[Tweeters] additional comments on ...

[jimbetz at jimbetz.com]

Dave,

   I specifically chose the D500 and the R7 for just the reasons you
consider comparing them to be "unfair".  They are similarly priced
and they have an equivalent sensor.  So the optics and the software in
the auto-focus becomes the major differences ... and the "human
factors" (ease of use, especially weight).  Plus a birding friend
uses a D500 and swears by it - so I essentially had to try it for
myself.  For me - the R7 is better than the D500 ... a large part of
that choice is based upon how heavy they are/aren't.  Even the R7
is heavy compared to my Lumix ... but it out performs the Lumix in
so many ways that it was easy for me to choose to purchase an R7.
I don't know yet if I'll keep or sell the Lumix.  There are some
things it does such as when it is at focal lengths less than 100
that make it an excellent camers.  But for birding I'm going to be
using the R7 that arrived today.

   I stand by my opinion ... but it's just that ... my Opinion.

                                                   - Jim

> Message: 1

> Date: Mon, 22 May 2023 12:26:31 -0700

> From: dgrainger at birdsbydave.com

> To: Tweeters <tweeters at u.washington.edu>

> Subject: [Tweeters] additional comments on subject Better Birder

> 	Camera

> Message-ID: <7879321988624eed0879487e8ddd4eaf at birdsbydave.com>

> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed

>

> Comparing a very old Nikon D500 with a newer Canon is absolutely not the

> right thing to do. That D-500 is several generations old! It was

> introduced in 2016.  You should have compared the Nikon D-850 which is

> the best DSLR Nikon built... Lacking an optical view finder, I have zero

> plans to go mirrorless.

>

> I shoot a LOT of fast moving birds with a lot of foliage and other

> clutter around; the D-850 is an amazing piece of equipment. I also use

> either  Nikkor 200-500 or Nikkor 28-300 for birding.  See some results

> on birdsbydave.com