Mine has changed over the years as I have grown older and as camera technology has changed. And as my ability to buy high-grade equipment has increased or diminished, which it has done several times over five decades. And as my shooting philosophy has changed. I've always had what I consider "big" rigs ... Pentax or Nikon SLRs, Leicas or the twin-lens I grew up with, and lenses up to 300mm. But I've never liked carrying such bulky and heavy things around everywhere. Welll, except for in my teens and early 20s, when i actually did carry the twin-lens or the Pentax almost everywhere, especially when exploring or vacationing. In most of my life, I have favored a single body and lens, usually a moderately wide lens. For many years, I thought I had the perfect solution in a Minox 35, truly pocket-sized, truly fine lens, though only f2.8. I tried submini Minoxes too, but didn't like the image quality. Cut to the present time: My walkaround camera is the first one I have ever had that truly is with me always: an iPhone SE. I have an array of tripods (shirt-pocket size to a six-pound Gitzo), shutter releases, etc that fit it and my larger rigs. I still use bigger stuff ... now micro four-thirds stuff ... when I want to do macro or something specialized like sailboat races. Or play with different lenses. Or my current craze, shooting the street art that proliferates in cities everywhere. But LOVE the phone cam. Sure, it can't do it all. What can? I've mostly resisted the current bokeh fad, although now there are even phone cams (the most expensive ones) that do that pretty well too. For most snapshooting situations, my phone cam is able to deliver outstanding sharpness. By current standards, phone cams are not superior low-light cameras; nonetheless, mine is the best low-light camera I have ever owned. But best of all, I always have it on me. That counts for more than anything else.

"Judicious use of columns" hints at the reason. Long lines of words are harder to read than short lines of words. If a landscape page featured several columns of text, set in shorter lines than full screen width, landscape would be fine for text. Savvy word butchers and publishers, online and on paper, know how to make that happen, but most people do not. Look at what I just wrote .... it extends the full width of the "window," which usually is the whole width of the screen. Squeeze the window to make it a third of a screen wide. Notice how much easier it is to read? That's why portrait framing of text remains so useful.

I have a bunch of them because I have gadget neurosis ... and I enjoy cool design ... and because even the expensive ones are cheap, used, if you do daily eBay buy-it-now searches for a week or two.

In general: Almost all of them work well if your camera/lens (or phone, if you shoot with it a lot) is not too big/long and weighs no more than a couple pounds. If you want one for longer lenses, or heavy rigs, you need to shop very carefully. And probably spend more.

My favorites are the Leitz or Leica table tripod ...

https://www.amazon.com/Leica-Tabletop-Folding-Cameras-14100/dp/B0000AGAWB/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1514459943&sr=1-1&keywords=leica+table+tripod

and the Manfrotto Pixi Mini, which comes in several versions ...

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00D76RNLS/ref=sxr_sxwds-rbp_1?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_p=3346373162&pd_rd_wg=LVDwE&pf_rd_r=1VWC6HVTHWG0SEDYZDFG&pf_rd_s=desktop-rhs-carousels&pf_rd_t=301&pd_rd_i=B00D76RNLS&pd_rd_w=31HOx&pf_rd_i=leica+table+tripod&pd_rd_r=89212142-3707-4108-bbf6-f87bdaa559d8&ie=UTF8&qid=1514459943&sr=1

The Leitz version, a design that dates back to at least the 1950s, is strong enough to mount a bazooka. The Manfrotto is strictly for lighter rigs (reportedly, up to DSLR size) and shorter lenses. Amazon offers lots of inexpensive but decent mini ball heads and quick-release gizmos.

A factoid that illustrates how our view (no pun intended) of photography changes over time: When digital first began to reach the wider public consciousness, people in the industry called it by another name ... maybe to help people comprehend it better. A name you can still see if you dig into the advertising of that era. It was called "still video." And the very first consumer digital cameras produced photos with visible rows of pixels over the entire image ... resolution that wouldn't be acceptable today even on the cheapest TV screen. At the same time, film technology was at its zenith, with the arrival of amazing emulsions such as Velvia.

One reason used Gitzos (which last forever) are a bargain these days: Until a few years ago, there was not a lighter carbon-fiber option. Nowadays, every pro is buying carbon-fiber Gitzos and selling off the heavier old ones on eBay. One of mine (both are all-metal) is 30 years old, and I bought it new, back when Gitzos were only a little more expensive and when I was a jungle macro freak in Hawaii. It looks like a beater, which it is, although it still works like new. It lives in my car's trunk in an old duffel bag. The other is even heavier (thicker legs) and looks like new. It's recent enough to take the bowl* assembly videographers use for leveling, which I love even though I don't do video. It lives indoors. Get a used Gitzo. Everything else is just a cheaper attempt to be as good as Gitzo.

Those cool new carbon-fiber Gitzos cost two or three times more than the old all-metal ones but are only one-third lighter. To my way of thinking, they're still too damn heavy to carry around much. And the math suggests they would be a poor investment even if I were rich. If I were rich enough to have an assistant (in British India, they were called "bearers," for good reason), maybe I'd be buying that stuff.

*What's a bowl? Think of it as being like a ball head ... only it's a ball foot. There are good no-name imports on Amazon.com for $30 to $50.

Here's the thing about tripods.

1.) They give you rock-steady, vibration-free shooting at comfortable eye level, even with a longer lens, without using an inherently shaky center column for extension. This can be very or just a little expensive.

2.) They are comfortable to carry on long walks. This can be done for less than $50.

Choose 1.) or 2.) Choosing both is not allowed.

I'm like you, using only relatively light gear. But I believe in serious tripods. Along with inexpensive table tripods that I collect because I think they're cool, I have two big, top-grade, pro tripods, both Gitzo, both way more expensive than I could afford if I bought them the regular way. And a medium-sized Linhof ball head that costs $800 new but that I paid $129 for. eBay is your friend.

Well, grain used to be a fact of life. ISO 400 ... up to maybe 1600 if you push-processed ... came with more graininess. That's just how it was, like snow in winter.

Now, graininess is just another "look" you can dial in when or if you want it. I use one of the simplest post-processing apps, the Mac OS Photos that I got for free with my computer. Even that lets me add grain when I feel like it.

There is only one correct way to process an image, assuming that you don't need or want to please anyone else. That is to do whatever floats your boat. And nowadays, technologically speaking, the sky is the limit. Go for it!

Maybe the results will be wonderful. Maybe they will ... like ... really suck. Either way, you won't waste any film.

The smartphone cameras are now so good that they are the best pocket/everyday/everywhere cameras any of us have ever had. Just sayin.

Good (meaning strong and heavy) tripods and heads cost a fortune. If you're not a pro who uses gear to make money and therefore can afford buying the best new, eBay is your best friend. The savings can be amazing, like half to a quarter of new retail ... and if you're careful, for stuff that is like new or close to it.

"main things i would like to crop, zoom in more, enhance the sharpness, brighten up things."

Those are the most basic requirements there are. EVERY photo editing app, free or paid for, lets you do those things, and pretty easily. Like most of us, you start out wanting to do pretty much what used to be possible in even the most simple film darkroom. Eventually, as you learn more and become proficient at doing these things digitally, you probably will want to be able to do more. The skills you develop on a simple app ... and there is a LOT of learning ahead of you ... will carry over and give you a head start when you move on to something bigger and better.

I recommend you use one of the free apps to start. Even these can be overwhelming to a newbie. The simplest apps can do far more than you require. There may be one in the box, as it were, if you have bought a new camera. Some computers ... Macs for sure, probably others ... come with excellent built-in photo editing programs. I'm a former Photoshop user. Nowadays I use mostly my Mac's built-in program, called Photos. It does almost everything that I need, although I'm looking around for an app that can remove barrel and pin-cushion distortion from an image. Your requirements, present or future, probably will be different.

Paying even $10 a month for Lightroom and Photoshop as a newbie is a little like buying a 200-mph Lamborghini when all you want to do is drive to the supermarket once a week. If you don't mind the cost and the complexity of what you're getting, and you crave the satisfaction of knowing you're driving the top-of-the-line ride, it's a good purchase. But otherwise, no.

I suspect there aren't any truly bad macro lenses. They are, by definition, highly corrected flat-field optics. Most important is picking a focal length that suits what you do. Something longer than 50 to 60mm gives you greater distance from front of lens to subject, very important if you use any kind of artificial light source or if you take pictures of skittish critters that won't like a lens poked in their faces. I recommend 100 to 105mm ... 200mm if you can afford it. Macro lenses are not cheap, and a lot of what people use them for could be done just as well with a conventional normal or tele lens plus an extension tube or two and maybe one or two high-quality, two-element screw-on close-up lenses.

I have owned 25 or so cameras and several dozen lenses from age 14 to my present age, 70. All kinds, from TLRs and 4x5 press cameras to Minox subminis, Pentaxes, Leicas, Nikons. Have rejected DSLRs as too big and heavy (obviously, I am not a sports shooter). Now using a Panasonic GX8, a Minox 35ML, a 1938 Rolleiflex Automat and my latest favorite, an iPhone SE. The current phone cams are the most fantastic pocket cameras the world has ever seen. Have done a lot of jungly bug-and-flower shoots. Presently just a geezer doing happy snaps and about to begin digitizing my and my late father's 35mm slides ... after editing ruthlessly, that's several hundred, some 70 years old, shot all over the world. Will use the GX8, a Nikkor 55/2.8 micro, lens-front extension tubes and a Nikon ES-1 slide copier. Eagerly awaiting the Film Lab app (http://filmlabapp.com), which will drastically simplify evaluating massive numbers of 35mm negatives and slides.

I used Photoshop years ago when I had a bigger income. It probably was a waste of money, since I used maybe 5 percent of its capabilities. Lately I've been using my Macs' built in Photos app. It meets all my needs. You may to do higher-level post processing than I do, but if you're not a pro and are a Mac user, Photos may be all you want or need, and you already own it.