Peter_in_PA

<p>Actually, I find hand-holding in low light to be my favorite kind of photography, but I also don't expect to get tack sharp images from corner to corner with that kind of shooting...<br /><br />But some of those so-called "blurry" photos are my favorites I've taken. I love 'em.<br /><br />And there's an excellent cheat for low light that is the only decent thing I ever learned from Ken Schlockwell (mis-spelled on purpose). Shoot a continuous burst of three or four images and one of them (never the first) will likely be sharper than the others. It really works.</p>

<p>I think that based on your last post, that technique is going to be more important than anything with most of your issues... <br /><br />I'm not convinced you need a new camera, in other words.</p>

<p>My experience with my Nikon 55mm f3.5 (the only Nikon lens I kept when I switched to µ43) has been just great.</p>

<p>I've tested 16MP vs. 12MP vs. 6MP and found that in an 8 x 10 there is no difference if the image is shot the same.<br /><br />I also found that if you go bigger you STILL can't tell the difference at a normal viewing distance.<br /><br />So the higher res are unlikely to make much difference at 8 x 10 or smaller.<br /><br />But if you're gonna crop or do a LOT of image manipulation, conventional wisdom still tells me you want to start with all the resolution you can possibly get.</p>

<p>Well, people can copy and paste links I guess. I'll try one more time.<br> <br /><br /><a href="http://www.dpreview.com/news/5877052166/olympus-announces-25mm-f1-2-pro-12-100mm-f4-is-pro-30mm-f3-5-macro-lenses">Lenses</a><br> <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/news/9740173952/olympus-announces-e-m1-mark-ii-development">EM1 Mk II</a><br> <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympus-pen-e-pl8-first-impressions-review">EPL8</a></p>

<p>Does this work?<br> www.dpreview.com/news/5877052166/olympus-announces-25mm-f1-2-pro-12-100mm-f4-is-pro-30mm-f3-5-macro-lenses<br> www.dpreview.com/news/9740173952/olympus-announces-e-m1-mark-ii-development<br> www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympus-pen-e-pl8-first-impressions-review</p>

<p>Lenses.<br /><br />https://www.dpreview.com/news/5877052166/olympus-announces-25mm-f1-2-pro-12-100mm-f4-is-pro-30mm-f3-5-macro-lenses<br> EM-1 Mk II</p> <p>https://www.dpreview.com/news/9740173952/olympus-announces-e-m1-mark-ii-development</p> <p>And EPL-8 (I know... more of the same... who cares...?)</p> <p>https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympus-pen-e-pl8-first-impressions-review</p>

<p>The difference between good results and great results is more the hands, eyes, and brain of the person holding the camera than the sensor, especially these days.<br /><br />She wants to just point and shoot, but unless she really learns how to best use the camera, all its modes, etc., she won't see a "stunning difference". The photographer has to be the difference.</p> <p>back to the original post, the Canon Sure Shots you mentioned first are really fantastic point-and-shoot cameras.</p>

<p>There are Nikon, Sony and Canon all-in-one cameras that fit the bill and you'll spend 200 - 300 (or even less) if you want to go refurb or used. Stick with those brands, imho, for all-in-one compact cameras.</p> <p>Here's a Nikon I KNOW will be decent for this. But Sony and Canon have equally good choices I bet.</p> <p>https://www.amazon.com/Nikon-COOLPIX-Digital-Certified-Refurbished/dp/B013FARZIG/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1474126749&sr=8-2&keywords=nikon+compact+wifi<br /><br /><br /></p>

<p>Edward, I'll be surprised if this isn't the direction for the entry level stuff from Canon and Nikon very shortly.</p>

<p>My experience with little tripods is that I'd rather just rely on IS most of the time.<br /><br />Seriously.<br /><br />And if I'm doing work at home or on a location where I don't have to hike to, I just like the big 30-year old Manfrotto I have.</p>

<p>This. looks like EXACTLY what I want in a mirrorless camera!<br /><br />DANG!<br> Price is high, but it looks SO promising.</p>

<p>I switched from Nikon to Oly EM-5 (not the mk II) a couple years ago. I'm delighted. You don't appreciate the advantage of the very small size of everything until you have it all in front of you. The 45mm f1.8 Oly takes great photos and is just amazingly small, the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 just about LIVES on my camera, it adapts well to other glass (although, imho, only for controlled careful manual focus work.<br /><br />My tiny bag has a EM-5, 14-42 zoom, 40-150 (used very seldom), the 9mm fisheye lens cap (not a great lens, but seriously fun), the 45mm and 20mm primes, the on-camera flash and a nicer Olympus flash...<br /><br />...all in the space that used to house a D90, kit lens, flash, and one extra prime.<br /><br />For me, the limitations of the smaller sensor are far outweighted by the fact that now... my camera is always with me again.</p>

<p>for a small unobtrusive street photography camera, it is hard to beat mirrorless... like Fuji or Panasonic/olympus µ43. Full-frame cameras are big and bulky and obvious, except perhaps the Leica, but that is pretty expensive.</p>

<p>D7000 is in that range. Far better choice than D300 imho.</p>

<p>Olympus and Panasonic mainly.</p>

<p>Snicker, the used µ43 cameras I mentioned are often under 200.</p>

<p>Not all ultra-wide landscape shots are great, in fact if there's not something big in the foreground, they usually are pretty lifeless.<br /><br />You actually MIGHT be better off with normal wide to short tele ranges for most real usable landscape, jus' sayin'...<br /><br />That said, if you KNOW what you're doing with ultrawides, you can make magic happen.<br /><br />Given what you have, if you're happy with it, the Tokina 11-20 is the one I'd get, but you might live at the LONGER end of that range for really good photos than you think you will...</p>

<p>The best way to do video is a video cam. The best way to do stills is a still cam. Mainly because of ergonomics. Try doing a slow smooth zoom on a DSLR with a mechanical zoom lens for instance... no good.<br /><br />I suspect you want a basic Point and shoot still cam. They all do video now.</p>

<p>If you don't have a smartphone, imho, a used µ43 camera with kit zoom can be had very cheaply and do this very well. And really almost any point-and-shoot camera on the market can, too.</p>

<p>The 16-80 is the clear choice for DX. A lens that only goes out to 24 as a basic walk-around zoom is frustrating (only 36mm f.o.v. equivalent) and it's a lens that gets really great reviews.</p> <p>But the Tamron 17-50 (and the Sigma in a similar range) f2.8 lens is really popular for really good reasons.</p>

<p>Eric, cost is indeed the factor, putting it in the purely professional and pro-wannabe range.<br /><br />It's not gonna sell in the numbers the Sony, Fuji, Panasonic and Olympus do even. It's many times the price. I mean... get real...</p>

<p>Edward, it is the ULTIMATE high-end wedding camera, even with only those two lenses you can probably get everything you want/need.<br /><br />That said, I have worked in churches since 2005, and most of the people who get married probably couldn't afford or wouldn't see the value in hiring the photographer who used this kind of rig and was therefore priced accordingly. Small market, but it's there...</p>

<p>It's a pro level system. Will it attract possible Sony A7xxx users? Maybe (unless they need a fast frame rate of course). But no one who is looking seriously at the bulk of mirrorless systems for its small size and extreme portability (in other words, Fuji and µ43) is looking at it.<br /><br />Pro MF shooters mostly if not completely.<br /><br />DSLR shooters from Nikon and Canon probably need or already have invested in systems that they are already going to stick with. 2.3fps will keep those folks away.<br /><br />Great for nature shooting, studio shots, portraits... everything that MF is really great for. Not so good for the things that people who can't afford it anyway don't gravitate towards.</p>

<p>It's mirrorless, but it's not in the same product class as virtually all the mirrorless offerings from the rest of the pack.<br /><br />It's a pro studio camera, basically. No interest for me.</p>