I am quite happy with the Corel products. I use Paintshop Pro 2018 ultimate and Aftershot Pro 3 and upgraded from Paintshop Pro 8 ultimate. I have tested Adobe products and Afinity and did not find them any better or faster. Most of the plugins for PS work with Paintshop Pro 2018. Occasionally, Corel runs a sale and you can get the software very cheaply.

The articulated view screen on your camera was made for live view. I use live view whenever I mount my camera on a tripod. It allows me to see what my final photo will look like. Macro photography, landscape photography and even portrait photography are easier in live view. Your camera has automatic face recognition for better focusing of portraits in live mode. Autofocusing in live mode is generally slower than when using the viewfinder so it is not good for moving objects. Of course if you shoot video, you must use live mode. I generally use the viewfinder for handheld shots.

Noise toleration is subjective. If there is something you want to shoot in low light and cannot use a flash, boosting the ISO is the only alternative. Yes, the output will be more noisy but you will get the shot. Some of the excess noise can be mitigated in PP. I was in a large ornate church in St. Petersburg and was taking photos of the ceiling. I boosted the ISO to 5000 and got some really good shots. No flash could illuminate the 150 ft ceiling. I also boost the ISO in art museums where flash photography is not allowed. You do the best you can with what you have.

Google Photos will work for jpegs. It will run on your PC, ipad and your smart phone. All photos are stored in the cloud. It works great.

Laptops with big screens are heavy and not too portable. I use a Dell Insperon 13 for PP when I am traveling. It fits in my camera bag and weighs only 3.5 lbs. When I am home, I use a full sized desktop computer with a 24" monitor ( I am looking to buy a 27" or larger monitor). I find that PP with the 13.3" screen is not as accurate as with the larger monitor, so I do my preliminary PP with the Dell and finalize the PP at home. Both computers have all my PP software installed and both run them well. Just one additional thought; Laptops and 2in1s like my Dell have limited internal memory. Transferring raw files from your camera to your computer will fill that internal memory quickly. My Dell has 3 USB 3 ports and I plug in a portable external drive to store the raw files and the PP files. Costco sells a 256G flash drive for under $50. It weighs nothing and takes up little space in my camera bag.

What is a digital camera? It is a microprocessor with a lens, a sensor and a storage device. There is a saying in the computer business. GIGO ie. garbage in/garbage out. If you keep copying other's photos, you will never get anything that others will admire. A photo should be imaginative and original so that the viewer is moved emotionally. Years ago I took a course on Engineering numerical analysis. The professor started the first lesson by saying that if you can solve an calculus equation exactly, don't bother. Someone has already solved it. It is the same with photography. I look at National Geographic and am always moved by the photos in it.

What I am saying is that no matter how good your equipment is, a good photo requires a good eye and sense of space and light more.

A concrete block with a steel rod imbedded in it with a camera mount welded to the rod will hold the camera steady in any conditions. I can't say much for it's portability but it will hold it steady.

My lord! The camera and lenses that the OP has are fairly light (under 5 lbs.). Practically any of today's tripods will hold his equipment steady unless there is an earthquake or a hurricane. Some of the tripods recommended above are over $1,000. The OP is obviously an amateur and does not need the best available for the occasional use. My Polaroid tripod is as cheap as dirt but it holds my D5100 and lenses steady in good weather and good weather is the only time I will go out and shoot. Spend the money on better glass and buy a less expensive tripod.

[quote=Raz Theo][quote=Edia]I can't understand why film would produce sharper photos than digital. If you tell me that you can get sharper focus in manual than with autofocus, you have a point. That would apply to both digital and film. It has been said that today's lenses are sharper and better than those of 20 years ago. If that is true, then new digital equipment is sharper than previous film cameras. .[/quote)

The way I've always understood it is: An image is created by a chemical reaction on film when light reflects off a subject and into the camera. We then view/screen the image through the lens and onto a mirror. The light then bounces off the mirror into a five-sided piece of glass called a “pentaprism" and into the eyepiece. But nowhere do we detect the troublemakers in this process, pixels, 'cause they ain't there. And pixellation will, one way or the other, always present an issue for those of us who swear that not just vinyl, or Kodak 64, but old telephones, old cheese and old Buicks sound/look/smell/feel better than their modern non-organic, digital counterparts.
Allow me to end with a sincere wish for Peace & Love this Christmas season. [/quote]

Amen.

Thanks. That worked.

My firewall won't let me download picasa from this site.

National Geographic and Life are and were the best photo magazines. In the internet age, most print magazines are dieing. On line, there is little need for a dedicated site. Youtube and dPreview cover most of the photography field.

I can't understand why film would produce sharper photos than digital. If you tell me that you can get sharper focus in manual than with autofocus, you have a point. That would apply to both digital and film. It has been said that today's lenses are sharper and better than those of 20 years ago. If that is true, then new digital equipment is sharper than previous film cameras. Previous photographers like Ansel Adams used primitive equipment to achieve great sharp photos. Adams also had a large dark room for post processing to get the best prints. Today's digital equipment and PP software should achieve better results. Film to me is like playing vinyl records. The sound is different than on digital media. Different but not necessarily better.

None of these cameras are really suitable for shooting children. They all have interchangeable lenses and take too long to set up. Children do what they want to do when they want to do it. A parent or Grandparent must be ready to take a photo at any time. A good point and shoot or an iPhone are better choices for getting the shot.