I guess I missed the part of my comment where I said anything about night. I don't use filters at night. If you are shooting in inclement weather, it is likely overcast and the color temperature is well into the 7000 - 8000 degree range. The UV filter compensates for this in either film or digital.

Refer to my comment about careful/careless. If by screw mount you are referring to the filter threads, top lens hoods by camera manufacturers do not screw hoods into filter threads.

I guess it depends upon how careful or careless you are. I ALWAYS use a hard lens hood - those specifically designed by Canon for each of their lenses are ideal. I am sure other manufactures have similar products. These hoods not only help with lens flare but protect the front of the lens from inadvertent bumps. My thought is that if Canon wanted to add a $10 piece of flat glass to the front of their lens - the lens designs that probably cost hundreds of thousands of dollars in R&D - they would have done so. It makes me cringe whenever I go some place like zoos and museums and see cameras on the dining tables with fingerprints, baby spit and pizza grease on a glass filter. I will use filters for specific purposes - polarizers and sometimes UV filters. UV filters are my filter of choice if I am shooting in inclement weather where rain, blowing snow or debris such as sand is blowing around. Other than that, the designed front glass is what is closest to the subject. The best protection is be careful. If you are going to be climbing a rock or something, at least put the lens cap on the lens or pack it in your backpack.

I would suggest a lens of the same brand as your camera. Go for the f1.4. You’ll spend a few dollars more but besides being faster than the 1.8 or 2.0, the optics are generally of much better quality – especially if you are shooting with the lens open. You will not regret it. Be sure to have a good lens hood on it as well. Don’t bother with the f1.2s or the f1.0 as these lenses are generally much heavier, more expensive and less sharp. The 1.4s are the cream of the crop flagship lenses of camera companies.

A few years ago, I purchased a camera strap from Mod Straps. It is a leather strap done in the fashion of a sheepskin coat – soft leather on the outside and wool against my neck. No more chafing on the neck and the strap is as secure as you could ask. I carry my Canon 5d II with a 28 – 300 lens and have no concerns of the strap breaking. It also has quick disconnects so when a strap is getting in the way, it is simple to remove and reinstall it without having to undo normal camera strap clips.

When film was first being invented, it was slow - ASA (now ISO) of about 0.6. Light has 256 shades of gray ranging from 0 to 255 non-descriptive monochromatic units. Before light meters, photographers looked for something that was between total black and total white. Without going into the history and development of light meters, the between "pure black and pure white" subject was viewed through smoked (literally) ND type filters and the darkest shade of visible light that could be seen was the correct exposure. As things developed, it was determined that this "proper exposure" was 18% lighter than black on the smoked filters which was actually about 46% lighter than pure black on the scale. This became the standard and as film speed increased, the use of this measurement was in effect and it was the way that film speed numbers were assigned. In the mid-1960's metering became part of a camera and up until then, you either used the chart that came with the film or used a hand held meter. Computerized cameras, both digital and film use an algorithm to calculate this average 18% exposure but can be easily fooled. I still use a hand held incident light meter when shooting extreme wide angle or multi-shaded subjects. Many of these scenes have such a range of brightness that even the most sophisticated TTL system's averaging will be inaccurate. As one writer stated they simply metered off of their hand. A good tip but since your hand is about 36%, be sure to open the lens 1 stop. Although cameras can do the thinking for you, the more you know about what it's doing, the better you will be at correcting the camera to make it do what you want it to do.

Angle finders are invaluable for low level shooting. I've used them for more than 40 years and have a collection of them dating back to the FD days. The Angle Finder C is of exceptional optical and mechanical quality and with the adjustable eyepiece, it allows you to correct for your eyesight deviation in the event you wear glasses. I would caution you on how to use it. Many cameras meter off of the mirror and light entering from either the lens or the eyepiece can impact exposure if you are shooting in anything other than full manual mode. My suggestion is to use the angle finder to compose and focus (manual if you are doing macro) and then use the mirror lockup feature on your camera to insure the exposure is based only on the image.

I suggest that you go to the local camera store and try out some of the different ones. Depending upon what your needs are – how heavy a camera, how tall, etc – select the best one for the amount of money you want to pay. If you don’t find one there and want to order on line, determine the specs for the one you like and compare. In addition to the material, consider the weight if you are carrying it around for any length of time. Consider the collapsed length if you are traveling with it by air. You may like steel, aluminum, carbon fiber or if you’re nostalgic, wood. The choice is yours. I have numerous tripods including Manfrotto, Gitzo, Slik and Leica. For wildlife with large lenses, I prefer a Slik. For monopod, I use a Manfrotto carbon fiber. Buy one without a head and get what you need. I use RRS heads – expensive but I have confidence in their holding power and quick interchangeability.

Any slight change in the color temperature of the light source will fool the AWB. Even with flash, the ambient light will have some impact. You can either measure the color temperature of the light with an expensive meter or you can lock it in on a picture that pleases you or if you are outdoors, use one of the color temp adjusting devices out there and lock the color temp on your camera for that shoot.

I used to build and use PC's since the late 1980's. I've switched Macs since 2001. As they used the old Motorola processors, there was limited independent software available to us. The change over to the Intel processor in 2007 made a big impact and many developers immediately jumped on the bandwagon and improved their software for use with the new Intel/Mac. As time progressed, Mac continued to push Apple-everything making themselves a chic celebrity. Now, they seem to be orienting themselves to streaming and social media. A couple of years ago, they "upgraded" their OS from the big cats (Tiger, Leopard, Mountain Lion, etc) to El Capitan and beyond - I believe that the latest iteration is High Sierra. When one of my iMacs (2007) died, I replaced it with a new iMac at the end of 2016. It is NOT backward compatible with a lot of hardware and even some software. Many of my non-photo programs will not work with the new OS. Scanners, large high end commercial printers and some other devices are now obsolete and the hardware developers don't want to invest in new drivers or software updates for Mac. I still have all of my photo and video software on an old Mac Pro (2008) running Snow Leopard. Apple has since stopped supporting this so there are no longer any updates available. One of the great things about Snow Leopard on the Mac Pro is that it boots up in about 20 seconds. The new El Capitan takes over a minute - like Windows XP through a VPN. To be honest, when the Mac Pro dies, I will probably go back to a Windows machine. Even Adobe has better support for Windows than Macs particularly on programs other than Photoshop and Lightroom. Fortunately, Lightroom is multi-platform compatible and the switch will be easy. I will however, miss the 30 Cinema Display.

In reality, the choice is yours and yours alone. I would offer a word of caution: make sure your selection considers how much you will use the scanner. I've always been an ardent Canon fan and always purchased their top of the line equipment. I've also been a big Mac user. With Mac continually "upgrading" their OS, some of my equipment has simply become obsolete because Canon and many other manufacturers don't want to invest in firmware or drivers for their older equipment trying to keep up with Mac. I don't know if this applies to Windows users as well but I've been stuck with some high end outstanding equipment that no longer functions with my computer. If you are going to use it until the gears fall off, go for it but, if it will only be used occasionally, you might be better off with a less costly model. Remember, as far as the results go - there's always Photoshop.