More megapixels gets you a quick digital zoom to make up for lack of lens reach.

it doesn't sell as well cropped like that. I have most of these framed and cropped about 100 ways.

Me too, except I started in 1968 as a PFC in the U.S. Army. A roll of film was really expensive and then as a college guy. Rarely did I have more than 2 rolls at a time. I couldn't afford to waste a shot. I rarely, very rarely tried action shots. Too few keepers and I couldn't afford that.

Now I shoot a lot of action, wildlife, BIF's, insects in flight. In fact, both my cameras Pentax K-5's are set to burst. I think I'm trying to make up for those previous years. But when I shoot portraits, landscapes, etc, I fall back to my old frugal habits. Checking and rechecking framing, exposure, and all.

Yellow bells, maybe. Not the yellow bells(esparanza) we have here in Texas. But a fritillaria pudica. Also called yellow mission bells.

But of course, I could be wrong.

Shot from the end of the pier at Cape Porpoise(Kennebunk, Maine) We found this by accident and the timing was great.

Goat Island Lighthouse


Goat Island Lighthouse






Goat Island Lighthouse

Shot in burst. 3 more to follow.

I use auto ISO for shooting wildlife in an area with both bright sun and shadows. I set my shutter for say 1/500 aperture for say 6.3 and then let the camera worry about the ISO.

Often, I cannot change the parameters fast enough to accomplish what I want, so I let the camera sweat the details.

Newegg sells Win 7 for $140.

Mac people are snobs.

But I am too. I build my computers too much higher standards than Dell, HP, Lenovo, or Apple.

Microsoft until recently didn't build computers, only software and software that would handle an infinite varieties of hardware. Did a damn good job too.

If Microsoft had built the hardware too, most of us would not own computers. They'd be too damn expensive, with only two competitors.

Mac people should thank Microsoft. They brought the prices down where we all could afford them in Macs.

I didn't need one, I wanted one. The old setup was nine years old. I gave it to my sister for her picture editing. Still runs well.

Regarding security, one of my brothers didn't run antivirus software on his iMac and ended up with a keystroke logger, and one of my nephews didn't use antivirus on his Macbook and picked up a trojan of some sort.

I wouldn't do what you are doing. I even have antivirus on my Linux box.

My PC has over 45,000 images, all raws, except for about 1k.

Put a new motherboard, processor and video card under your Mac. Let me know how it turns out.

Macs are for people that really don't like computers and need to have their hand held.

I have never had a freeze, lockup, or blue screen, since XP except one time due to hardware failure(a hard drive dying). I now use Win 7.

I have used Macs off and on in the past. They are good products, but I prefer the virtually infinite degree of customization that Windows allows. I can take Win7 and put a whole new motherboard, video card, hard drive(s) under it and keep on going. You can't do that with a Mac.

I build my own desktops. Takes one day to build, update, and install all my software, including PS6 and Lightroom 5. I have an AMD FX 8120 8 core processor, 16gb ram, gigabyte motherboard, AMD 7870 video card.

I carried over from my old computer the 256gb Crucial SSD hard drive, that contains Windows and all my software, and, also 2 synchronized 2 terabyte Western Digital RE Hdd's, that have my photos, and also my 2 22" NEC monitors. Probably $2000 total.

The only thing I had to do when i upgraded is reactivate Windows, too much hardware changed.

A Mac that has the capability of my computer would be somewhere in the neighborhood of $4000.

Building a PC is easy, hardly even let you screw up, Tab A into slot C, everything is keyed.

No, those numbers apply to the focal length or the telephoto reach. The 120-400, at the 400 end is the equivalent of about an 8 power telescope. The 150-500 about a 10 power telescope.

The amount of light getting is is designated by the F stop number, with a higher number letting in less, such as F 6.3 and a lower number letting in more, such as F 2.8.

Lenses that combine these two features, a strong telephoto and a lot of light are scary expensive. The best solution for that is a camera that has good high ISO performance so that you can buy less expensive lenses.

Good high ISO performance means that the camera will take good pictures with less light than optimal. Most, if not all, current dSLR's can do this.