You can adjust the white balance in post, which is fairly easy with RAW files or you can switch the WB to degrees Kelvin and tweak it to perfection. It's easy with Live View turned on.

The trick is to remember to switch it back to AWB or risk messing up later shots - in a different temperature (something even post processing can't fix).

Now that's really hard to get...great capture!

I'd highly recommend a MeFoto Roadtrip. The aluminum version is just a tad under $200 and comes with a really good (arca swiss mount) ball head, which is really solid, regardless of prices. It weighs 3.6 lbs and one can easily travel with it. I do take it with me on trips all over the world.

I find it odd that they allow you to use flash but not tripods. I've reached a point I don't bother to take a picture in dark places without a tripod anymore. For you, to get a decent picture using flash, I'd do the following:

1. Use Tv (or M) and set my shutter speed to 2 times 1/FL (double the minimum required shutter speed). For example with a 24mm FL, I'd set my speed to 1/50
2. Turn on live view and increase my ISO until I'm about 1 to 2 f/stops darker than ambient. Basically I'm letting the flash to fill in no more than 2 f/stops. Your picture will look natural and not "flashy" which I hate.
3. Turn on the flash (ETTL) and shoot.

I shoot a lot of hummingbirds myself. I'd like to offer a few pointers...

1. You can get closer, much closer (as close as your lens MFD will allow). The hummers are skittish but they are brave. The trick is for you to be present and keep inching ever closer. Usually it'd take anywhere from 5 to 15 minutes before the hummers will just accept you as part of the scenery.

2. Your shutter speed is a bit slow. I've shot at this speed and it's OK provided the bird doesn't move. Any slight movement will make the image blurry.

3. For a long time I shoot without flashes but I've changed my mind. The hummers are not scared of flashes nor do they seem to be affected by it. Flash will freeze the motion and light up the scene a bit better, allowing slower shutter speeds and better ISO.

4. Try to take pictures with them feeding on real flowers. Feeder photos are good practice but not very special.

Sample of one of my pictures (taken with flash, uncropped - 7DII, 100-400mm f/4.3-5.6L II, @ 400mm, f/5.6, 1/400, ISO 800)

I too find Costco prints decent. There are a few things you may want to consider to get consistent results.

1. Calibrate you monitor with a calibrator (this is a must do, even without printing). I use a Datacolor Spyder calibrator.
2. Download the printer profile for the Costco you're printing from - each Costco has their own profile. You convert to Costco profile then save for the file you're going to print.
3. Test print a picture (larger is better, at least a 8x10) from Costco. The color is usually right on but the brightness will usually be too dark. This is not Costco's fault. Rather, most computer monitor is way too bright. Reduce the monitor brightness to match the Costco print. I find that the adjusted brightness works well for everything else, not just Costco prints.
4. When ordering the prints, make sure you select the option NOT to let Costco auto-adjust.

I find that my prints match perfectly with what I see on the monitor after doing the above steps...some people complain about having to try several times to get the print just right...Usually it's because of the brightness mismatch between your monitor and the print.

I haven't had to send in any of my lenses for cleaning. I'd think this is something you want to send in to Canon.

I'm just wondering - Are you sure the dust spots are caused by your lens and not on your camera sensors? It's worth cleaning the sensor first.

150 yards is a bit far. You will need 600mm or more, especially if you use a full frame camera.

I have a little bit of a different take on the use of ND and polarizer filters. There are two kinds of ND filters - graduated and non-graduated filters.

To me, you use non-graduated ND filters when you have too much light for the shutter speed you need. This typically is when you shoot in mid-day bright sunlight. If you're like me and shoot only at sunrise or sunset...there is a good chance you don't need ND filters. My ND filters are not quite high end (about $150 a piece) and I found they have quite a bit of color cast, softness and vignetting that sometimes are difficult to get rid of in post. Bottom line, I use ND filters only when it's absolutely necessary. I don't even own graduated ND filters. I bracket my shots and merge them in post processing.

Regarding Polarizer, I also dislike using it...while it brings out the color, reduce glares, etc, it also comes at costs...namely vignetting and uneven color gradation (if you're not careful). I solve the problem by bracketing also - granted your 1000 will become at least 3000 shots but heh, digital "film" is cheap. I use Polarizer only to reduce water surface reflections otherwise it sits in the bag.

From experience, my shots without filters (ND and/or Polarizer) always end up better than those I shot with. After a while, my filters tend to sit in my bags neglected. I'm sure there will be a bunch of folks vehemently disagree with me...but this is my take on these.

I do hope that you are not going down the path of those who use full manual as a badge of honor...I've seen quite a few of those. One I know who insists on not even using the camera metering system...rather he depends on the f/16, 1/100, ISO 100 rule for bright sunlight and goes from there. Whatever for, I don't know.

The idea should be you use whatever mode that will, one, make it easy on you and, two, get you the kind of pictures you want. If those two require you to use full manual then that's what you will do.

My suggestion would be: (can be used as a combo)

1. Use Live View with Simulation Enabled. In full manual, you will quickly see the effect of each setting on the picture that you will take. Turn off Live View once you get the idea because Live View is slow and eats batteries.

2. Take full advantage of the camera metering. Camera metering can be seen on Live view or through the view finder. Use it and adjust your exposure to compensate for it's shortcomings (like getting fooled in bright/dark background in relation to your subject).

3. I find that M mode is just as easy as A (Av) or S (Tv) mode...use the camera metering but compensate for exposure as needed.

4. Don't be afraid of using Auto ISO in cases where background exposure is changing too rapidly (like shooting sports, airshows or birds in flight)

On the lady guitarist, if I were you I would have placed her a fair bit on the left, giving her more room to the right which was the direction she and her guitar were facing...more room to breathe, so to speak. Also I'd not have cropped her feet off and left too much room above her head. Her image is a tad bit blurry...I'm not so sure it was because of motion blur or incorrect focus (the bottles in the background were very clear and in focus). If it was motion blur, you might want to up the shutter speed next time and open up the aperture (there seem to be plenty DOF). The color is a bit red - I would have changed it to something a tad bit cooler but then one might prefer the actual stage colors...I don't see much noise for ISO 5000, though.

On the male performer, again, I'd put him a tad bit to the left, maybe crop a bit tighter. The lighting is horrific, especially on his face...In post I'd reduce the contrast and brighten his face a bit. I'd also change the color to lessen the red. There is also a hint of either motion blur or mis-focus on this picture as well but not as obvious as the other one. Overall, I like the male performer picture better.

I think you either zoom out (by feet is OK too) to show the vast expanse (like you see it with your eyes) or zoom in and convey something specific.
By the way, the revised photo solved the dynamic range problem...much better picture by some simple post processing.

Since you asked for honest feedback... :). Looking at this I don't really know what you are trying to convey. I see a bunch of trees. On the right, the clump of trees is larger than anything else so I assume this is the main topic but it's still too little (too far) to see any real details like texture of the moss and the bark. Bottom line is this picture does not grab me at all.

I'd significantly zoom in to that clump of trees to show really clear details of the moss and/or the tortured tree bark and tree knots...perhaps it will be more powerful.

Also the picture lacks contrast/dynamic range and colors (almost all green).

Great pictures. Congrats on your son's graduation. By the way, if you didn't say anything, I'd have thought that was his sister in the second picture :).

A lot of cameras don't. For Canon you can count on your fingers for those that do. My Canon 5D Mark III does not while my newer 7D Mark II does.