> >That was probably a bit facetious. I appreciate the fact the >OP seems to have a problem, which we've all tried to help >with. >
That's what baffles me. I see very knowledgeable people making suggestions for the OP, and the OP just ignores this advice.
Do you think the pic of the Helikon I posted is sharp?
I do; maybe I'm wrong - that's fine, and please don't worry about hurting my feelings by telling me it's not sharp. I know the lighting sucks, that's why I originally posted the image in a thread, I was looking for critiques about lighting.
But there's a story behind the pic.
After buying my D7000 bodies, and completing a paid gig, using (gasp) old kit lenses, I decided it was time to start upgrading glass. I purchased the Sigma 24-70EX, and immediately had backfocus issues, I thought. I posted a couple sample pics, and got advice, which I took to heart, and the advice really did help my technique.
However, the lens still backfocused, on both bodies. Another moderator, Brian Wong, picked up on the issue, and walked me through about a week's worth of testing using real world objects. I learned a ton. Brian freely shared his knowledge with me, and I came out of that week a better photographer.
The pic of the Helikon was taken as the final test in the series. I ended up dialing in a lot of adjustment, but the Sigma is now, to my eye, quite satisfactory. It seems to focus on what the AF system says is being acquired. Again - to my eye.
So, anyhow: I understand the frustration with purchasing an item that doesn't seem to perform as well as it should.
I don't understand why anybody would not welcome the chance to learn from experienced photographers. Perhaps, at the end of the day, the body will still be unsatisfactory; well, then, that's something Nikon can, and will, fix. But the opportunity to learn and grow will not have been lost.