Before you tell me not to listen to this Tony guy let me explain. He has the controversy topic of crop sensor which caused a lot of disagreement but I don't want to talk about that. His latest claim that ISO is fake and I email him asking him to do a test of his cameras and see if they conform to the ISO standard and heard nothing back from him.
I don't see how ISO is fake because.
1. The ISO organization is real and based in Switzerland.
2. There is the ISO standard for digital still cameras and the latest is ISO 12232:2019 published Feb 2019.
3. Unless you test the cameras against this standard and they don't meet the standard then you can't claim that they are fake.

I have a Canon 70D. My go to all around lens is Tamron 16-300. I’m wanting a newer / hopefully better lens and have looked into Tamron 18-400. I have Canon 70-200L 2.8 & love its pictures so much that I have enlarged & framed a few. With my Tamron, most distance photos are beautiful for my photo books but lose sharpness when I’ve tried to enlarge. I also have Canon 50mm 1.8, 18-55mm, 55-250mm, & 70-300mm. I really don’t want to continually change lenses when I travel because sometimes conditions aren’t the best for that. Should I look at another lens? Would I not zoom to 400 much because of its lack of sharpness so would a Canon 18-135 be preferable? Than you all for always helping me.

You even hear talk about folks here having made the proud decision to have traded up to the next camera, up the line … like, it's no skin of their nose. But, I'm wondering here - whether these kinds of rash decisions make any sense, at all. You all know you can NEVER EVER get back the monies you spent, originally. And, chances are - you will have had to sweeten the deal - adding some cash in to get the upgrade you want. Just seems to me, that, no matter what you're getting in exchange - just t'ain't worth it. What's your take?

I was out shooting here in Florida yesterday and all of a sudden, when I depressed the Shutter buttion, nothing happened! Tried a few times, nothing. Went back to my car, sat down and aimed at the dashboard, and Click, the Shutter button worked and captured my Dashboard! Checked all my settings and I am at a loss why my shutter button did not work properly,..then it did work.
Does anyone here have a suggestion as to what might be going on with my Nikon D3300 Camera? Is it just a setting adjustment I must make or a serious issue with my camera?
So, right now I am confused, will it again happen at a very important time and totally frustrate me as to what is causing this Shutter issue. I am a beginner, about 3 years now, still learning and will appreciate any assistance here at UHH.
Oh, first thing I checked was my Battery, it was at full power.

I've been clear from time to time, and at length that I do not currently shoot RAW. I have in the past for a 4-5 year period and used Photoshop for some time and I do not want to revisit that decision on my part. But I think I have been clear in my reasons, over time.

Someone is not happy with my decision and choose to tag me as lazy, and more than that, intimidated by the process. Here follows:

"Raw is pretty much useless to me (my topic)

from: mrjcall (all from/all to)
received on: Mar 17, 2019 08:11:26
Greetings: I find your musings regarding your lack of desire or need for shooting in raw format to be devoid of any real facts except for one: the jpeg format is used primarily for sport/news photographers (who make money at their endeavors) because they often need to immediately transfer the images back to their base of operations.

The vast majority of hobbyists who decry raw format as useless, such as yourself, are simply too lazy or too intimidated by the effort involved in bringing their photography to the next level. Yes, of course it is an effort, but so was using the darkroom back in the day. I'll make the leap that you don't make money at sport/news photography, so I'll attribute your raw attitude to being both lazy AND intimidated, but most likely the later......

Shooting in raw format isn't necessary for many to enjoy photography as a hobby, but it IS required if one is interested in creating the highest quality images their brain, their effort and their gear can produce. Based on your somewhat lengthy treatise, you obviously don't aspire to that goal and that's fine.........few do. 😎

Jim"

Well Jim, for me it all boils down to personal choice. I did use a wet darkroom in the past, but eventually also gave that up in favor of mastering the camera and film, or the camera and digital capture in favor of image capture in both media. I have been abundantly clear on that..... capture in the studio and the field is much more important to me.

While I do not decry shooting RAW or Post Processing as unnecessary, and while I have seen the benefits of both, I simply choose to shoot with a properly adjusted camera and with proper media (if film) and other "capture tools".

Your point that I have done little to prove my point, I find no evidence in your PM to me to prove your point. So we drag this old bickering point onto the table again, when it truly is simply a matter of choice.

To Each his own.