Definitely with sky, but crop so the rocks beneath the subject's feet are the same width as the sky, for symmetry (or framing). I did this inadvertently as I scrolled, stopping when there was about an inch of rocks, same as there was of sky. It looks terrific this way.

The sky adds perspective. The subject's not blowing his horn just for you, but for a great expanse.

You almost had some nice Sun shots. Too bad the Moon photobombed them.

This is great advice. After I got my first DSLR, I started out shooting only jpeg for around six months. When I compared some identical shots with those of my friend who was at Glacier Point with me one day, I thought I was doing something wrong. That day I learned what a simple dehaze slider in Lightroom could do for landscapes. I've shot with both RAW and jpeg ever since, and I've learned what I can do in post processing.

I wish I had RAW files for some of my early jpeg-only shots.

Remember that a camera's jpeg is a processed image, so if you're going for purity, it's no more pure than a RAW file that you process.

Cameras use whatever processing they're programmed to use. Most of the time they get it right, but when they fail, it's nice to have a RAW file to work with. This is especially true when we get it wrong as photographers. Examples where I've gotten a shot wrong are rainbows and unintended silhouettes. In either of these, I could have made in-camera adjustments to compensate -- thereby overriding the generic camera settings -- but I didn't. I was able to make up for my shooting mistakes by tweaking the RAW files in post and producing images of what I tried to get in the first place. A jpeg usually won't have enough data to work with to get a good result.

Are you grating cheese or cutting it? Because something about the pompous nature of your reply really stinks. Something, that is, besides the naïveté.

My buddy had a Scirocco, and I had a VW Rabbit in the mid-80s, a car I probably push-started at some point. I don't remember for sure, but I do remember that I always used second gear to smoothly start a car. First gear was too rough.

Who are you calling old?

I learned to drive on a stick and most of my vehicles have been stick, by my choosing. I've push-started my dead-battery vehicle more times than I care to remember. Many times I did so by myself. A vehicle that's generally easy to start will easily start with the pop of the clutch at a speed of only a couple of miles per hour.

I guarantee you not all EF lenses are amazing, fanboi. And yes, 40 lenses is only a handful.

If you're shooting with the Canon mirrorless RF-mount, you're stuck with a handful of Canon lenses only (or adapted lenses). Canon claims it will license its design to third-party lens makers, but I've read that none will be available until at least late 2024.

If you're using a Canon DSLR, there are plenty of third-party choices, some good and some bad.

Very true, but what of the added expense of extra wiring? And battery manufacturers would surely protest (probably why this never became the norm).

BTW TriX, where would you strike a side window to make your escape? Most people are surprised to learn a window is weakest along its edges and strongest toward the center. People should also be aware, as I'm sure you are, that if faced with a car filling with water, they must use a striker to break a window before their arm is under water. Under water, it's exceedingly difficult to move fast enough to break a window.

Automotive electrical is odd at times. I once had no prior warning whatsoever before my battery went kaput, leaving me completely without power and the engine unable to run.

I was driving a Toyota Corolla in moderate early afternoon traffic, in the #2 lane of the I-405 over Sepulveda Pass, one of the busiest spots of the greater Los Angeles freeway system, when my car died and had no electrical power whatsoever. I opened the door and stepped out only to hear some young "lady" creep by honking and yelling at me to turn on my %*!#-ing flashers, which of course I had already tried. Dude behind me in a brown Porsche 928 put on his flashers and kindly stayed behind me alerting and blocking traffic as I pushed my car (slightly downhill, fortunately) to the shoulder. Proves the old joke about the difference between Porsches and porcupines is wrong; not all Porsches have pricks on the inside.

Another time, in a Datsun 710, the voltage regulator stuck wide open (at night, of course) while I was stopped and about to turn right, and it blew out every bulb in the car but the high-beam headlights, dome light, and left blinkers. Yes, it took out a fusible link, but not before the damage was done.

Wow, Jerry. How old are you? Ten?

I don't know which is worse, you resorting to name-calling over an old, not-so-funny joke, or that you actually think inflation is low. Stop watching MSNBC and try to be a better steward of this site that you think you run.

Agreed that 24-105mm is a good choice for a place like Yosemite -- or anywhere. That and the OP's 16mm would be enough for 99% of his shots, I think.

I shoot Sony, whose 24-105mm is excellent. It rarely leaves my camera despite that I have several other excellent lenses. I'm not sure Canon even offers a 24-105 in RF, but if so, and if it's a lot better than Canon's EF 24-105mm f/4L lens that rather sucked, an RF 24-105mm would be my first choice.

I expected Jerry to have his own section by now.

I figured as much.