Many folks here say or imply that getting the "correct" exposure is a must if you want to get good images. Many will add that you have to shoot in "manual" to get control of the camera and get that "correct" exposure. I'm wondering what message this sends to newcomers.

Yes, you should try to get the exposure as close to "perfect" in the camera.

Yes, there are difficult lighting situations that can cause the camera's light meter to give you readings that may be wrong for what you want. But, let's face it, changing exposure is just a matter of letting in more or less light and/or changing the ISO. The light meters in modern cameras are pretty darn good. And if the lighting is squirrelly, you can make the proper up or down adjustments using exposure compensation if you're in one of the auto modes. And you have a fair amount of control in post-processing, particularly if you're shooting RAW.

I don't mean to resuscitate the Manual vs. semi-auto modes debate. I'm just wondering if there is too much of a mystique being attached to getting the "proper" exposure. So how important is it to "nail" the exposure settings? Aren't there more important, or at least equally important considerations such as focus, depth of field, etc.?

I had the opportunity to spend 5 days photographing Bald Eagles in Homer Alaska during the first week of March. What a treat. Living most of my life in the Southwestern part of the country, I never had the opportunity to spend much time with these amazing birds. Hope you enjoy. Constructive criticism is alway welcome.

All but one of these images were taken with a Sony a9 and for the most part the Sony 100/400 GM. Pretty amazing equipment IMO and just got better with the new version 5 firmware.

Going through some 2016 photos from the Krochel Wildlife Center in Misquito Lake AK, I found these images of a red fox. This rescue habitat has animals some of which were raised from very young to injured adults which cannot be returned to the wild. This fox was in an enclosure and we were inside with the animal and Steve Krochel. The biggest issue in photographing the fox was his high energy level and speed. He would run between our legs and only stopped to catch his breath, twice. All images were shot with a Canon 5D3, 70-200 f 2.8 ISO 1000 with 1/500 shutter speed.

In our community of Pacific Beach in San Diego, CA the main business street is Garnet Ave. The first photo (credit: Google Maps) shows a mural painted on the side of a building just south of Garnet on Cass St. depicting a photo taken in the mid to late 1940s shot from the intersection of Garnet and Cass looking west to Crystal Pier that extends out over the ocean. The second photo I took of Ms. chase and our dog, Fern, standing in front of that mural just for fun and a little time travel and converted to B&W. chase

I've come a long way since my first post about 6 weeks ago. Thanks to all the good suggestions, these are todays shots. The first is with my D 850 and 420mm, the second, my first attempt at digiscoping with a Swarovski ATX 95mm scope and a D 750. One thing I have learned, the moon is rarely clearly seen. I have had at most 5 or 6 nights of clear skies in 6 weeks. Also, very difficult to try to shoot the moon directly overhead. Also, it moves quite fast.

Thinking my next effort will be digiscoping with the D 850.