Ron, another thought for you. Yes, I went to my local cameras store and held and shot photos with both makes of camera. They permitted me to go outside for outdoor shots. Just as important, I went to Ken Rockwell's site on-line. He has very good reviews of most major cameras, the good and the bad. I would not pass up that opportunity to check the plusses and minuses. Good luck.

I learned on this forum that zoom lenses, especially the "external" zooms where the overall length changes, will suck in air as they extend. This would leave a haze, or even worse, if you are in a humid climate, so now I avoid that. (Don't use them at the beach, for example.). To your question, however, I have an older MF Canon tilt and shift (T&S) lens which is actually open all the time to the atmosphere. I used to take it apart myself and clean the haze from time to time. Most recently I sent it to Midwest Camera Repair (web site) and they were terriffic. They not only cleaned it but serviced it (lube, corrosion) and they were customer friendly (phone, email), fair price, and prompt. Good luck!

I started as a Canon person way back in the 1970s while in Japan. Later on, I acquired Nikon film cameras and many manual focus lenses. The thing that had me come back to Canon last year (away from my Nikon D200 - time for an upgrade) is that it is extremely easy to convert the Nikon lenses (old or new, MF or auto focus) to a Canon mount. There is no extra glass in those NIkon lens to Canon body converters, and I just leave the converters on my Nikon lenses. So my investment in lenses is saved for a very modest ($15 or so each) converter. I have been very pleased with my Canon system. However, I bought a used Canon 5D Mark ii because it is a full frame size sensor. That way, all my older Nikon lenses are still "true" to their focal lengths. This will depend upon what you have now, and what will transfer over to your new, upgraded camera body.

I carry three or four in my camera bag.

I would add to my previous contribution. This is not a matter of the quality of the glass. I have a top of the line Canon 24-70 L series f/2.8. It is a zoom where the lens extends. Because the lens is so heavy with big glass, it extends itself when you have the lens lowered, such as when you are carrying it. The quick, easy and cheap solution is the rubber band, as I stated earlier. By the way, the newer Canon lenses have a lock system to prevent the extension, so you need to remember to release the lock when you are ready to take photos.

Now my local photography store sells these "rubber bands." But it is a lot cheaper, and just as good, to choose a wide rubber band of the right length for the circumference of your lens. I just leave it on all the time, and it works fine.

I don't have this particular camera, but rather a Canon 5Dii. I have a similar situation, but have learned from other on-line forums that it is not unusual. Mine does the opposite, in that I need to set to a minus 1/3 stop. Now, as a matter of routine, I bracket, -1/3, -2/3, and 0 for my shots. I was surprised that depending upon the contrast between the highlights and the shadows, it is not always the same EV that gives the best result. And I've learned that sometimes, I need to put the main setting back to 0, with a -1/3 and a +1/3 bracket, depending upon conditions. Once I got over having the camera set by that method, the results turn out fine. By the way, I use aperture priority, and adjust the ISO to suit the lighting conditions. Hope this helps.

I agree with several others on the forum. The essential filters for outdoors are the UV, the circular polarizer, and if needed, a ND. I also learned the hard way that the cost to buy B+W filters is well worth it, as I have some permanent reminders of using some cheaper ones. Although I don't use them as often as I should, I carry some graduated ND in the Cokin system, to help avoid blown out skys. Again I learned the hard way it is much easier to do this on the camera, than on the computer later.

I suggest that you look at, and have the knowledgeable salesperson, explain the difference between the Canon 5D and the Canon 5D Mark ii. The Mark ii had some enhancements that made me decide to go with it. They are both available used, and with the newer 5D models now being out, the price has dropped some.

Many thanks to all who replied and offered suggestions. I always learn new things from them. Given what I have now, I'm going to look into the layer method, or alternatively, another PP software other than elements 14. Thanks again to all.

Thanks to Gene51. I appreciate all the suggestions for next time. Meanwhile, the family gathering is over, I have the photos that I have in JPEG at 22mp, and was looking for suggestions on what I could do now, with those photos, on the computer. Thanks again to all for the great suggestions for next time. As I said, the photos I have are perfectly exposed for the family group of people, but the sky and horizon are barely visible. Was looking for a suggestion on a software that might do better in adjusting the background, than P/S Elements 14. When I adjust for sky and horizon, those parts look good, but the skin tones are not right. Thanks again.

Thanks to all who replied. All are lessons learned for future situations like this. Meanwhile, I was hoping someone would have a suggestion on post-processing, and if there is something that will do better than than Photoshop Elements 14. Thanks again.

Hello Photography Enthusiasts. I have just taken some very nice photos along the Atlantic beaches, and am seeking your advice on exposure correction. I got some group photos in the late afternoon, camera facing east towards the ocean, people facing west, and the exposure of the family group is perfect. However, the horizon is nearly lost, and the blue sky looks nearly white. I can correct the background with Elements 14, but then the skin tones change and look unnatural. Elements actually does a good job restoring the color to the background, using the "lighting" tool. Any suggestions would be much appreciated. Thank you.

Thank you to everyone for many good suggestions. I went to both the TV manual and the computer manual. It turns out that the computer has better resolution options than the TV. When I set the computer to a resolution option that matched the TV, the photos showed very well - much better than ever before. Also, I see jimmya's suggestion to use the DVD player's USB port, and I will check into that too. Thanks again to all.

Thank you to the five who responded. Very helpful thoughts. The TV is HD, but it is the plasma type and a few years old. I'll check to see if there is a settings capability for the HDMI, and also if there is a USB port. All very helpful ideas, so thanks again.