Hello everyone, my name is Charles L. Eral, I grew up in the land of 10,000 Lakes of Minnesota where we raised three children over the first 50 years we lived in central Minnesota. We now live in the "Valley of the Sun" Fountain Hills, Arizona for these last 27 years. Except for my 4 years in United States Coast Guard in the early 60's.

I first became interested in photography when I was in the Coast Guard. I was stationed in places where people dream about going and visiting. I took a lot of photos of Coast Guard Stations, Ships, and Light Houses. From Cape May, NJ to the Great Lakes of Superior and Michigan. Some of the places I was stationed were Duluth Lifeboat Station, Splitrock Lighthouse, Ashland Breakwater Lighthouse, Bayfield Lifeboat Station on Lake Superior. Also was on the Coast Guard Cutter Mesquite out of Sturgeon Bay on Lake Michigan. My only camera during this time was a 35mm Petri. It took great pictures for its time.
I'm currently purchased a Nikon D5500, which came with DX AF-S 18-55mm lens. I purchased the camera first for its video capabilities. I needed a camera that would do a great job of recording old 8mm movie film of my father-in-laws when he sailed the Great Lakes for the Columbia Transportation Division. Everyone remember the Edmund Fitzgerald. He retired one year to the dated this great ship went down with all hands on board. I have now recorded 18 reels of 400 feet of his film of the Steamers, Ewing, Buckeye, C.G. Post, O.S. Mc Farland, and Edmund Fitzgerald. All now preserved for future generations.

I really a novice while using this camera. I purchased the Nikon D5500 Dummies book to help learn the pros and cons of this camera.
Sense then I purchased the Nikon 55-200mm DX AF-S ED Lens for getting up-close and personnel. All my photos were taking with auto setting "what you get is what you see" Like I say I'm a novice, so I'm just trying to capture that place in time. Any pointers will be very appreciated with this Nikon D5500 camera. I'm 77 years old and still willing to learn.

Thank You for viewing my work, and I look forward to the interaction with members.

I want to start a new hobby taking pictures - mostly of my grandchildren and family.
Best Buy has three cameras on sale:
1) Canon EOS Rebel TS 2 Lens Kit
Includes camera with 18-55mm lens, 75-300mm lens with the camera plus camera bag PRICE $749.99
2) Nikon D5500 with 18-55mm VR11 lens
24-2MP; 5.0 fps; built in Wi-Fi. PRICE 849.99
3) Mirrorless Sony e6000 2 Lens kit
24.3MP; 11 fps; Built in Wi-Fi. Includes camera with 16-50 mm lens and 55-210 mm lens
I really can't afford anything that costs more than $1000 and I know absolutely nothing about buying a camera.

I would really appreciate your advice!

My experience with them in Nikons (D7000) back in 2012 was frustratingly spotty. It seems that the Nikon titanium bodies are almost like three-sided Faraday boxes... They don't do well at allowing RF to escape!

If you hold them at just the right angle, with just the right side of the camera facing your WiFi receiver's antenna, then hop on one foot and wait ten minutes, you might get a few JPEG images. I never waited for raw.

If you want WiFi in a camera, get one that has BUILT-IN WiFi. It means there's a well-engineered antenna in there, and the signal can get out!

The Panasonic LUMIX GH4 is a great example of a camera with practical, built-in WiFi. It even has an app for iOS and Android devices that lets you control the camera remotely, download JPEGs, and monitor video. There's no raw transfer, but at least it works reasonably well.

I appreciated your honesty here though you seem not to be full throated about how you feel. What I am about to say here is to give you back your feeling of self-worth and dignity.. I feel your pain.

It is common knowledge that most wedding professional photographers and professional sports photographers use JPEG.....So a good many people who get paid for their images USE JPEG...Their workflow demands it and in the wedding photo industry, their clients DEMAND nearly instant results by the time of the reception and you can't do that with RAW...

The imaging engineers at NIKON, SONY, and CANON have spent years on their sensors and processors in perfecting how they do JPEG images. So somebody has been working on how these are rendered....and Sony has their sensors in a lot of other brands but those brands don't want you to know it..

In addition, there is no such thing as pure RAW as Ken Rockwell has pointed out over the years much to the horror of RAW purists....Rockwell mocks their entire RAW THEORY in fact though I would not go that far.

RAW is just another way of doing what we do but most of us can't really see the difference and most of us don't have the time to do it. In fact the RAW image is affected by a lot of factors according to what camera you are using....the image is not RAW just as a negative/slide was affected by the soup it was processed in.

For me when I am tweaking what is normally a flat looking raw image, the standard I use to start off with is the JPEG shot I took at the same time I took the RAW image... So in essence I am trying like heck to make the RAW image first off to at least look as good as the JPEG!! That is not progress in my opinion but a manual way of affecting the image that the engineers at the best camera manufacturing companies have spent years and millions of dollars trying to perfect for our ease of use.......

The irony of this whole discussion of RAW vs JPEG ends up with the person doing RAW at the ending up at the end of all their efforts by converting their carefully tweaked RAW image to JPEG in order to use/send it in a practical manner.

So the RAW people even if they refuse to admit it, end up in JPEG anyway.

Good lord....

It it is in the same ballpark discussion of a pro friend of mine when discussing how to get better images from my Nikon F2S film cameras (that I use to this day) and he said "Buy a medium format camera". So I bought a couple of Mamiya RB67's and a Mamiya C330 TLR. Problem solved.

So I think that you need not feel behind the power curve in any of this though some of the purists here suggest you are somehow a lesser form of human for using JPEG...though as I previously mentioned wedding and sports photographers to name of few RELY on JPEG for bread on their table .....and again not to ignore the engineering investment of the major camera manufacturers have put into developing the JPEG format to what it is today...

Though I have a boatload of expensive Nikon pro digital cameras, I find myself using my Sony SLT cameras and my Sony A6000 to death rather than my NIKONS..and why? Because I can see REAL time exactly the image I will take !!! I can correct exposure and temperature ..I can see exactly the effect of my filters ..ND...gradual, Polaroid etc right there instead of taking the photo and then reviewing it... These Sony cameras are phenomenal....I don't have to spend a ton of time doing raw processing labor because I can get it right the first time..and getting the exposure and temperature right in the first place(and this is what we are REALLY talking about isn't it when talking about RAW!!!).

In fact to justify all this RAW methodology, the RAW people usually use eyelashes taken from 100 feet away in a blowup to prove their point.

That's fine..I get it....But then I think it is a lot of nonsense on some level.

I give the RAW folks credit for all the skill it takes in PhotoShop to make those raw adjustments... But by me using my Sony SLT cameras, I have just eliminated 90% of my exposure problems by seeing right there what the image is going to look like...Is that being lazy or non-technical or just being efficient and using common sense tools that are now available to use ..and in that regard I also mean using JPEG.

In fact the JPEG fine setting produces some pretty big files but RAW? Holy good grief...those files are massive..they fill up cards, slow down the taking of photos, glob up hard drives, and create problems trying to work with them unless you are running the best and fastest computers money can buy....and for what?...for creating an image that most people cannot tell the difference between a modern, JPEG fine in camera processed image and a so called RAW image that MUST be tweaked right off the card since a non processed RAW is NOTHING!!....THAT'S WHY THE ENGINEERS AT NIKON.....OH WHY BOTHER with that drill again. The ego bruising is just too much for the RAW purists to swallow...

So like Rockwell says here, if you want a true RAW image, then shoot film....Otherwise let's stop this nonsense of RAW vs JPEG. I really get tired of hearing it and I don't like the arrogance exhibited by the RAW practitioner who mocks JPEG users as if they have NO idea what they are doing.. The fact is they and we DO have an idea of what we are doing and we simply don't have the time nor the inclination do go ALL RAW.

Photography is to be out shooting rather than being in front of a computer trying to tweak a RAW photo that really isn't a pure RAW photo in the first place .....and in the process of their TWEAK by definition, they are adding tweaks in that Sony, Nikon,and Canon engineers have worked YEARS on perfecting FOR OUR BENEFIT and the final result is called JPEG.

So yeah..shoot all you want in RAW but when you are finished don't dare call it RAW any longer cuz it ain't. And then don't go and ruin your self-acclaimed purity of intent by then converting your RAW into a JPEG format so that you can send it on line...and do other useful things with it.

I have included a recent Reuters demand story link that discusses raw to JPEG conversions that Reuters won't accept any longer....They want submissions in original "in camera" JPEG format.....Imagine that??!!!

And below of course is a link to Ken Rockwell's rant on RAW format that is akin to Martin Luther pounding his 95 thesis on the front doors of All Saints Church in Wittenberg.

Now I can hear the RAW Panzer divisions rolling towards the JPEG Polish border so I had better dive into the nearest ditch and watch the show.

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/1135269351/reuters-will-no-longer-accept-edited-raw-files-from-freelance-photographers?ref_=pe_1822230_156800330_dpr_nl_174_18

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/real-raw.htm