Geneh7, Nice pic! My rufous only stayed around a few days. But, I ended up having a black-chinned hummer show up at my feeders on December 13, 2012, he turned out to be my 1st official winter hummer. He stayed for over 2 months. I assumed he was a Ruby-throat at first, because he sounded like a Ruby, so I didn't take a closer look. A few days after he showed up, I happened to notice the sound of the wing whir as he was flying away from a feeder and it got my attention because it didn't sound like a Ruby wing whir at all, then I realized that I had yet to see a red gorget, so I started to pay closer attention and I finally got a glimpse of the purple gorget. I Never managed to get a really nice photo showing the gorget though, I am hoping he comes back this winter!

Well, I have to wait for my PODS to arrive here on Dec.1st and then find my Sony cord to connect camera to computer. Why I lost touch with that and not in my computer bag, I haven't a clue. I took all these lovely pictures of my three original hosta still all pretty and nice in the garden bed covered with leaves, and duhhhhhh, there they sit untouchable in the Sony camera. The new Nikon P500 arrives on Nov 29th, I think Tuesday, and after I charge the battery, I'll be reshooting the same garden shots. As direct a comparison as I can make, provided we don't have a terrific freeze before then. I got a monopod and a tilting ball head. Incidentally, I decided on the Nikon because of my hands. I must have broken my left hand while loading the PODS to move, and it is quite painful and will not do things as it should. Not knowing if I will regain an adequate degree of use for a heavy camera, I opted to go with one having a fairly long zoom lens w/o so much weight. Being left-handed I've always been more ambidexterous than many folks who are right-handed, but some things you just MUST have both hands working right. Like pruning with hand clippers.

ML, I plan to buy the new Nikon D3200, which is the successor to your D3100 and takes the same lenses, and in fact comes with the same 18-55 lens that yours did. For close-ups of flowers, I plan to buy the Nikon 40mm f/2.8G AF-S DX Micro NIKKOR Lens because it lists for only $279 and focuses as close as 6.4 inches. I also consider its relatively short focal length to be an advantage, because I have been taking floral closeups of my hybrid zinnias by using my wife's Kodak Z712 IS and I noticed that I get more depth of field at its shorter zoom settings and less at its more telephoto zoom settings. I realize that limited depth of field lets you throw unwanted background out of focus, but I also notice that not enough depth of field is a frequent problem with closeup pictures. That shows up in this recent picture of one of my hybrid zinnias. The petals toward the front of the flower are in reasonably sharp focus, while the petals toward the back of the flower are in soft focus. The 40mm-2-8G-Micro-NIKKOR has the shortest focal length of the Micro NIKKORs, and hopefully the deepest depth of field capability. It does not have image stabilization, and I will be saving my pennies to buy the longer focal length 85mm f/3.5G AF-S DX ED VR Micro Nikkor because the VR (vibration reduction) indicates that it does have image stabilization. I agree with LazyPup that the Nikkor AF-S DX VR 55-300 f/4.5-5.6 6G ED that you mention would be difficult to handhold at it longer zoom settings, even with its VR feature. "...because I want to get up much closer than the 18-55 lens it came with." The Nikon 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S DX VR Nikkor Zoom Lens will focus as close as 11 inches throughout that entire zoom range. At 55mm that gives you a pretty good closeup at 11 inches. The minimum focus distance of the AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR is 4.6 feet. I'm not sure that is going to get you any closer than the lens you have on your camera, although it is a good lens, and would give you considerably more telephoto capability than you now have. ZM (not associated with any product or vendor mentioned or linked)

Nice work by lazypup! One other way to think of it is to equate what the camera sensor sees to how the human eye sees: Think of shutter speed as how quickly you blink your eyelid. A quick blink is like a fast shutter speed like 1/1000 of a second. With a quick blink you hardly expose your retina to the image you are looking at. A longer gaze where you stare at an object would equate to a slower shutter speed like 1/30th of a second. Think of aperture as being related to the size of the pupil in your eye. A wide open or dilated pupil is like a low f-stop number (a more open lens aperture), it lets a lot of light through to the sensor. A pinpoint-sized or very small pupil is like a high f-stop number (small lens aperture opening), it lets little light through to the eye's retina or to the camera's sensor. In the daytime in bright sun, your pupil will naturally decrease in diameter/size. It's trying to not overexpose your retina to bright sunlight, it's like using f-stop settings toward one end of the scale, f/8 to f/16. At night when light is limited, your pupil will open up wide to let light in, like a camera's f-stop settings in the f/5.6 to f/1.4 range. Think of ISO as how good your night vision is, or how well your eye or the camera's sensor sees at night. A high ISO number means you have excellent night vision capability. You might not always use the high number, but you have the capability. So a camera with a sensor that goes from ISO 100-1600 will be fine in bright light and at dusk, but in darker situations (indoor or theater photography) you'll wish your sensor was from ISO 100-6400. In general, the higher the ISO setting, the more artifacts or "digital noise" can be introduced into the picture. So you want to keep the ISO towards a lower number when able. Just because you can see at night, it doesn't mean the picture will be perfectly clear. One other thing, it is relative: ISO 1600 on a camera with a 100-1600 range will be grainier or noisier than 1600 on a camera with a 100-6400 range. The closer you get to the highest ISO setting your camera offers the more likelier you are to get noise. It's not a hard rule, just a guideline. You can still use a camera's flash to illuminate what you are photographing, much like a person would use a flashlight to see better at night. But a sensor with a high ISO rating allows flashless photography in low-light situations. Plus, a camera's flash can only illuminate so far out in front of the camera. At an indoor graduation ceremony you'll want to be in the front row to effectively use a flash. With a high-ISO camera you could be in the rear of the auditorium and still get nice shots with no flash. These three things; shutter speed, aperture or f/stop, and ISO, can be thought of as sort of making up the three corners of photography. There's fluidity between the three, shooting one of your camera's manual or priority modes allows you to vary things as needed for what you are shooting. Like lazypup wrote, shooting outdoor sports you'd want a fast shutter speed (a quick blink of the eye) so the fast moving athletes won't be blurred. A fast shutter speed limits the amount of light that gets to the sensor. So you can increase the amount of light that gets to the sensor by using a lower number aperture setting like f/4 or f/2.8, and an ISO setting like like ISO 200 or 400. In bright sun you could be ISO 200 for example, if there are clouds, the 400. These are just theoretical numbers mind you, not real-world specifics. If I'm in bright sun shooting outdoor scenery for vacation photos, I can have a low ISO number to maximize photo quality like ISO 100, a smaller aperture opening (smaller opening means higher numbered setting) like f/14 to maximize depth of field so everything in the photo, from foreground to background, is in focus. Then whatever shutter speed is required to make the desired ISO and f/stop work. Shooting indoor theater I want flashless photography. There is some motion on stage, maybe a little dance here and there, so I can use a somewhat slower shutter speed like 1/200th of a second to keep the moving actors from blurring, a sort of medium blink of the eye. I still need more light though, so I'll open up the eye's pupil with a wider aperture setting like f/2.8, and I'll give the sensor better "night vision" by increasing the ISO to a higher number like 800 or 1200. If I'm taking photos of a non-moving sleeping baby in a quiet room, blur really isn't an issue, so I can use a slower shutter speed of 1/60th of a second to let light in. I can use a medium-ish ISO like 400, and I can open up the aperture with f/5.6. All of the above are sort of wags of numbers to try to convey the idea of how the three things can be adjusted to compensate for what you are trying to shoot. The thing you'll find is that based on what you are shooting, one of the three things will be prioritized. Fast moving athletes might lead you to prioritize shutter speed to control blur. I might shoot in "S" mode to prioritize shutter. Shooting your child on stage in a school play might lead you to open the aperture wide open to maximize light to the camera's sensor. I might shoot in "A" mode to prioritize aperture. Lazypup said he'd write about depth of field, that can be an important criteria that leads to using a certain f-stop or aperture setting. So lots of variable. But you only learn by shooting, analyzing your shots, and trying different settings. The "delete" button is one of the beauties of digital photography.