The F stop was set to low, probably around f/4 to f/5.6 so the depth of field is to shallow.

It looks like the f stop is set to f/4 or lower so the depth of field of the back ground and background subjects are going to be fuzzier.

I use a program called Luminar AI and it seems to cover most editing needs and is very easy to use. It doesn't over whelm you with a lot of tools that you don't need or use and you own it, no rents.

If you want a decently priced wide angle, the canon 17-40L is a good range on the m7dmk2. And the price is very reasonable. The 24-105L is the best walking around all purpose lens, in my opinion. It is glued to my 5dmk3 and I use it 90% of the time.

Definitely return it. It may be a rental product that they are wanting to get out of their inventory.

I have been using one for over a year now and really like it for several reasons. One is color accuracy. When you are in live view, you can press the white balance button and are able to adjust and tweak the color using the Kelvin scale. I generally set Custom White balance first. Another thing is the abundance of focus modes, of which I probably only use 2. High ISO ranges are nice for star photos at night along with the high ISO noise reduction. It was great for the Perseide meteor shower. Not to belabor the point, it is a very good camera and is pretty rugged too. I can't really compare it to other brands because I have shot Canon since the days of the old Rebel 300. This is my first foray into the upper crust of Canon products and I am glad that I finally made the leap.

Wise decision in my opinion. It is a great lens and doesn't weigh a ton like the f2.8 lenses. With the low noise high ISO availability I think the F/4 settings are sufficient for most shots. If not a tripod and a remote switch and slower lens speeds will cover any photo situations and you will save thousands of dollars. Also renting a lens for special occasions is a lot cheaper than buying a 24-70mm f/2.28 II.

If you are using Lightroom, you may need to check for the newest camera raw update from Adobe Downloads. If you are using Aperture then got to the Apple Support site for Aperture or the App store and download there latest Raw extension. As the other respondents noted iPhoto should handle just about any Raw file.

The difference is in the details when you crop an image and when you resell the lens. The canon holds its value somewhat better than the sigma in my experience, especially with L lenses. Lenses are the real investment in camera gear, and L lenses are an investment that do not loose their value over time as much as third party lenses. Yes, they are over-priced in my opinion, but they perform very well and retain their value. I know the extra money seems like a rip and it may be, but you get pretty much what you pay for when it comes to lenses, again, in my opinion. I do think the 2.8 IS weighs a ton and the f/4 IS is a better bargain and performs very well. With the low noise higher ISO settings, it is worth a try and is a lot lighter.

I have a 70-200mm f/4L that I replaced with the IS version of the same lens. I would be willing to sell it for 500.00 plus shipping if you have an interest. The lens is in excellent condition and hasn't been used since I upgraded to the IS version about 6 months ago, and only used for four months before that. My e-mail is jwpulliam9256@gmail.com. Since you're using a 60D this lens will be like shooting a 112-320mm, and will not give you the wide angle shots for landscape. It will isolate and give you excellent presentation for specific areas of a landscape. If I were you I would buy the 24-105L IS. It is a tremendously versatile lens and I use it 80% of the time on my mk3. Also, the 28-135 is about as close to an L lens as you can get, and only on a large crop of a picture can you see any difference. They are all very good lenses, but the 24-105L on a cropped sensor gives you the best range for a walking around lens and the best glass. It would be essentially a 38-216 lens and that is a nice range. Sorry about the length, but I've learned by spending and it is not the best way.

You can rent either lens you want to try from a very reasonable rental concern called LensGiant. I usually rent the lens I am interested in before purchasing and it has prevented me from making some purchasing errors, particularly with the f/2.8 series of L telephoto zooms. They are really weighty items. The f/4s are excellent and avoid hernias.

I have the 28-135 is also, and it is a great lens, but if you do any cropping, it doesn't have the clarity of the L lens.

I have both of the 70-200mm L lenses and would definitely spring for the image stabilized version. The non stabilized version is excellent, but needs a tripod from for the longer focal lengths. The image stabilized version so good that it can be used as a walking around lens. I would be happy to sell you the non stabilized version.

Really cool shot. Great detail and interesting cloud formation.

I have had both Sigma and Tamron lenses and both brands seem to have good performance. If you are planning to or have a full frame unit, then I would invest in the canon L lenses. They have some nice features that make them worth the investment. The three that I invested in are the 24-105 IS, 17-40 and 70-200 IS. All are f/4 and aren't to heavy like the f/2.8 units. Also, they are not quite in the second mortgage on the house cost category. I did move from a 40D to a 5d for a ful frame unit and am glad I had the L lenses when I made the switch.