camera for my father

Mark Thomas wrote:
Ron Hunter wrote:
Stephen Bishop wrote:
The reason is that, if you can get good photos with the lighter and
cheaper gear, you can potentially get great photos with the more
capable gear. (Assuming you know what you're doing, of course.) The
day still hasn't arrived when a tiny p&s sensor will perform just as
well as the larger sensors in more substantial cameras.
Remember, just because technology is newer and smaller doesn't mean it
is better. Those same technologies that make p&s cameras better than
they were a few years ago are also used to make larger cameras even
better, as well. The laws of physics don't change just because of
wishful thinking.


All quite true, but would you say that current P&S cameras are as good
(image quality wise) as the old dSLR cameras?
Given one of the better 'bridge' cameras:
For a brightly lit 'un-contrasty' scene (eg bright overcast) - yes.
For a sunny scene with bright highlights and deep shadows - no (but
fairly close).
For a low light scene - no (not very close at all, especially if
anything is moving..)
The differences may not be great when printed/viewed small.

In other words, that question is unanswerable without specifics.

If so, then the images
would be good enough for the 99% of us who just don't want (or can't) to
carry around a larger camera?
And that is your only criteria? How about AF speed? Ability to manual
focus? General handling? Why is there this determination to satisfy
"99% of us", when 'our' needs and wants are not going to be the same?
For me, a p&s is good enough oh, about 85% of the time. Do I think my
needs are typical? Of course not. Photographic needs vary wildly and
widely, even in groups that you might think would 'mostly' want the same
thing.

Disposables, camera phones, p&s, bridge, APS-C, FF, 4/3, m4/3, MF, LF,
film, digital... vive la difference! There is room, and *need*, for all
formats (and more!). For many, no camera will exactly fit their needs
and there may be significant overlap, especially once you try to factor
in cost effectiveness.

No question about that, which is why I often prefer the greater
flexibility my older P&S (4mp) has compared with my wife's 10mp model.
I can use it in lighting conditions where hers just won't get a picture.
But hers is smaller, and lighter (which I consider a plus), and is
quicker to power up, better in 'movie mode', and renders better details
with the higher resolution, meaning I can crop with more flexibility.
Usually, we take both along, and use them for whatever each does best.