Zoom is bad because there is no matching flash. Sure you can zoom in but there is nothing to light up the objects. Usually wedding receptions will be my problematic areas since I don't always sit in the front, but I will be happy to let the DSLR-ers deal with that and send me the pictures afterwards.SpotTheCat wrote:Flying Fox wrote:So Spot, any pics night indoor parties with lots of faces and stuff? What about nightshots? I thought you said you wanted to take some during that lunar eclipse a while back.
I did and the zoom is pathetic. It is much more suited as an indoor camera because of the wide-angle lens. Low light level pictures... I can't help you there, but they look fine to my eye.
Which Sony, the W's or the T's? Yes, when they guess wrong things are horrible. My mom's Panny FX01, even at the same restaurant, can guess right and wrong from almost the same location and lighting conditions, the results between ISO200 and ISO800 are drastically different. I personally couldn't care less as long as it is good in max ISO400, and if there is manual aperture control (which my A40 has) I can compensate. However I expect these situations to be the minority so I need good out-of-box performance. And if the "night scene mode" is good enough I can live without manual aperture control I guess.SpotTheCat wrote:I am a little hesitant to veer away from the companies that made good film cameras. We tried a Sony, too, and it was just awful. It constantly wanted to be 2-3 ISO levels too high in auto-mode, so everything came out super grainy. Automatic modes shouldn't be so useless.
I do see myself eventually moving on to almost complete auto P&S and a bigger pro-sumer level unit if I get more serious. However, for now an all-rounder is what I am looking for. Damnit Canon why not put out an A with <35mm lens.