Yesterday evening I took Timothy to a local tumbling gym where his friend Taavi takes lessons, for Taavi's birthday party. The party, I think, was a big success — imagine a dozen six- and seven-year-olds running around, jumping on the trampolines, diving from ten feet up into the foam pits, playing hide-and-seek and red-light green-light, scaring each other in Darth Vader masks, and generally having a good time. My photography, I think, was not such a success — I tried taking the Elph instead of my usual D60 and was reminded why DSLRs are so much better than point and shoots. The light was low enough that I could only get a sharp shot with flash, and I don't like the way flashed photos look; also the shutter lag made it hard to get any shots of fast action such as the diving, and I had trouble framing the view accurately through the viewfinder. Well, it's pretty good for what it does, just not for what I like to do. And it was very convenient to be able to just put it in my pocket when I wanted to try out the trampoline myself. So out of 99 frames I ended up keeping only four, three of them severely blurred but I kind of like the way the blurring gives a sense of motion and action.
Larger versions in the gallery.
For example, look at Fujifilm F10. It has ISO 1600, which helps greatly in available-light photography. But that's just one problem among the several you mentioned. -- maverick
But that's just one problem among the several you mentioned. Yeah. For one thing, ISO is not the only important factor in low light, fast glass helps a lot too, and the F10 seems to be only F5 at max zoom. For this sort of situation with my D60 I'd be likely to choose my 50/1.4. Also I usually like more background blur than a point and shoot will give, although the 1.4 wide open may be too much.