>>3444997>I can't tweak the exposure compBruh just turn the big dial next to the screen in aperture priority. Or if you really must shoot manual just take a look at your light meter and adjust your shutter speed to be half a stop below the middle. Look at pic related, I forgot to switch modes and underexposed by 4 stops but it's still fine once I push it in LR. It's a shitty shot that I wasn't going to keep anyway, but if it was good I could have easily saved it in post. You should never be afraid of underexposing on digital.
Also low light performance is kind of a meme. All modern cameras (made after 2010ish) have extremely good ISO performance. You can shoot at ISO 3200 on any modern DSLR and your images will be perfectly usable, while even just 20 years ago ISO 3200 in color was simply unfeasible because of how muddy and grainy color film gets when you push it that far. Even ISO 6400 is fine as long as you don't crop too much. If you can't get a shot at ISO 6400 with an f/2.8 lens then you're doing something wrong. That being said I do think the D800 is overall a better camera than the 5Dm3, but not by much. Good lenses are way more important, and if you want to shoot at 200mm you should get a 70-200 f/2.8. Non stabilised versions are cheaper but VR is a godsend on longer focal lenghts.
And as with edits, the most important thing is to make your edits visible but not noticeable. What I mean by that is that they should be there and they should guide the eyes, but the first thing someone thinks when they look at your photo shouldn't be "this looks edited". From your first image with the cat I can instantly tell how crazy the vignetting is just by looking at the thumbnail. The one you just posted is much better
