I prefer a built in flash. Most of my photography is with family and family events. Fill flash is what it is best for and when used correctly I can get a good shot in less than ideal lighting that is worth saving. Like and use it on my D7500 and especially my Fuji X100V which meters the light really well. If the D780 would have had it, I would have purchased it.
Do you have no digital editors today? Ken Rockwell is big on Perfectly Clear. Maybe 6 years ago I took his discount and purchased a copy. I'd say it has a few positives although it doesn't fit my shooting style nor needs. I'd recommend PC for the following photographer:
a. JPEG shooter b. High volume shooter as the software operates in batch
I'm of the school that all digital images need some editing / post processing. SOOC is a false myth. Therefore, PC is a benefit over no processing, but it is the minimalist approach to processing. If you follow Rockwell closely, you know he configures his camera already to maximize his JPEGs and the minimalist processing is all he needs afterward.
Do you have no digital editors today? Ken Rockwell... (show quote)
I agree. As a hobbyist who has always shot jpg's, PC has become my go to editor for ease of use along with FastStone Image Viewer to cull images before using PC.
3 notes: -you are an excellent photographer -with a really good eye for composition -and your work is done with middle of the pack aps-c cameras, a Nikon D750, and inexpensive glass.
There is SO much many of us can learn from your work!
If you've never been to Yosemite, it won't matter how many photos of it that you've seen, - There is Nothing even close to standing on the Valley Floor, looking up and all around in AWE of it all, Smelling it, Feeling it! - JUST DO IT!
If I need a flash, I generally use the built-in. I would avoid buying a camera without one - like Nikon's replacement for my D750.
I'm with Jerry on this one. It won't help shooting landscapes or bif. But for shooting close in daylight, it can be very useful. Taking people snapshots, it takes out the shadows under eyes and hats. Also gives a better s.o.c picture if you don't do much post processing. I use it daytime on my cell all the time.
I have been to Yosemite 3 times and being from the deep south, that is a big deal to me. The bay area and Yosemite are some of the most photogenic places in America.
I always look with interest at any photography that originates there and especially different compositions of things shot a million times. Photo 2 of the sun behind the tree is my favorite, a great composition.
Thank you for sharing, Mike. I look forward to your next set from this beautiful part of the country.
Last year's trip to Disney World with the grands, I didn't want to keep up with a large camera and bag so chose my RX100 VII. It did everything I expected and then some. I got good colors, sharp pictures, and some good video. We captured some great, great memories from that small package.
But...There is no magic pill in a small camera, small sensor, for low light. Physics won't allow it. Don't expect it. I saw one dad pull out his Canon FF camera inside at a show. I'm sure it worked well but no way for this grandad to carry that around 10 hours a day.
The windows Photo application (comes with your Windows PC) is very capable for your needs as is Google Photos. And Google Photos can be used on an IPhone as well (not sure about on a Mac PC).
Going through old photographs, I realized that some of my best outdoor color soc photos were from my Nikon D50 with kit lens. In most cases, it's not even close. Wish I hadn't sold it to help fund my next gas attack.