Asking for a friend here (no, really!)

So he has an EOS R50 and I am trying to explain to him the concept of exposure bracketing and the subsequent use of HDR software - seemingly simple enough, right?

However, when we set the camera to AEB (and set it to take the 2nd and 3rd shots 1 stop over and under) what the camera does when you press the shutter release is take three shots, think a minute, and generate a finished bracketed image...which is a JPEG and it did not actually save the CR3 raw files.

My question is - can the camera be set to take the three shots and just save the raw files so they can be played with in post?

TIA for any helpful answers...

"lens hanging from the body mount..." What version? The recent iterations of that Canon optic have a Tripod foot.
Use it as an attachment point.

Also I'm thinking you're in need for many hours in a gym with progressive resistance training
The Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Lens weighs in at 1640 grams

My Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G ED IF VR II Nikkor weighs in at 1627 grams (1540g sans foot)
I shoot Agency Represented "Birds in Flight" all day long using my Black Rapid (Original Version) Strap.
No Problems... I also can hand hold that Nikkor (sans Tripod Foot) for intermittent shooting in my Studio.

BlackRapid 10-Year Anniversary Edition Classic Retro RS-4 Camera Strap (Black)
Available from B&H for $81.95 (currently in stock) you should seriously consider this!

The progress is in the sensor, nowhere else.

The idea of using a display instead of through the lens is reverting to old time when folks were looking from above to focus...

Issues with the display...
- LIGHT!!! If too bright, good luck using the display.
- Eyes issue If one needs glasses all bets are off, there is no way to adjust for that but use the tiny in camera display in the 'view finder'. Go check for accuracy on that since the display is made of tiny pixels vs 'a normal light' (analog)
- Weight unbalance. (Light body, heavy lens)

That is one of the few reasons why I will not upgrade to mirrorless, even if I do appreciate the new sensors.

I see some people only posting landscapes. Or only birds. Some only post street photography.
Is it normal for a photographer to gravitate towards just one type of photography over time as one gets more experience?

Also, about styles. Some people seem to prefer natural-looking pictures. Even when light modifiers are used. As long as the final result is as if no additional equipment was involved. But others seem to like producing pics that have strobes with "wrong" color temperature. Or overpowering the ambient. Or reflectors that almost completely eliminate shadows.

I'm not talking about HDR or post-processing. More about different styles. Realistic vs. artistic. Do photographers generally stick to one style? Or should a good photographer be able to adopt any style they need?

A LITTLE BACKGROUND: I've been taking pictures since 1958 when my grandmother bought me my first camera, a Kodak Brownie Hawkeye. I like to think that those simple beginnings brought me to where I am today. I currently sell my work domestically and internationally through two websites. I'm self-trained but have taken a class here and there on lighting techniques and darkroom operations. With the dawn of digital imaging, I have left the darkroom in favor of digital editing.

THE EMOTION OF PHOTOGRAPHY: I now have the time (I'm retired) to travel and explore with my cameras. While I have been known to take more than 5,000 photos in a single day, I try to be selective with my scenes. The only time I take a large number of shots is when photographing wildlife. That said, I have spent hours in a single location; shooting from different angles and changing light. The overriding factor in this is how I felt about the scene. What was I thinking, feeling, and remembering while I viewed the subject? There is a line in the Star Trek IV "The Voyage Home" where the testing computer asks Spock "How do you feel?" That is how I approach my photography. I take notes about the scene and what I was feeling and why I stopped to take those photos. I do the same thing in post-production processing. What I felt plays a part in how I crop the scene and adjust the lighting.
Last year I began writing stories and poetry to mate with my photographs. All of those works have been copyrighted and are now being published into a series of photo/poetry books. Here is an example: "Abandoned Buckboard"

THOUGHTS? COMMENTS?

I am a Nikon shooter and was excited to put the Tamron z 150-500mm lens on my z50. I was ready to do more wildlife and birds in flight photography until I spent some time with this beautiful beast….it is too darn heavy for me to hold still and I am not inclined to lug a tripod around when I get the urge to shoot some wildlife when I am close to nature. At 75 I admit I am not as strong as I’d like and holding that lens isn’t getting easier.

So I am returning it to Adorama today and exchanging it for the Sony cyber shot RX10 IV. I guess a bridge camera isn’t so bad….(right?)…..and it sure will make my sometimes forays into nature a little easier. I just hope I don’t have pangs of regret and envy when I encounter folks with those big, beautiful telephoto lens in the field.🥹

It’s actually a very common practice in photo journalism. The AP has very strict
Guidelines on what can and cannot be edited. For instance a photo can be cropped but people cannot be edited out. They don’t allow for a lot of leeway.

The point is that the photog is trying to capture an image that is documentary, not necessarily artistic. Al thought the good ones often do both. RAW simply requires too much editing and allowance for interpretation of the image.

A good example was years ago Time had a photo of OJ Simpson that they intentionally darkened his face with deep shadows to make him look more sinister. There were significant ethics issues involved and they clearly editorialized a photo through editing.

As usual a blanket statement, without context, is not often accurate or helpful. In this case the news agencies need accuracy and raw does not help. In some ways it hinders.

Often field photogs are uploading their pics on the fly. Others may be downloading them, determining what goes to publication etc. in addition They simply don’t have time to mess with each photo. Just like some wedding photogs and others. Time is money. And they’re on a very tight schedule.

I shoot almost exclusively RAW the latitude it provides my amateur skills. The news agencies are trying to achieve the exact opposite. Now if they could achieve neutrality and accuracy in reporting we’d all be better off.