Program mode, if I understand it correctly, isn't the same as Auto. Sounds like you're controlling aperture and shutter speed and not ISO ... which is like using a fully manual film camera. I sometimes say "Program" when I mean "Auto" ... (sorry!)

How is that possible? Weren't all SLRs manual years ago?

Anyway all that post-processing in any era may have been mitigated by making more ideal exposures, no?

You are correct: It doesn't matter what camera mode got you to those specific settings -- but what if that wasn't the ideal capture?? Did you want a large depth of field or a shallow one? Did you want moving objects to be razor-sharp or have motion blur? Did lights in the room throw off the reading, rendering your subject too dark? The camera will decide those settings for what it calculates to be the "correct exposure," but it won't answer those questions.

Yup I think of Aperture Priority and Shutter Priority to be near-manual modes because they allow for the creative choice I value in manual mode.

Sometimes. But your camera, as sophisticated as it is these days of the computerized modes, still just averages everything, without taking into account outliers or really any ideal exposure that you might want, based on the light, colors, areas of composition etc that YOU want to emphasize. (The book "Understanding Exposure" goes into this well.) It's a creative choice--the camera isn't creative.

I find this to be an odd comment to say the least. I learned in manual mode (so to speak) with a film camera, so maybe that's why it's never felt like an "ego trip" to me. In any case, I find that manual mode and near-manual mode (like AV) allow me to make decisions that are superior to my camera's. If your camera's full auto mode is getting better exposures than you do in manual, that just means you're not paying attention, maybe because you don't want to (which is fine, of course). In my experience, full auto renders less-than-ideal exposures, mostly because the camera doesn't know what I want out of a picture. As a result, for me, post-processing is MORE necessary with auto exposure. Practice in manual mode and you get plenty fast, especially if you are auto-focusing (although I use often use manual focus too). Adding to the decision-making in photography is an opportunity for more creativity. Otherwise you're limited to just composition as your art. If that's all you want, no biggie. But the extra creativity is enjoyable for me and results in the images I want to take. Ego-shmeego

It's no doubt true that Adobe will continue to have millions of subscribers and will likely be here a long time. That, however, doesn't mean that they will continue to set -- or even measure up to -- the standard required by serious photographers. The beauty of our capitalist system is that, time after time, when bloated success stories begin resting on their laurels, smart upstarts step up to fill the resulting voids. I would never be so complacent as to think "they've been the one and they're big, so they are the one for me."

Thanks -- is ON1 the only other program that does so? Does any know if Capture One works that way? I can't tell from the descriptions of Capture One.

I don't know much about the alternatives but am also thinking about the potential need for a switch. I don't do a heavy amount of processing but I do some and want to work the way I have with the desktop version of Lightroom. My first question is brought up in your quote above -- which programs work in virtual copies like LR? It's one of my favorite things about that program.

haha this seems like a pointless and evergreen comment that is pointless on a forum where people are interested in feedback and discussion. Maybe just keep it to yourself as your daily mantra or something?!

Tough one. Like many (or most) my budget has forced me to really think through what gear I buy (and how, like waiting for sales or buying refurbished or used). But if someone has enough money to buy big right off the bat, as a beginner, they would theoretically also have the money to buy up as their skills improve. If I were rich I'd probably opt for the best (or among the best) consumer or least pro camera, knowing that if my skills grow, I'd go up. Starting off with the most expensive top-notch gear, which is also often the most complex, might actually slow you down ... taking you to a point where the tech has advanced markedly ... or even discouraging you. By starting a bit more lean, you could get yourself to a point where you are ready to pony up real cash for some truly beautiful new gear equipped with the latest advancements.

Sexual assault isn't funny fyi

Just put in my first Bay order. I've been using proDPI for a while but it seemed like their quality went down, though it could have been my images of course. They were acquired by another company in the last year or so, I think.

I'm glad I got my Pentax K1. It has the advantage of taking my vintage K mount lenses and the glorious 77mm prime that I already had. I was told it wasn't necessary because I do mostly portraits and street (it's great for landscapes), but my portraits are better now. Definitely heavier but what a camera! It feels like home.

One of the great things about the Pentax is that old glass is good to go, and it's nice to have so many full frame lenses around!!