keep on believing that. Apple concentrates on it's phones because that's where they make the most money. All computers are just tools that help you do a job. I use both Mac and PC and can't find any large difference between them.

Apple is kind of dumb with their iMacs and Laptops in that they are not touch screen. Photo editing is much easier using a touch screen than using a mouse or touch pad.

One more thing about Apple that bugs me is planned obsolescence. I owned a Mac Pro with dual Processors and then Apple switched to Intel and my expensive computer became a door stop. I could not upgrade to the latest operating system and nothing past Snow leopard with run.

As for the iPad Pro, can you put the full version of PS on it? How about software designed for the iMac. Will it run on the iPad Pro?

If you watch Polen's youtube videos, he says that the most important thing in getting good photos is the photographer. A good photographer can get good results with any camera, while a poor photographer will not get good results with the best equipment available. Cameras are tools that produce photos. Some people want the latest and greatest and others will be fine with tried and true. Having GAS and a fat wallet does not mean you will get the best shots.

The real problem with DSLRs or Mirrorless cameras is that they are updated every few years while cell phones are updated and improved every year. If camera manufacturers updated their cameras more often, they would not recover their development costs. This is because millions of cell phones are sold each year while camera sales are much less. As for photo quality of cell phones vs dedicated cameras, it all depends on the photographer, the subject, the lighting and the post processing. Also, the best camera is the one you have with you when you need to get the shot. Most of us always have a cell phone with us while we only carry our cameras when we know what we are shooting in advance.

Cell phone cameras are getting better each year while dedicated cameras change incrementally. The market for dedicated cameras keep shrinking for this reason. Most people just want to take snapshots that are in focus. That leaves only photo hobbyists and pros to buy the expensive, large and heavy cameras and lenses.

This question comes up every few months. The computer you are familiar with and use, always works better; no matter if it is a Mac or a PC. Apple is not always a friend to Mac users. From time to time, they make their legacy equipment obsolete and make you buy a newer model. I have been burned twice with older Macs. An other weird thing about Macbooks is that do not have touch screens. On the small screens of laptops, touch screens to zoom in or out, make photo processing much easier. This is why I like PCs better. PCs are more configurable and expandable than Macs. An other consideration is that computer sales is a small portion of Apple's business. That said, Apple does not put R&D money to develop new and improved computers compared with the developments of the iphones. A new iPhone comes out every year and a new ipad every few years. The Mac pro was not updated for over 10 years!. Speed with a fairly new computer is not a big issue. Both iMacs and PCs use Intel chips in their CPUs. i5 or i7 chips will provide all the power to run all the available photo processing software. More memory and a more powerful graphics card may provide faster processing for either platform.

People who buy an expensive DSLR and only use it occasionally in the auto mode are like people who buy a Firari that can go 200 mph but only drive on roads with a 55 mph speed limit. People buy big SUV’s that are great off road but never take them there. They want to show that they can afford it and love the ego boost it gives them. Practicality is just so blah for them.

It is a poor carpenter that blames his tools. A good photographer can get good results with any camera, lense and post processing program. That said, I use Aftershot Pro 3 and like it. I do have a stability problem with it on my computer that is annoying. I use the program for Raw processing and cataloging. I use Paintshop Pro for final results. The best program is the one that you feel comfortable with and produces the results you seek. Any of the programs you cite will give satisfactory results. For ameture photographers, price is an important factor in selecting a program. The “best” program may be overkill for most people.

Adobe was first and for many years the only player in post processing world. That does not mean it is still the best for most photographers. You seem to be ignorant of what Aftershot is or what it’s capabilities are. I have used Lightroom and Aftershot and find After shot to be superior. As for Photoshop, Paintshop Pro has all the color depth and layer capability of PS for considerably less money. Snobbery in which program is used does not equate to better productivity in PP.

I use Corel Aftershot Pro 3 as my Raw professor. It is quite powerful and supports Adobe add-ins. It costs only $30 on sale. It can be updated on the fly for free. Anyone who thinks a $10 per month is cheap should realize that over 3 years, little new features are added to these programs, will cost you $360!

I use a Meike MK910 with my D5100. It looks like and feels like the Nikon SB-910. It cost less than $100 and does a good job.

Corel Paintshop Pro Ultimate is available on Amazon for $60. This package includes Aftershot 3, with the power of Lightroom and other goodies. It is compatible with most PS/LR add-on’s. Like with all PP programs, there is a learning curve to use it but it is more user friendly than PS. Paintshop has an interface like PS elements with all the power of the full blown PS. Corel updates the program every year, but the updates are minor. As for camera Raw, Aftershot lets you download updates for new cameras soon after the camera is released. No need to buy an updated program.

Tripods are used to support a camera and lens steady for still photography. In selecting a tripod, you look at stability, portability and versatility. I find that a 500 lb. block of concrete with a 1/2" steel rod embedded and a camera support welded to it, will keep a camera stead in all conditions other than an earthquake or a nuclear blast. However, portability and versatility are almost zero.

In all seriousness, all tripods are a compromise that require the photographer to determine which factors are important. High cost carbon fiber tripods will yield better results under most conditions. However, cheaper tripods will give good performance under less exacting conditions. What you shoot, where you shoot, when you shoot and how you shoot should determine what tripod you need.

Touch screen, WiFi, focusing points, tilt screen lead me to select the D7500 over the D7200. The two memory card slots of the D7200 is no advantage to me. Statistically, you are more likely to be struct by lightning than have a memory card failure. That said, I would wait for Nikon to come out with a mirror less DX camera with the latest tech. The DSLR is so past it’s prime.

It depends on where you are shooting. Outdoors, the Sony will be great. If you enter cathedrals and other buildings where flash is not an option and you need to boost the ISO to above 3000 to get the shot, The D500 is the way to go.

Nikon is not failing with these cameras. Nikon and Canon have multiple camera systems for sale. They do not want to kill sales of their DSLR cameras by offering new Mirrorless camera with all the same features as their other systems. Sony, Panasonic, Fuji and other manufacturers only produce mirrorless cameras and do no compete in the DSLR market. Eventually, Nikon and Canon will evolve to mirrorless when sales of their DSLR cameras fall. They both evolved to digital cameras when their film camera sales fell.