True but they are also very expensive so if you are on a tight budget and the diy gets you what you need it's sometimes the best option.

Isn't that the same as just saying he charged 5 times his cost (or 500%)?

None of your statement makes sense. Photographers who think chimping is a bad habit aren't saying don't review your images or use the information that tools such as the histogram can provide. That isn't what chimping is. It's very simple; chimping is when you take a picture, immediately take the camera away from your eye to look at it on the back of your camera, take another picture, take it away from your eye to check it on the back of your camera again, every (or nearly every) time you take a picture. Taking a shot at the beginning of a series to check your histogram and make sure you didn't accidentally set something wrong, and then occasionally checking to make sure everything is still going well or to review some shots with a model or client isn't chimping.

Although you could chimp your tethered shots, tethering itself isn't the same thing as chimping. Tethering is done to be able to speed up the review process but you still don't normally check each photo after every single shot when shooting tethered unless an assistant is monitoring the shots as you take them.

It's situational, you don't really have any negatives from chimping in your situation. However you could also just review your shots on a laptop before leaving your location. This would be even better as you could verify their quality much easier on the larger laptop screen. Reviewing images is completely different than chimping.

Yeah, it's a huge advantage of mirrorless. I have mirrored and mirrorless systems and it's one of the reasons I prefer my mirrorless system.

I've had no problems printing 16x20s and that's off an Olympus em-5. It's largely going to depend on the quality of the specific file or image rather than the camera. If you were forced to shoot at a very high iso in poor lighting conditions then it probably won't print large very well but otherwise it isn't a problem. If you are someone that can't stand any noise at all then even a "full frame" sensor probably wouldn't cut it. I actually like the noise pattern in Olympus cameras. Keep in mind that the larger the print the further away the viewer will be standing. An 8x10 can actually show more noise than a 16x20 since the 8x10 would be viewed inches away whereas larger prints will be viewed from a few feet away.

It all depends on what you are shooting and how much time you have to capture your subject. Keep in mind chimping is usually considered checking every single (or nearly) shot right after you take it, not an occasional check. It's not a problem to chimp if your subject is static and unchanging but there are instances where it can really hurt you.

If you are photographing a person it really breaks up the connection you have with them and you risk missing great poses or expressions while chimping. It takes you out of the scene, not concentrating on your subject. Whenever you are chimping, that might be the time the best shot had occurred and you would have missed it. It can even be a problem for landscapes. If you have a scene with rapidly changing light you might miss the best shot while chimping. Certainly for wildlife it would be a problem, or sports, or really anything with action.

Again, this doesn't mean checking your images when there is a pause or break. That's totally fine and useful. Also, checking your histogram occasionally is very helpful. If you are dependent on chimping to know if you are getting your exposure correct for every shot though you probably need to work on your camera and photography skills because you probably aren't very good with exposure, reading your scenes light levels, metering, and understanding the dynamic range of your camera.

I'm another m43 user (among other systems). Although I have other equipment if I need something I can't get out of my m43 it's my favorite system to use on a regular basis.

It looks like a video rig, not for still photography.

There can be a few things that might have conspired to not give you the sharpness you were looking for. Diffraction was mentioned which at your f-stop would have been a factor. The shutter speed also in conjunction with your tripod. You don't mention what your tripod in detail but if it is a lightweight or low-quality tripod it may have vibrated during the shoot, this is more likely to happen if you had extended your tripod high, especially if you extended the center column. Another factor is your lens. Although your D810 is capable of astounding images the Tamron you're shooting with might not have the sharpness you are looking for. I don't have that lens but after looking at a few reviews it seems its edge and corner sharpness isn't great and is noticeably less than it's center sharpness. You also don't mention your file type. Did you shoot in jpeg or raw? If in jpeg you could try bumping your sharpness in camera but I'd recommend shooting in raw. If you shot in raw your raw processor will make a difference in sharpness, contrast, and other settings. If you processed the image in Lightroom, for example, you could try higher sharpness settings. Overall though I feel like it was either your lens, tripod, or a combination of the two as even the rocks in the foreground look soft to me. You might also need to perform an AF Fine Tune on your lens.

I'm guesing the biggest reason they added the 30mm is that out is cheaper and would therefore appeal to a bigger audience.

Beautiful work at your website Jim. It doesn't look like you do the types of photography that would be greatly impacted by chimping. It's going to be more of an issue in sports or event photography. Portrait photography too as it breaks up the rhythm of interacting with the subject.

They are for most people but there is post for Polaroids. My point is that all methods can have their advantages and disadvantages and to say (not that you did) something like "professionals should only shoot in RAW" or a similar attitude is missing the bigger picture. Check out number 4 on the list for an example of a photographer that did "post work" on Polaroids or just Google "polaroid manipulation" for a ton of examples.

The thing with RAW is a lot of photographers may hear they need to shoot in RAW but they really aren't at the skill level necessary to be able do so just as not all photographers who shot film developed and printed their own film. There are different skills involved in the capturing of the image versus the manipulation of that data on a computer.