Not sure if most people are aware but Corel owns Pinnacle Studio. They bought it from Avid in 2012. If you do search you can easily find press releases and other posts that mention this and if you go to the Pinnacle web site and go to contact -- you'll see that all the contact addresses are for Corel.

Pinnacle Studio is basically Corel Video Studio's slightly older sister. In fact, both products have benefited by this acquisition and over the last several years Video Studio and Pinnacle Studio have really improved in the usability and reliability areas -- there is collaboration between the two development teams. You can't go wrong with either package. In the media, the more high end and expensive packages that are in the "professional" space get a lot more attention, but programs like Corel Video Studio, Pinnacle Studio, and Cyberlink Power Director -- are the workhorse video editing programmers in the "consumer" market for PCs -- tons of YouTubers use these three packages. You really can't go wrong with any of these three -- they are all great video editors -- simple to use -- that give you a lot for your money.

I learned video editing on Corel Video Studio -- still use it -- have taught a lot of people how to use it and highly recommend it for beginners. I have been moving to a higher end package called Davinci Resolve -- which is amazing (and IMO I think blows Adobe Premiere Pro and Apple's Final Cut Pro X out of the water!!) -- but like Premiere Pro, Davinci Resolve has a higher learning curve than programs like Corel Video Studio. So if you're starting out in video editing I highly recommend Corel Video Studio, Pinnacle Studio, or Cyberlink Power Director.

Some tips: Make sure you use the 64 bit version of Corel Video Studio (the package comes with both the 64-bit and 32-bit versions -- don't load the 32-bit version) -- and make sure you have a decent system. Lots of problems people have is just because they don't have a decent system. :-)

Oh -- the way you can identify the Sony's easily -- it is white -- however it has a large Orange ring on the outside of the lens hood.

And one review I read said it was Sony (Minolta) white versus Canon white -- but doubt anyone can tell the difference. ;-)

btw: If you looked at any comparisons against the Nikon and Canon 400mm equivalents, the Sony 400mm is about a Kilogram lighter than the other two.

Yes -- you heard that correctly ~1Kg lighter.

Good video. Several quotes from the video from Bob Martin and Nick Didlick. They are just their opinions, however they are both world renown sports photographers.

Bob Martin : "The combination of the a9 and the 400mm is the best I can get. It's the best I can buy."
Bob Martin : "This is the best 400mm 2.8 I've ever used. For me now I've got my standard lens."
Bob Martin : "The optical performance with the 2x tele-converter is quite phenomenal"
Nick Didlick : "The autofocus was really impressive"

Nick made a lot of other statements about the high quality of the photos. They both had nothing negative to day about the lens.

Last year Sony completed the Holy Trinity of lenses in their G-Master FE lens lineup.

And now Sony finally came with a strong answer for Indoor Sports Photography and short range Outdoor Sports, and a good response for long range Outdoor sports. So for indoor professional sports photography -- the "glass" reason no longer exists.

Now the only missing lenses are 500mm and 600mm for longer range Outdoor sports photography and wildlife. And then there will absolutely nothing for the nay sayers to talk about.

The 500mm should arrive sometime in 2020, and note you can use 1.5x and 2x tele-converter with the 400m -- to get 600mm and 800mm, although you do lose the normal lisht stops by using tele-converters.

In any event -- this lens is an interesting read -- highly superior in the fast auto-focus department than the Nikon and Canon equivalents. Well done Sony!!

I recommend FastStone or Google Photos for Free.

If you want to pay around $50 for a perpetual license Serif Affinity is a great choice. I have several friends that use it and they love it.

If you are ok paying around $60 for a perpetual license Corel PaintShop Pro is excellent. It is what I use.

And if you are ok paying $70-$80 for a perpetual license I highly recommend Adobe PhotoShop Elements.

All excellent choices. Do some research -- read some reviews and pick the program the best fits your needs.

Very nice. Great job with the eyes!

Just MHO -- I would blur out the background in Post processing, the background is a bit distracting, takes a bit away from the nice subject.

A really nice frame can be had for $40 to $50 and another $15 for the matting (single mat). So you really should just let your co-workers frame it themselves.

Me personally I'd just sell them the print for somewhere around $30 or $40.

Also note really nice professional prints (no frame and matting) can be had for $20 to $30 off the Internet. I just bought two really nice prints last year for $20 each. So max of $30 to $40 sounds about right.

The Sony A7III. Can't speak for you -- since your opinion is your own, but the A7III is an amazing camera, especially for the price. It will make many believers.

The correct comparison to make if you want to make against Canon is the G7XM2. You have to take size into account, as you can easily find cameras that are bigger than the RX100M6 and are much better deals. With the RX100 series you are paying for the very small size.

Probably the closest competitor to the RX100M6 is the Panasonic Lumix ZS200 which sells for around $800. You are arguably getting a better camera with the Sony RX100M6, so the question is -- is the extra $400 worth it?, for basically superior autofocus, more fps: 24fps versus 10fps, arguably better video capabilities, and a smaller size and weight than the ZS200. The Sony is 102mmX58mmX43mm versus the Lumix ZS200 which is 111mmX66mmX45mmm and the Lumix is about 40g heavier than the Sony.

The big market segment that Sony is going after is the "Travel Zoom" market where people want a really small Camera. This is the market that Panasonic has been leading the charge in. To a lesser extent Sony is going after the Vlogger market segment with this camera (for Vloggers that want a really small pocket-able camera), but in my mind Vlogger can be better served with cameras that are larger and have larger sensors. Like APS-C and micro 4/3 sensors. Why Sony still left out the external microphone port on the RX100M6 is a bit puzzling -- although again their number 1 focus with this camera is the "Travel Zoom" market for compact cameras.

Almost all manufacturer's do this. They put something by their listing -- an asterisk, or a small statement like (full frame equivalent) or (35mm equivalent), etc.... I just checked and Canon and Panasonic both do this, and if I checked I'd find that pretty much everyone does this. So is Sony any different?

Again -- "Best" is hard claim to make. What is "Best"? -- Best is a subjective term. Claiming anything is best is difficult, because everyone's needs and wants are different. What is "best" to one is not "best" to another.

Yes -- We get it -- PS is the "best" for you, and you have the right to make this claim and express your opinion -- but I repeat -- Photoshop is not the "best" to me, and probably many, many, many others on this site.

Again -- you may want to re look at my examples. The fact, that a business is dominant in a market -- i.e. a market share leader does not mean it has product superiority.

Your logic is taking a very shaky jump.

Again there are many reasons for market share leadership: Leadership, operational offices, superior marketing, distribution channels, superior finances, etc...

I gave three examples of market share leaders where the product is arguably not superior to companies that had smaller market share. McDonald (burgers), HP (personal computers and laptops), and Anheuser-Busch InBev (beer). I can easily come up with many more.

So if your assertion is correct -- i.e. that if a company is dominant in a market (like PP software in Newspaper companies) then does that means McDonald's has the best fast food?, HP makes the best laptops?, and Anheuser-Busch InBev makes the best beer?. I'm sure the person with the Dell or the Apple Macbook would disagree with you, or the person that prefers Lagunitas over the Anheuser-Busch InBev family of beers would disagree with you. Although maybe the guy that likes HP laptops might agree with you. :-)

Again -- "best" and "superior" are subjective terms.

Yes -- based on what you have said I would agree that Adobe PS/LR is "best" for you.

However for me and probably about 50% of the UHHers -- it is definitely not. For some it is PS/LR, for some PSE, for some Luminar, others Capture 1, others Affinity, and others Paint Shop Pro, others Google Photos, others Picassa, others FastStone, etc...

And I'll make a very interesting comment -- it's actually a good thing for people that like/use PS/LR, that there is a lot of competition and a lot of great choices and options. If there wasn't Adobe would be a lot more expensive than $120 a year subscription. Competition keeps Adobe from raising it's prices.

You do realize that you just contradicted yourself.