Aye (although full manual only when I need the control)
I bought mine off of Fred Miranda but I like B&H and KEH in the US. The lens is quite sharp, competitive with modern zooms. It does have some CA due to its lack of modern coatings. The AF speed of the high speed version of the lens is also impressive.
I don't use my fisheye very often but when I do I like to get very close to my subject to maximize the distortion effect. The settings don't tend to matter that much because of the very large depth of field such wide lenses provide.
I often shoot tulips with a 135f2.8 at f4.5 to 6.3 without issue. Typically I'm more concerned with too much behind the flowers being to sharp than I am I little out of focus towards the back of the flower.
As an aside, the Sony 135f2.8 STF is a nearly perfect flower lens.
At this point quality mirrorless cameras are at parity to DSLRs. Specific cameras in each genre will have specific advantages and disadvantages to one another but, at this point, it's impossible to make any general statements like "mirrorless is better" or "dslrs are better". As several people have said, you've got to compare the specific cameras in light of the specific needs to figure out which is best and even then it will what's best for you.
In addition to the many other comments, I like the Sea Pines Nature Preserve preserve.
I had an a99 and now have an a99ii and as I recall the a99 buffer was just over 18 shots and the a99ii hits the buffer around 55 shots (which goes by fast if you're shooting at 12 fps). I love my a99ii and the only E mount camera that is tempting to me is the a9, but there are a few things about it I don't like. I suspect I will one day have an E mount but, at this time, I believe the a99ii is the best overall camera Sony makes. I do envy some of the new GMaster lenses but there is some solid A mount glass available as well.
I didn't see it included anywhere but, as best I can tell, the Pro 1000 uses pigment inks whereas the Pro 100 uses dye inks. Most of what I've read suggests greater archival performance from pigment than from dye. I have a Pro 100 that I print personal stuff with (and I love it). If I sold prints I'd be printing pigment.
By the way, both the EA3 and EA4 are for FF. The EA1 is the APS-C equivalent to the EA3 and the EA2 the EA4. As has been mentioned, the difference is the EA4 uses it's own AF sensor and will drive screw drive lenses. Both can be found used for less than $200 if you look around. The mirror eats roughly 1/2 stop of light..
For me the high ISO capability is all about getting the shot. I shoot my daughter's in competition band and winterguard. I like to shoot at 1/250 sec to stop the motion. For the band I use my 70-400 and most everyone's lens in this range is f5.6 on the long end. This requires roughly 6400 ISO to match up. For the indoor stuff I use a Minolta 80-200 f2.8, but the high school gyms still require something in the 5000-6000 ISO range to get the shots. However, if I can shoot at 100 ISO, I will.
I'll give a second vote for the Manfrotto Neotec. It doesn't collapse to a really short length but it's fast to extend or collapse (just pull up to extend, just squeeze the trigger to collaspe).
I think what you're referring to is the process of microadjusting the focusing on DSLRs or other cameras where the autofocus sensor is not on the imaging sensor. In this case the length of the light path can sometimes be slightly different as it travels to the AF sensor vs. the imaging sensor. This microfocus adjustment allows an offset to be input to correct for the difference.
Mirrorless cameras focus off of the imaging sensor (using CDAF or PDAF) and don't need this type of adjustment.
I've got a Sony 500mm f8 mirror lens that I love. It's sharp and incredibly small and light for its focal length. A unique thing about the Sony (and Minolta) reflex lens is that it has auto focus (which is pretty quick on the a99). The big downside to this lens is the donut bokeh which shows up under certain conditions.
I've owned the a100, a700, a99, a99ii, Nex 6, QX10 and RX100iv. I've never had a premature failure on any of them. I did drop my RX100 and it stopped working. Sent it to precision for an out of warranty repair. I was impressed with they're responsiveness. Within about two weeks I had my camera back (And this was over Christmas).
I used Lightroom for years. It's great for cataloging files and it's great for raw processing, especially when you're not making a lot of local adjustments. However, Lightroom is slow and for this reason I switched to Capture One Pro