For them not interested in reading, you can see the photos in THIS<<link SmugMug Gallery.  

For a SmugMug slideshow, click HERE<<link. When you click the link, it will open in a new window, and you have two options:
1) Manually scroll through the photos by clicking the “<” and “>” symbols to the left or right of the photos.
2) There’s a PLAY/PAUSE button at the top-left of the screen with the transition set at about 5 seconds. Note: clicking the PLAY arrow activates the option for a full-screen slideshow. You can then still use the”<” and “>” symbols to the left or right of the photos (this will pause the slideshow).

If you want the full experience, keep reading.

As mentioned in the title, these are all Nikon D7500 photos. This is a companion post to the similar post showcasing the Note 20 Ultra photos (LINK) of the same subjects. All of these are added to the same SmugMug gallery so anyone interesting in comparing shots should go there. 

Although, the shots are probably not comparable because they are shot at different zooms.

For them not interested in reading, you can see the photos in THIS<<link SmugMug Gallery.  

For a SmugMug slideshow, click HERE<<link. When you click the link, it will open in a new window, and you have two options:
1) Manually scroll through the photos by clicking the “<” and “>” symbols to the left or right of the photos.
2) There’s a PLAY/PAUSE button at the top-left of the screen with the transition set at about 5 seconds. Note: clicking the PLAY arrow activates the option for a full-screen slideshow. You can then still use the”<” and “>” symbols to the left or right of the photos (this will pause the slideshow).

If you want the full experience, keep reading.

As mentioned in the title, these are all Note 20 Ultra photographs. Some are shot at the regular 4,000 x 3,000 pixels size, and some are shot at the 108MP resolution which produces 12,000 x 9,000 pixels photos. The 108MP photos — depending on the amount of detail — can be larger than 75MB (the camera outputs JPG which are compressed even though I choose minimal compression).

Really, by the time I process them and output them for the blog, you can’t really tell which version is which unless doing a direct comparison and know what to look for.

Nota Bene: if you are reading this on the Reader, and if you are using a Dark Theme or Dark Mode, AND if you are on an Android device . . . well, then, you’re likely not able to read this post (or many of my previous posts). Let me repeat this using a white font color in case that will show up: if you are reading this on the Reader, and if you are using a Dark Theme or Dark Mode, AND if you are on an Android device . . . well, then, you likely won’t be able to read this post (or many of my previous posts).

So, landscapes. I like landscape photography, but I’m rarely happy with my results. I can almost hear a few people start to argue . . .

“Oh, Great Disperser. Thou should not sell yourself short for all you do is pretty good!”

Morning Frost,

Well, yeah, but it turns out “pretty good” is a far cry from “good” and lightyears behind “great“.

Don’t believe me? Take a look at these samples (LINK). Now, for comparison, look at a few of my landscapes (LINK). That’s the difference between ‘pretty good’ and ‘great’.

There is no shortage of sites sharing all manner of rules for snapping great landscape photos (LINK) . . . and I know them rules; so well that I know which to violate.