Don't use either. I usually start with research at these types of sites:
http://www.cameracomparisonreview.com/2014/08/23/sony-a5100-vs-sony-a6000/
http://snapsort.com/compare/Sony-Alpha-A5100-vs-Sony-Alpha-A6000
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/compare/Sony_A5000_vs_Sony_A5100_vs_Sony_A6000/BHitems/1022333-REG_1076400-REG_1039057-REG

I'm sure you'll get some "real world" input shortly.

Easier to open Folder Manager and see a complete picture of where all folders are that Picasa is watching.


Picasa doesn't keep secrets - certainly not about what folders it is watching for changes/additions.

Click on the Picasa|Tools menu, select Folder Manager... and a dialog box opens and shows you exactly "where your photos are" and allows you to manage "watched" folders.

I had a D5100 with 18-55 and 55-300 kit lenses. About a year ago after much research I decided to buy the Tokina 11-16 for a spring London/Paris/Rhine River trip and a fall Alaska cruise trip. I really love it, but even so I also do panoramas whenever possible.

This link will filter Flickr for Tokina 11-16 Grand Canyon photos:
http://www.flickr.com/search/?sort=relevance&text=tokina%2011-16%20grand%20canyon

This one filters for 18-270 and Grand Canyon:
http://www.flickr.com/search/?sort=relevance&text=18-270%20grand%20canyon

I don't think you really "need" an ultra-wide (any more than I did last year :lol: ) - especially if you are good with stitching panoramas.

However, the equipment is rather irrelevant if you don't have decent weather. Below is a thumbnail of a panorama I shot 9 years ago with the only camera I had - a 4MP Canon SD300. I stitched 6 vertical shots. We've been back several times with better cameras, but have yet to see that kind of sunset and clouds!

Hope the weather and sky cooperate when you're there.

SD300 6 shot pano - Sept 10, 2006

True, but beyond the technical photographic DOF/bokeh/resolution/sharpness attributes what really makes the photo magical for me is the blurriness of the strings leaves the impression that they are vibrating, alive and being played. The diamonds at the top bring to mind sound waves emanating from the strings. Remarkable photo. Love it!

Great use of bokeh! -- just kidding -- I think... Yup, just kidding. :lol:

Based on what everyone is reporting I think with the final merge of Web Albums into Google+ Photos, Google has made small changes in Picasa and on some of their Google landing pages. The different behaviors we all describe are because some of us are Google+ members and others aren't.

- I'm not a member of Google+ so when I click on the Web Albums button in Picasa it takes me to the Google+ profile page to try to get me to merge all my Googley accounts into a Google+ profile. Steve: I suspect that since you have a Google+ profile when you click on the Picasa Web Albums button you slide right into your photos at http://plus.google.com/u/0/photos

- With the merge there are no "front doors" into Web Albums on any of the Google landing pages. However, non-Google+ers can still upload to Web Albums through Picasa or go directly there if they have the URL ( http://picasaweb.google.com/home takes me right in.)

- If you are a non-Google+er logged into your Web Albums page and share an album with the "Share" button Google+ looks at the recipients and if they are not Google+ members, requires that they join. A non-Google+er merely has to copy and paste the link that opens when you click the "Link to this album" button just below the Share button into an email. (Tita - have you tried that yet?).

Here's a link to a couple of items my grandson was excited about when we dug them out of his father's toybox -
http://picasaweb.google.com/105107429087668611298/1402161980sLegoSpacemen?authuser=0&authkey=Gv1sRgCPS23-G45-rkCg&feat=directlink
Anyone should be able to see the photos and not get a join Google+ challenge. Just like Steve has said several times. :lol: :lol:

I finally realized that Steve was talking about sending links, tita used both "sharing" and "sending a link". It took me several read-throughs of Steve's step-by-step to realize that they are exactly correct EXCEPT that non-Google+ers have to start at picasaweb.google.com NOT plus.google.com.

Not sure where Jethro's laptop/desktop issue fits in - it might have to do with the absence of Google+ cookies on the machines. Jethro - what happens when you go directly to the above picasaweb.google.com link on your laptop and desktop? I think your "old" links might be hitting the same "join Google+" front door I hit when I click on the Web Albums button from inside Picasa.

Basically if you are not in the Google+ club use the Web Album "Link to this album" button NOT the "Share" button.

Tita - please get back to us about whether this resolves your issue.

Huh?? What "it's" are you testing? Unless I missed something along the way, nobody in this thread has claimed that your 1.1 and 1.2 files would be visually different as long as they were saved at the same compression/quality level. Running the compression algorithm through the same set of pixels twice will result in 1.1 and 1.2 being almost absolutely identical. (I have read that due to the floating point math involved there will be very, very slight differences - certainly nothing visible.)

As RFPhotog summarized above, it is the degradation of repeated edit/save cycles that is being discussed in these last posts.

(And, I have to apologize to the OP, fjrwillie, for participating in the sideways topic drift from the original question. :oops: )

AND

WRONG! - compression ONLY happens when saving. Editing programs allow you to specify the amount of compression and you can save with 0 compression. In fact, if you open a .jpg in Photoshop, save it at the highest quality (12) the file size grows by about 8%. Irfanview does the same thing if you set the quality level to 100. If you have the compression level set to some lower quality number (higher compression) the algorithm will go about it's business of averaging pixel values and throwing out "unnecessary" pixels and yield a smaller file size.

Closing the file does nothing more than releasing the programs handle/lock to the file.


Only if the compression level is set to 0 - or conversely you are saving with the softwares highest quality level. bkyser is absolutely correct:
I would only add that this applies to files having a non-zero compression setting. (But even if the compression setting causes the resulting file to have the exact same size the JPEG algorithm has still had its way with your pixels - they are not exactly the same. However, it does take dozens of 100% quality saves for visible degradation to occur.)


What's frightening is that you seem rather adamant about incorrect information.

Don't worry about the "12 left in stock". Click on the vendor link "Itsuzai-Japan". They have many more styles and colors available.

But there's only 1 of these left:
http://www.amazon.com/MULTI-PURPOSE-WASHABLE-MICRO-FIBLE-Mameshiba-P295/dp/B00HFIDYH6/ref=aag_m_pw_dp?ie=UTF8&m=A3BYJJY31RNCJ2

Better jump on it if you want it! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Great link Jerry!

Have you been using the Share button on the picasaweb.google.com Web Albums page that pops up that email-like window? If so, instead of using the Share button, click on the "Link to this album" button and copy and paste the link into a normal email compose window.

I'm pretty sure I understand what's going on. It's late though - I'll put together a post tomorrow.

OK - I remember way back (in internet time) when Web Albums was first rolled out as a cloud adjunct to Picasa I had to tell my adult children to sign up for a gmail account to be able to see the Web Albums I shared with them. Later on I could share albums with them through newer non-gmail email addresses. Didn't really think about it much.

It appears that with the Web Albums merge into Google+ photos is back into a "you have to join to play" mode.

I really hope that's not the case.

When I go to http://plus.google.com/u/0/photos it is trying to get me to upgrade to Google+ which I refuse to do - see below. As long as I can still get to Web Albums through picasaweb.google.com and all other Google services without "upgrading" to Google+ and creating a public profile I will do so. Also, I have no interest in researching "...the changes to Picasa Web Albums when I create a profile." I know it may be inevitable - and I'll spare you the anti-Google+ rant which is first cousin to my anti-Facebook rant, but there are principles involved here!

I can see your chalk art photos, but we still don't know (for sure) whether a complete Google-virgin would be able to see them. Perhaps if such a person exists and stumbles across this thread they could report back on the visibility of Steve's chalk art album???

Based on my experiences, I certainly cannot dispute tita's claim that recipients of her album invitations are being hornswaggled (haven't used that in a long time :lol: ) into Google+.

Something has changed re: Web Albums full integration into Google+ Photos. Like I mentioned above I have been putting albums I share on Flickr instead of Web Albums for about a year now. Before tita's post I was going to put an album onto Web Albums and clicked on the "Web Albums" button in the upper right corner of the Picasa screen. Instead of opening up into my Web Album pages it instead wanted me to log into Google+.

Necessary background: I've had a gmail account since beta which is the same account that is linked to Web Albums and Google Drive. I have a separate account linked to You Tube (although they know it is me.) During their multi-year push to make all things Google+ they kept trying to get me to merge everything into one glorious Google+ account under my real name - even though I knew that was actually what was happening behind the smoke and mirrors anyway I would always skip the requests for the grand merge.

Getting back to that Web Albums click from Picasa - it opened up IE (which is not my default browser) and wanted me to sign in to Google+. I put in my gmail/web albums/drive name and PW and it took me to a Google+ profile page. Even though the information was correct there was no way to navigate away from that page. Hmm... how was I going to get to Web Albums?

It's not easy - click on the little upper-right corner app grid in gmail; click More; click Even more from Google; scroll down and click on Picasa - nope that let's you download Picasa. OK... Let's pop over to Google Drive... good - right there is a Google Photos button, click... "Stay Tuned! Your photos are coming soon."

At this point I was wondering if I was ever going to see my Web Albums again. I Googled "web albums google" and the first hit is picasaweb.google.com. Click that and finally get to https://picasaweb.google.com/home which is my Web Albums. I'm sure a combiniation of cookies and a stored password got me directly in. (I also uploaded a new album, just to make sure it was still live.)

While spending way too much time just trying to get back into my Web Albums I came across the "Share from Picasa Web Albums" web page with instructions for sharing with non-Google+ persons. Frankly, given the trouble I had getting into my Web Albums, I'm really wondering if a shared album recipient that has no Google accounts at all would easily see the shared album.

The only people I have shared with in the past at least have gmail accounts so I can't do a meaningful test.

I know Google claims that they reversed their "everyone has to join Google+ to use certain services" stance and claim they are de-emphasizing Google+. But it sure hasn't felt like it too me.

St3v3M: Have you recently shared any Web Albums or photos with people who have no Google Accounts?

Because I have some kitchen duties to attend to shortly I will spare you my thoughts on Google for now.

I've used Picasa since before Google bought it. For years used Web Albums to easily share photos with family. However, this final merge of Web Albums into Google+ Photos with its ugly interface and forced inscription into Google+ is the last straw.

Many months ago I started using Yahoo's Flickr which allows 1TB of free space. It has a drag-and-drop upload interface, but I usually use Picasa to select the desired files, put them in a Picasa album, export the album to a local temporary folder and then upload the temporary folder to Flickr.

After uploading you do have to manually place the uploaded photos into a new Flickr album. It is certainly not the elegantly integrated album uploading from Picasa to Web Albums, but it works.

You can send links to individual photos or entire albums to people who will not be required to join anything.

One important thing to be aware of is that Flickr defaults to making all uploaded photos public. If that bothers you be sure to edit the security permissions of the photos and or new albums you create on Flickr.

Web Albums has been folded into Google+ Photos. If you have existing Web albums (like I do) you can still use the Web Albums interface and do searches, but the hits are displayed through Google+ photos UI. From a new user perspective Web Albums are no more.