Originally posted by: Ornery
Sounds like you want your cake, and eat it too. Either you get a point and shoot, that fits in your pocket, or a serious camera that has to be toted around in a bag. You can spend quite a bit of money either way, but you'll have to choose which way to go.
Yup. I found this out the hard way. Do you want a full featued big lens camera with good indoor light capabilities, no red eye problems and a hot shoe, or a small to tiny camera that fits in your pocket?Originally posted by: Ornery
We've already got a full size, very capable, prosumer type camera, but we want another one that's pocketable. The S50 is even a tad bigger than ideal.
I really had no idea these pocket size cameras were that limited. Even when I said that, I assumed you could easily take a decent picture on an overcast day. I had no idea that would be taxing a $400.00 camera's limits!Originally posted by: fyleow
A wise man once told me:
Originally posted by: Ornery
Sounds like you want your cake, and eat it too. Either you get a point and shoot, that fits in your pocket, or a serious camera that has to be toted around in a bag. You can spend quite a bit of money either way, but you'll have to choose which way to go.
Knowing how to do something is entirely different from being able to do it at all, much less do it well.
We all know how to play the piano: you just press the keys and step on the pedals now and then. The ability to play it, much less the ability to stir emotion in those who hear your playing, is an entirely different matter.
Don't presume the most expensive gear is the best. Having too much camera equipment is the best way to get the worst photos.
The more expensive cameras and lenses don't do much of anything significant for the huge increases in price.