too many choices - HELP!!

[V I Archer]

Okay it is time for a new camera.  I took a photo of a cow moose this past hunting season, 8 yards, cold grey morning.  downloaded the image at home, and was barely able to make out the moose.  I want to take wildlife photos to accompany magazine article submissions.  I want something that will capture images well in low light.  I am thoroughly overwhelmed by all the information surrounding digital photography.  My present camera is a cannon powershot A-30, probably around 6 years old, 1.2 megapixels.  When I bought it it was hard to find anything over 2 MP.  Now I am reading about sensor size, optical vs. digital zoom, raw vs Jpeg......

I really have no idea where to turn, it all seems like a roll of the dice.  

I have a few choices:
I love my Leica binocs, so at first I was considering the Leica V-Lux 1 or D-Lux 3.  Then I was told the only difference between a Panasonic Lumix, and a Leica, is the little red logo.  So I considered a Panasonic lumix FZ18.  Then I read about the Sony DSCH-9 which has a "night shot" option.

Went to a camera store today to seek further help.  They had the lumix, they had the DSCH-9, but the clerk told me that I may not be pleased with the low light capabilities of such a camera, and should consider a digital SLR.  Now this opens a whole other realm.  He showed me the Sony A-100, sold as a kit with two lenses for less than the V-Lux 1, but nearly double the price of the lumix FZ18.

As the title says ....  HELP!

[Steve Kendrot]

I have a DSLR and a point and shoot. (Canon 10D and P&S is the Canon A720IS). If you want to capture quality low light shots, you better be prepared to plunk down some cash for a decent DSLR setup with a fast lens and a tripod, which will run you some serious bucks.

Most of the point and shoots have some sort of "night shot" which basically couples a long shutter speed (which allows better exposure of the background)with a flash to illuminate and freeze the close up subject. Its not really a low light wildlife setting.

The DSLRs offer much better noise reduction(thats the visual static you often get when shooting at low light conditions) at high ISO levels (higher ISO settings mean the sensor is more sensitive to light and requires less light to capture an image). Its not magic however, and you still need a fast shutter speed to freeze action or you will get blurry images. That means you need a "fast" lens with a large maximum aperture (2.8 or so) that lets lots of light in. They are expensive...more than the camera body itself.

To put it bluntly, you aren't going to find a camera that performs to publication standards at low light levels without investing in a professional grade system. And even then, it required a lot of techique to get good shots. I know because I have yet to get one!   :eek:

So... I would recommend two things... 1-lower your expectations and 2-look at a model that has an image stabilizer. That will give you a little more leeway in low light conditions. The Canon A720IS is a nice little camera for around $250. I bought it based on a recommendation from Jerry Gowins who writes the photography column for Traditional Bowhunter. I've been very happy with it with and my only complaint being it eats batteries like popcorn (at least the rechargeables I'm using don't last long). Other manufacturers have similar toys with similar features. Check out  www.dpreview.com  for independent reviews of all kinds of cameras. And don't torture yourself. They all take good pictures. Get one and start having fun.

[Chris Surtees]

Steve is right on with the A720IS being a good choice. Just bought some recently and I have heard nothing but great comments about them from the guys.