The website is mostly for screen viewing, but some people do download pictures from the website for personal use. Yes, I do keep all the files in original size in case someone asks for a larger file than the website allows.

Can you specify file size in Elements? I have access to it.

I submit pictures to a website that limits pictures to 12 mb size or less. The files I get are often 14-18mb in size so I need to reduce them. Since all my pictures are jpeg, I usually reduce them by setting my jpeg compression to 97 or 96 in my editing software. There is also a resize option where I choose pixel size reduction. I don't know if these two options work similarly or differently. What would be the best method to reduce pictures size from 14-18 mb to under 12 mb? [I use an old version of a semi-obscure editing program called Zoner Photo Studio but this question would apply to Adobe Elements too, I think.]

Are there any programs that allow you to save by file size, so I could just pick 11mb or 10 mb for example? When I save by my current method of changing jpeg compression, I really don't know the resultiing file size until after I do the save. If I am just missing something obvious, please gently let me know.

Well, I might "upgrade" to the X-T5 if they made a version with all the improvements except the 40mp sensor. I assume there is a menu setting for image quality that goes along lines of fine and normal quality. Wonder how many mp the "normal" or "standard" would be? I could get the improvements without excessive file size (for me) if the normal was 25mp or less perhaps and I did all my work in that mode except for occasional distant objects that needed major cropping - where I could switch to fine mode. I could get the better autofocus but I doubt the IBIS would be much of an upgrade over my X-T4 (1/2 stop).

I enjoy my X-T3 and X-T4 but the newest version - the X-T5 - holds little appeal to me at this point. I don't think I need or want a 40mp sensor. Now, I understand many people might find that highly desirable. So be it. But I take many pictures and the extra storage costs do not seem worth it to me. And I see no reason to buy it and lower the pixel count.

What am I missing? I get that more pixels can equal superior IQ but I will be interested in reading reviews to see how people rate IQ between the T4 and T5. If the difference in IQ is noticeable to the eye on standard prints, I might change my mind. But if it is only noticeable if I were printing posters or billboards, then no thanks.

Former Canon and Nikon user who loves the X-T3 and X-T4 cameras. I do a lot of distance work and the 150-600mm fuji lens is great. Then I have a Tamron 18-400 with adapter that works - not great but OK - for a lightweight do everything carry around. I often pair the telephoto on my X-T4 with the 18-135mm fuji lens on my X-T3 so I have pretty much complete coverage.

Did you read the post by Grahame???? It sounds like you got the exact camera that the sticker said it was & you let a buyer mislead you. You cared about the 800 ISO when it was used by the buyer to convince you it wasn't a II. I don't see any blame on Adorama unless you have proof you have not divulged.

So it seems that you did get a H3D 39 II and the buyer duped you by showing you the specs for the H3D 31 II or a H3D original? Was the sensor 39mp? Maybe somebody needs to make an apology to a certain camera dealer?

Geeze. You are criticizing my work routine? I come home, I remove my SD cards from my cameras, I store my cameras in the closet, I drop my SD cards off in my office where my computer and card reader are, and then I work on my pictures later whenever it is convenient. If that seems unreasonable to you - tough.

Actually, reading all the replies has convinced me to use the copy & format option more often. I may occasionally revert to old habits if in a hurry I suppose. Copy and paste and then format are a bit more awkward as my cameras are not where my computer & SD card readers are so I will have to remember to format tthe cards when I return them to the cameras. Just need to form the habit I guess. I have multple cameras (Fujifilm and Sony) and I use a bunch of SD cards interchangeably in the cameras with no issues so far.

Just wanted to respond to your opening statement. It is true but the later part shows a little failsafe mechanism. On very rare occasion, my cut goes awry but the files are still on the SD card until I do make a backup. So I cut, there is an oops of some kind, I go back to the SD card and the files are still there, I cut again, I paste, and then the files are gone from the SD card.

On another post several people indicate that they reformat their SD card after transferring files from camera to computer. Why? I just cut files from card and paste to computer folder using a USB card reader. I have never experienced any file corruption on my SD card. I don't reformat a hard disk after deleting and moving files so why do so after using a SD card?

I am wondering if these people are being extra cautious or if there is a valid reason this is beneficial?

Would that be different than taking a picture of an old pickup in a field with the name Ford clearly visible?

Yep, looking across the water from Whidbey Island towards Pt Townsend at 2pm it's like a fog bank has moved in. No view of Olympic Mts at all. I am sure it is unhealthy to be jogging or biking in this smoke.

Go during a basketball home game. Any kids in school - what about a parent-teacher conference. When I had a class reunion, the school let us tour the building after hours.

Thanks for all the suggestions. I have gone with the Fringer adaptor, the Tamron 18-400 for Canon and a new Fujifilm X-S10!

Hey, I openly admit to severe GAS attacks constantly. You wouldn't believe how often I changed telescopes when I was into stargazing. The only thing that keeps me comfortably solvent is a more sensible spouse.