Ive used outdoor fill flash for years by just reducing its power by a stop and leaving the flash aimed at the object Im shooting. I understand the comment about losing two stops with the attached
diffuser, but what if you left the diffuser on (outdoors), as well as leaving the flash on full power, and pointed the flash directly at the subject? If its TTL won't it compensate for the loss of light?

The FU animated gif is unappropriate for this site. If you want to act like a child, do it someplace else. I dont know how you get blocked from this site, but someone in charge should do so. Im no prude by any means, but with your level of intelligence, you probably have bumper stickers on your vehicle with offensive words of language, that little children in the car behind you really shouldnt be forced to read.

I had a specific photo in mind while at the beach. It was sunny, early afternoon, and I wanted more of a sunset photo. Not wanting to wait around several hours. I switched over to manual, intentionally underexposed several stops and got the photo shown below. The regular metering in the camera, whether aperture priority, shutter priorty, or programmed point and shoot, all wouldve given me a bright sunny afternoon with boats sitting in the water.

Your original shot is great. Changing horizontals to verticals, and also cropping in some cases, can give a whole different perspective on the same photo. Also warming up the lights to me makes the car lights fit better with the warmth of the sky.

Although Harvey suggested cloning out the cars headlights, I would go the other way, select them in photoshop and put a little yellow into them warming them up and drawing attention to the curve of the road. No cropping. The contrast makes the sky jump out.

Nice detail in the shadows, highlights not blown out, background does not distract from photo. I think its a great photo. I know what a dogs back legs look like, seeing his face clearly as youve done shows his character. Nice job.

If its for sentimental value, then the color #3, as it represents the feeling or sentiment of the day better. If its for photographic value, my favorite would be the B&W #2.

I was a professional wedding photographer, owning and running my own wedding business for 25 years. Having really good equipment, and also having backup equipment ( I always had three complete setup cameras with me at every wedding) was important. I cannot comment on the 7D, Ive always shot with Nikon. Canon makes a great product too, so based on other comments it sounds like a great purchase. Question is, how unhappy are you with your images now? When I left the business, I sold most of my stuff, bought a Nikon D90 body to go with the 18-200 lens and Nikons SB800 flash, off camera flash cord and swivel bracket. I love my photos, I think theyre great, friends think so too. So I personally am in no hurry to run out and spend a chunk more money simply because the latest model has more cupholders. I had a Canon SD550, that most people would refer to as a point and shoot , and it was great. I had taken a razor sharp picture, from a moving boat of a lighthouse. It was only 6 megapixels. The only reason I gave it away, was to my daughter for a trip she was taking. Her camera was very inexpensiive and the image quality poor. I had always wanted a "point and shoot" sized camera with DSLR features, especially manual. Knowing how to use manual, aperture priority, shutter priority, bracketing etc, I knew I would use those features, so for me it made sense to upgrade. I purchased a Nikon P-300. Im going to call it a pocket camera and not a point and shoot because of all the features it has, and that I use, and yes it does have a little green icon for point and shoot. The first shot I took with this 12 megapixel camera blew me away. I made an 11x14. Still blew me away. Sharp or sharper than many shots I had done with my DSLRs. I wanted a very large print to put up in my house on a large completely bare wall and decided to print it into a 24X30! Being very critical, I wasnt expecting much. But to my surprise, it is still as sharp and impressive as the 11x14. So Id say rent the 7D. If you think it warrants a purchase based on your needs, or desires, then you should buy it. If youre just buying into the latest and greatest and newest syndrome that is so easy to fall into, I think you should keep your current equipment, knowing that you are going to love your next image just as much as your last. Good luck. Andy

As with many shots in photography, patience, patience, patience will get you the photo you want. This young lady built a nest right outside my den window in a well protected bush.

Photocat. I agree with the print against the glass possibly sticking, but I only found that to be true if I printed the photo myself. If I had it printed commercially and there was no "drying time" involved for the print, Ive never had one stick to the glass. Yet.
Andy

As I am reading the replies to framing and matting (sounds like a vaudeville team) I agree with all the replies about pilot holes and not drilling too deep and using a needle nose to turn the screw eyes. But I am surprised that nobody has suggested something that Ive done for a long time. I found that many times the precut opening in the mats did not fit the photo I wanted to use. It covered up maybe something important on the edge, or my photo was just better in a non standard composition. And sometimes I actually wanted a different colored mat with less or more texture. So I found you can do the mat in photoshop. I have a couple examples below. Basically its a copy and paste. Decide on the size of the mat about to be framed, and click NEW in photoshop in File. Now of course before I go any further, these specific instructions will change from one program to another, or even an upgraded version of a program, but Im sure that all these options are available in any of them. Im only using an old $100 Elements 4!
So when you click on new, you are making your mat. Make the size, select any color you want from the palatte part, and now you can lighten it , darken it, or put a slght (or heavy) canvas finish on it. Of course it only looks likes canvas, and is actually flat on the paper when printed. Now you go to your photo, and you have to resize it down smaller so that it fits "inside" the mat even though the mat and photo are perfectly flat. This is why I like it so much, you make whatever size you want, in effect leaving more or less mat around the photo. While your smaller resized photo is up on the screen you now go to something called stroke. This lets you put any color line, in any thickness around your photo. Say you make it 1/4 inch wide all the way around. Now you can lighten it slightly, and it looks like the beveled edge on a mat next to the photo. When you print the photo, it looks just like a matted photo. But its flat, and you can just slide it into a frame. This all sounds complicated, but it honestly takes about 10 minutes after youve done it a few times, maybe more depending on how much you want to experiment with it. When youre stroke is finished, you can copy and paste, or just drag it with the photo over to the mat which youve left open and voila, a finished matted photo, exactly the way you want it.
You can also do multiple smaller photos, using the same techinique and drag several photos onto the same "mat". For beginners new to photography, Michaels, and the extra money sounds like a better idea. But for those of us who have used photoshop programs over the years,and find it fun seeing how the end result turns out, you not only created the image, but created its mounting as well. Remember that you can also adjust the canvas look to be heavy or light. Or just put just a nice sharp line around the image, in any color or thickness you want. One of the shots below has a heavier canvas finish, but looks less once printed and behind a glass and up on the wall. The photo of the Vietnam Memorial has a much more subtle finish on the "mat" and just a black stroke around it. Have fun.
Andy

Its a beautiful shot. Like to be there is a beachchair enjoying that view. One thing I read a long time ago, is that you should lead a moving subject in the direction it is going. Is this a better composition? Some say no it's up to the individual.
Andy

Bird flying into space on left

As Indianna Jones said, "I hate snakes"

Trying out the autofocus on my D90 this past summer.
18-200 Nikon lens.

Also have the same one bruce. Built like a tank, and the shutter is still as smooth as can be on a long exposure.