Geomaticsman

You might be interested in Steve Perry's musings.

Of all of the responses Whoosh1's reflects my thinking the most accurately, but I have a couple of points I'd still like to make. It's not surprising that the venerable 400/2.8 is subject to a lot ...

Nikon could make a high FPS & high MP D820 if they wanted too but they won't. They'll continue to market high speed cameras with low MP count sensors and low speed cameras with high MP count ...

...having the D5 AF system in the D820 won't be all that impressive unless Nikon also includes the additional processor to drive it (and support high FPS)...but they won't do that. Nikon will ...

Sony cameras have great sensors but lousy performance and no "system" and that won't change anytime soon. Canon cameras have great performance and a "system" but lousy sensors that that won't ...

I'm not sure you can "switch" between AF-S and AF-C using a function button (I haven't tried that), but an alternative is to assign AF-C 25 point by default, and AF-C single point to a function ...

You can "get away" with ISO 800 on the D500, but if you have to crop heavily, or increase exposure, boost contrast or sharpen a lot in post, noise will start showing up. There are plenty of noise ...

No duties but there will be a small customs handling fee -- as I recall it's quite reasonable -- nothing like the $50 that UPS would charge.

Yes, that's a excellent price from B&H, at least compared to here in Canada. I have used B&H on occasion when the price warrants and will say they've got shipping to Canada down to a science -- ...

Yes, it used to be easier. For me, I'm only considering used market and alternate brands...the days of buying new Nikon lenses are over.

Try going to the store in person...I think you'll be able to negotiate for a better price.

No doubt the Sigma will be superior to the old 80-400D, but I sure wish it was a Sport or better yet, Art model.

It's been a very long time since I tried that lens...tried it and returned it twice. I was shooting the D200 & D300 at the time. Sharpness wise it wasn't too bad for 12MP type sensors, so it might ...

Completely agree. My "brain" tells me my D500 should yield better results than my D810 with any given focal length (i.e. more pixels per duck) but for whatever reason, the extra pixels don't seem ...

Granted, the point you make about FX IQ being superior to DX IQ is a valid one that I generally agree with, everything else being equal (though there are many variables to consider). But where DX ...

For distance/high magnification work (eagles etc.) on FX you ideally need 600mm+TC (or DX body) which rules out zooms. Since a 600 prime is out of financial reach, consider the new Sigma 500mm f4 ...

Well now that we've settled the canon vs nikon issue :-) my vote is for the 14-24G (because it appears to do everything you want better than the alternatives and being late in the product cycle ...

It's all the same "wafer" -- 46 MP FX ~= 21MP DX, just cut smaller.

...from the same fab as the D500 sensor? Don't see why not.

Maybe by scaling up the D500 sensor?