Quote Originally Posted by HDNitehawk View Post
There is no substitute for getting it right in the camera to start with, there are only repairs you can do to the pictures later. I can't see how it would be a good substitute if you have to individual touch each of your photo's to get the DOF and Bokeh you want, when with a turn of a dial on your camera you can set it instantly.

If you couldn't afford a fast lens I see how a person might use this, but it still costs you. You will end up spending your time with additional processing to save the cost of the faster lens.

+1 for Sean's points. If it were just about DOF I wouldn't own the 70-200mm F/2.8L II, I would just go for the F/4 version and carry a lighter lens. It is the Wide open F/2.8 and it's ability to perform in lower light that makes me choose the F/2.8 version.
As for the first point, it's called creativity, and gives one an option that might not have existed in the situation at the time.

As for the second point, each successive program improvement makes processing easier. Besides, we all spend time tweaking images, whether globally in LR, or with actions, in PS.

Sean's point is well taken, but as time goes on, this may not be as an important factor, in light of costs (which will increase with future releases of lenses). We are so used to expecting bokeh and depth of field, and we are willing to pay for it, but if the same can be achieved with manipulation of the data (which, after all, is what we all do with every image we take, and don't take perfect pictures every time), then why not?

Maybe we'll feel upset when we realize that the $12,000 f/2.8 wasn't necessary after all, since a simple Photoshop action can give the same result?