Andrea, I shoot RAW exclusively now for the reasons you stated except occasionally flip it over to sports because it goes auto to burst (I think), and does only .jpg. I love Photoshop, has a very steep learning curve, waited years until I got a $299 upgrade with Elements to CS2. I don't just use it for my photographs, and I agree with you about some of the software that comes with cameras, read about Nikon's, refused to get in the camera wars, was really torn between Canon and Nikon, at the time I thought Canons had better noise reduction at the expense of IQ, understood that going in. I started just doing graphics learning all I could with PSP (quit upgrading at 5 because I didn't like some things), then bought Photo Impact (fun for awhile but a waste of money), but when I saw the power of PS, I was sold. I don't use all the features, no, don't jump on the upgrade bandwagon (lightbox is really cool, can't afford it), but I love their USM and ACR white balance corrections and several others such as highlight/shadows tool (because of the limited dynamic range with all digital cameras, may be better with the more expensive, super-high resolution ones), when I want to make them pop more. And a lot of it is strictly a matter of taste. There are some incredibly talented with PS; I'm not one of them. The actual conversion process doesn't take more than 30 seconds, and when I can, I batch convert using scripts. I know everything you said is true, especially you can use Nikon pics right out of the cam, sharp as a tack, same with some good P&S cameras. Have to watch oversharpening, too. For web viewing, people probably can't tell the difference about sharpening. I can see it, very occasionally I don't bother with it, depending, but do like to do my own cropping and straightening, can't stand really crooked photos unless for creative effect. Other software does that just as well. I highly respect your opinion, and it sounds like you are some kind of pro. I don't presume to know everything. Blowing blows more dust in than I get out sometimes, always do that first regardless, a couple tries, then test, but I have used the wet method only once, got it better, but just let the dustbunnies I missed be for now and try to be careful changing my lenses. The only people I'd really trust to clean my sensor filter, not the sensor on Canon, but extremely delicate, is Canon. Nobody on the Canon dslr forum I've read yet on dpreview for almost 5 years now sends theirs anywhere for sensor filter cleaning; they all clean them themselves, most very confidently (not me!) many, many use a wet method usually Copperhill or a pen. I used extra pure alcohol and qtips I got at the medical supply center, just a drop w/eyedropper. I first try the dry method with Walgreen's brand q-tips very gently. The camera store person told me some use plastic knives from McDonald's! Not for me! I don't really trust my local camera store or Best Buy technicians. With the camera store, last time I was in was tempted to butt in and tell the customer something I happened to know, while the salesman didn't seem to, held my peace. Had some photos and a painting scanned I wanted to retouch, state-of-the art, awful, ended up using my camera and tripod. The camera store wasn't set up to cater to dslr users, maybe they're more with it now. I hate cloning out dustbunnies once a bad one gets in there, most don't show at the sizes and resolution I use, but do clone quite a bit for other reasons and like the healing tool. Once a piece of fiber got in there, it drove me nuts, that I got out by blowing, need a better blower, the Hurricane one. Sorry for taking up so much "airtime". Sooner or later most dslr owners are going to have to choose how to deal with it. Then if I screw up, I screw up, and will pay the consequences. You HAVE to clean your lenses, even on P&S cameras, which I do as little as possible. I know Nikon has fine cameras and lenses; that is why the choice was so hard, and sometimes I still look back, but now I'm invested heavily in a few lenses not as many as some have, don't need them, but very expensive and wouldn't get near what I paid for them if I sold them, even though they are all in mint condition.

Vannie, It depends on what you want to take pictures of. DH & I love our Canon Power Shot A series digital. We are on the second one, the first was still working but we had a chance to upgrade so we gave it to a young friend. It is great for all around photos and snapshots and is excellent indoors and out. As a simple point and shoot it is easy to learn and use. With only a 3x optical zoom it is limited for what you can do with it outside, especially taking pics of birds and animals. My Dad just bought a Kodak Easy Shoot - I don't remember the model but it is nice in that it has a 10x optical zoom. While it is also simple to learn and use, the zoom is wonderful - you can get close-up shots without spooking birds or other animals. I didn't get a chance to play with it, but one point was really good. With a USB cable connection to the computer the included software will handle downloading the pictures to the computer and clearing the memory card all with one step - plug in the camera. For a novice or someone who does not want to fiddle with the technology, that is great. My main camera is a Nikon Digital SLR that I can change lenses on - I've got an ultra wide angle lens, a middle range zoom and a telephoto zoom. But this is a serious camera and commitment to investment in equipment and time to learn to use. I get a lot of wildlife shots but mostly bought it to take portrait of horses. ;-) I suspect most of the digital cameras in the $150-250 price range would be good. We generally buy our point and shoots right when the new models are being introduced. That is when we buy the previous year's models at a tremendous discount. They are new cameras, never used, still good technology. But our last Canon that listed at close to $300 cost us $125,

Sorry to be late; didn't check in for a couple of days. Yes, the Panasonic makes extremely sharp photos, thanks, in part to the Leica lens. It offers two types of image stabilization, both optical (the best kind): 1. continuous and 2. at the moment of shutter let-off. Of my six non-DSLR cameras, the Panasonic DMC-TZ5 is the best one. Like most digital cameras, it has a wide range of shooting modes, most of which I never use. But they're there. It also shoots video, but I've never done it; I do know that it lets you zoom during video filming - I understand that many cameras will not zoom during video. As I said, the flash range is limited and the camera DOES NOT have an optical viewfinder. One other drawback - which you can overcome by careful "holding" - is that the flash is located below the shutter button, and it's natural to put your middle finger over it. You've got to get used to that. Panasonic has packed so much into this little camera that I don't think there was any other place to put the flash. And by-the-way, like most small digitals, it does not have a hot shoe for using an auxillary flash. If you'd like further info from me, go to My Page and email me directly. Javert

These kind of questions will start wars. I have the Canon XT, Olympus E500, Olympus E1. I enjoy all of the camera. I think the best bang for you buck is definately the E500. Best price for entry level camera and it comes with two kit lenses, and they are really good lenses. The colors are great, better than the XT in my opinion. Canon has better noise control in lower light, but that is okay with me. Another thing, Canon's aspect ratio is 3:2, Olympus is 4:3. 6x4 print: -- Canon - you use all 8MP with the ratio -- Olympus - you use just under 7Mp with that ratio Rusult- pretty much nothing, you can get a clear 6x4 print with 3 MP since its a small print. 5x7, 8x10 Prints: --Canon - you will lose about 2MP with these prints due to the ratio -- Olympus- better fits these print ratios, lose about .2MP on 5x7, lose about .8MP on 8x10. Results - when the picture is taken with proper technique it would be hard to notice a deference, but the more MP you can cram into the print the better (when using higher quality cameras and lenses, of course) Also, Olympus just announced two entry level models to be released this year - E410, E510- so the price of the E500 should be falling a bit. I migh tpick up a second body if the price is right. Just my opinions. ZJoe