot football. AT NIGHT. I like it a lot https://www.emueaglesphoto.com/p334470695

it was 9 years between 300 and 500, with mirrorless taking more resources away from SLR development, and the 500 being outstanding already, I very much doubt it.

Very good compared to its mostly not good predecessors and others from third party manufacturers.  Not as good as even the older 70-300 AFS.  also not really 300 I believe, more like 270 or so

sounds like HDR is on

Every additional interface adds a source for failure and/or error. It's not a huge risk, but whatever trivial benefits of the MicroSD aren't worth it, to me.

they're all outstanding and magical BUT remember that after production stops Nikon only guarantee parts for 5 years (maybe up to10?)

No it's not.   its quite a vacuum frankly, that is it moves air in and out with zooming.  I had a dreadful time going from a cold indoor room to outside in humidity. It fogged up to the very last ...

Swans or ducks at 30 meters, might want 55-300 DX or the not-too expensive older FX 70-300 AFS VR which is actually pretty good. As mentioned earlier the really good 70-300 AFP DX is completely ...

yes

well, yeah that would be an obstacle to some. both 4 and 4s do as in the directional pad?  yes.  and a separate one for vertical.

Oh hey, let me throw a huge grenade in this discussion, as I have a Nikon Z6 pre-ordered which on paper will be the best answer.