I guess there is a difference between adjusting white balance and some Snapchat filter people apply to pics of their breakfast that completely changes the image.

Some post-processing is always (or almost always) required. Yet, when I look at some pics out there, they are just not realistic because of all the filters people apply.

It's like an attempt to make a boring pic exciting by using filters.

Where do you draw the line when processing your pictures? What do you consider necessary?

I found a lens I've wanted on MPB, at a good price. Seeing lots of positive reviews (including here on UHH) I decided to make the purchase.

I called MPB, asking to place an order over the phone. Told I can't do it, must use web. Ok.

So I placed my order on the web, then got phone call for "security clearance." Fine, I can understand that: it was a big ticket item, and nobody wants to be scammed.

After a few legitimate questions (credit card, shipping address, etc.) they asked if I was an amateur or a professional. Seemed odd, but I played along. Next, what would I be using the lens for? Did I have other Nikon equipment? Had I ever used any other camera brands? I answered, but said I found the questions intrusive, probably more for marketing than for security.

The order went through, but then 3 days later I got an email saying the order was cancelled because it had "not passed our security checks process." I called, and was told that while my credit card had been approved for the purchase, they wouldn't accept my order. I asked to speak to a manager, and was told none were available. They'd get back to me. 3 hours later, no call.

So I've bought the lens from KEH -- slightly more expensive, but no hassles, and much better return policy.

I have pretty much always used 32g cards. Big enough.
I use a full frame Canon R6 so the files are pretty big.
It brings me in around 1,000 frames.
Generally on a 2 week travel vacation I will pretty much fill a card and sometimes I'll use 2 camera so 32g each.

I did manage to fill 4 cards on a recent to Iceland... never before more than 2.
After a trip I'll generally save the cards and file them.
Locally I'll erase and reuse the cards.

I see but can't really grasp using a giant card... 256g, more?
Why? .
Anyway,
What does everybody think on this?

Like most of you I read lens reviews before I buy them. I have been doing this since the 50’s when Popular Photography used to regularly test camera and lenses. Now I get my reviews on line. A conclusion. All lenses are sharp at f8. Usually at f5.6 and f11 too. Even the cheapest third party lenses. Only the high priced glass is really sharp wide open or down one or two stops. So, buy the cheapest lenses and shoot aperture priority at f8 whenever possible. OK, I recognize that this is not always the possible but, I think it does say a lot about lenses. My favorite lens is my Minolta MC 50mm f1.4. I have read reviews that this may be the sharpest 50mm lens ever made. True or not, (probably not) I really don’t recall ever shooting it at less than f5.6. So, for me, most of the time, the f8 rule is quite reliable. And how fast glass is so unnecessary for me. And how it pains me to think of all the really expensive glass I have bought over the years. And how relieved I am that even my cheap 135mm Minolta MD f3.5 lens at f5.6-f11 will give me the results I want. Now, go ahead and beat me up.

I've only had one camera that had two card slots, my Canon 7D Mark II. My current camera of choice is the Nikon Z fc which only has one slot. While I always carry an identical spare SD card in my bag, It won't help me recover images if the card in the camera has a catastrophic failure.

However, in the 15 years I've been shooting digital, with several hundred thousand images captured on fewer than two dozen SD cards, I have never had a failure up to this point. While an SD card failure is always a possibility, the chances of it occurring appear to be so low that It is not something I ever worry about. At my age the chances are my current SD cards will outlive me.