Thank you very much Bob. I appreciate that, and the more I look at it, the more it seems to be as much, or more, than I'll ever need. And it fits right into my budget range.
I wonder, could trouble you to check out the 2 links I've attached? I've also been looking at a Nikon Coolpix B500 that is somewhat comparable. It's slightly less money, and got pretty good reviews.
The Sony doesn't have a Macro Mode, but if I'm reading the specs. right, has at least as good or better focusing range than the Nikon. So is the lack of Macro a factor? You'll probably understand the numbers better than me.
The computer interface specs. also are a bit confusing. I have a PC with Windows 7.
The Nikon has Wi-Fi and a touch screen which I wouldn't need anyway. And the only other thing that I have difficulty interpreting, is the comparison of the limits of operation of the tilt screens.
Any comments about how the two cameras compare would be much appreciated.
The Sony camera, I don't believe, is even available in the U.S. And Best Buy up here says they have them on sale until July 13. So if It's not too much of an imposition, the sooner you could advise me, the better. I know availability for some of the products can be a problem.

Thanks again Bob.........................Dave http://www.bestbuy.ca/en-ca/product/nikon-nikon-coolpix-b500-16mp-40x-optical-zoom-digital-camera-b500/10415981.aspx?
http://www.bestbuy.ca/en-ca/product/sony-sony-dschx350-b-20-4mp-50x-optical-zoom-compact-camera-black-dschx350-b/10573934.aspx?&fromBrandStore=sony

I understand now that the sizing of a digital sensor somehow correlates with a video tube from back in the day. Until this moment, I didn't even know there was a correlation. I've been away! Lol
As I see it, a digital sensor that is 12.80 mm x 9.60 mm, and has been designated a 1" sensor, relates somehow to a 1" video tube. Very simply, if possible, what is that relationship? Similarities in information processing capability?
I also scanned Wikipedia, and saw that the CCD sensor format came into being in the early '70s, following the demise of video tubes. So they've been around quite a while. Are they obsolete, if you compare them to the latest sensor formats?

I agree. One can get along without a flip screen. I could too. You could have it but not use it, unless there was no other way to get the shot. Then it would be nice to have. I don't think that I would necessarily consider it to be a serious priority when making a camera purchase. But then again, that is the question isn't it?

Dave

Sun glare!! That's a good point Lazy J, and would share equal billing with, "taking low shots without lying down in the mud."
And as far as, "Who doesn't have a garage door opener these days?"...............I don't even have no stinking garage!!

Dave

Thanks Mike. It's good to be here.
It's already an interesting trip, even in such a short period of time. Like I said, I've been taking, "snapshots" for most of my life. And now, relatively late in that life, I'm just beginning to rekindle an interest in more of the details, as they pertain to photography. I've already asked a few questions, and i've received many responses, each time, in very short order. I appreciate the interest in answering my generally elemental questions. I also belong to a motorcycling forum, and never receive as much feedback, in such a short period of time. It's like everybody here, is just out there waitng to offer me advice! LoL
Some replies have been relatively to the point, short, concise, and aimed at this amateur more directly. I definitely appreciate, and intensely need that. Some replies are infinitely more detailed, way above my pay grade, and often leave my head spinning. But I really appreciate that feedback also, because it keeps me humble.

Thanks to everyone, and thanks again Mike, for your welcoming.................................Dave

This will no doubt be a very elementary subject for most of you, but I'm just learning and need a little help with details. I'll be asking a lot of questions in the future so please bear with me if you don't mind.
How is the numbering, used to identify a sensor's size, interpreted? For example: 1/2.3" (6.17 x 4.55 mm), 2/3" (8.80 x 6.60 mm), 1" (12.80 x 9.60 mm) etc. etc. I can see that the measurements in brackets, in millimeters, is the actual length by width size of the sensor. But how do you read, and interpret, 1/2.3", 2/3", 1" etc., and how do those numbers equate to anything?
Also, it would appear that the bigger the sensor, the better the photo. So, based on that premise, would that be a major factor to consider when purchasing a camera? If you purchase a camera that is going to max out your camera budget, should you opt for the one with the biggest sensor? And are there combinations of features, that you can apply to a camera, that would compensate for a lack of sensor size, and even create a camera that would produce higher quality photos, using a smaller sensor?

Any details would help.......Thanks.....Dave

All very good points. Thank you! I'm not sure I'm aging like most of us. I think it may be at a somewhat more accelerated rate than that. And that's a really good point about the low-down shots. I suppose one simply has to be careful with it, and not abuse it, so they don't break it. I agree that it's probably nice to have on hand. Better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.
And I hate to admit it. But I'm too damned old for touch screens. I see my son and my daughter moving stuff around on their smart phones, and it just leaves me in the dust!

Just give me a button to push. I love to push buttons. Especially the one that says, "AUTO". Ha! Ha!...................................Dave

If you were buying a new camera, would the presence of a flip-out screen be a mandatory item? If so why, and would you also need it to tilt, and do a 180º for selfies? Or would you be quite satisfied with a standard screen?
I've always just had a standard screen, and I've always coped. I'm wondering if a flip screen would get enough use to warrant having it. They have always seemed to me, to be a very fragile item, and not worth the bother. I'm curious about your ideas regarding the pros and cons.
Also while I've got your attention, what's your opinion regarding touch-screens? Do you love 'em? Hate 'em? Or do you get along just fine with standard switching? I have this feeling about getting my greasy fingerprints all over my beautiful HD screen.

Thanks..................Dave

That's great info. Thank you very much.

First of all I think the Olympus might be a bit out of my price range. And it might be just me, but I was finding it difficult to find a camera with a zoom feature. My camera has a 10X zoom, and I've used it often. The newer cameras seem to have huge telephoto features, which I like. I guess you would need to be interchanging lens' to accomplish that with the Olympus. That's something that I wouldn't find desirable. But it's no doubt a very good camera.
And also, thank you for all of the links. There's some on the list that I hadn't seen. I'll check them out.
And BJW, in the end you might be right about sticking with a Panasonic, for some of the reasons you mentioned. I remember 10 years ago, while shopping for my Panasonic, finally narrowing the field of possibilities to the one I finally purchased. That after doing some research regarding details, and reading reviews, and having a friend who had recently bought one and had a reputation for researching quite carefully. And also finding one in my price range. I've always had very good luck through the years, and always felt comfortable with it, and with it's performance. But now I'm going to upgrade, and probably, for reasons you mentioned, maybe I'll stick with a proven performer.

Thanks again to all of you...............Dave

Hi everyone,

I'm new to this forum, and I hope to feed on your vast knowledge of things photographic in the future. I'm 70 years old, and I've been taking snap-shots since I was a kid. I've never gotten very deeply involved with photography, and to be honest with you at this stage of the game, I don't think I will be getting all that serious. That's not to say that I don't spend time composing my photo shots carefully. I do try to discipline myself to take a thoughtful photographic memory, each time I take a photo. I guess I'm a kind of serious amateur. Just try to bear with me.
Again to be honest, I registered with the Ugly Hedgehog forum to ask your opinion regarding a potential camera purchase. So I guess I am taking advantage somewhat, and I do apologize for that. At any rate, we'll see where the adventure leads.
Please, promise you won't laugh, but I'm currently tired of using my Panasonic DMC-TZ1 compact camera. It's 10 years old, and has served me very well. It always did pretty well what I wanted, and needed. But now I want something new. I've been doing some research, and it seems that any compact camera these days is loaded with features, and are a far departure from my camera, and it's relatively simple and easy to use format.
My top-end is $400 to $500. It seems like I get to a certain camera, ie. a Nikon Coolpix B500 with a 40X zoom that has good reviews, and then I'l see a Sony DSC-HX350 with a 50X zoom, also with good reviews. It's loaded with extra features that the Nikon is missing, ie. much better screen resolution, Exmor R CMOS sensor, digital viewfinder etc. etc., for an extra $80.
I'll cut to the chase. If someone wouldn't mind Googling the Sony camera, and offering their opinion regarding the dollar value of this camera I would be very grateful. It seems to me, that it's a very good camera, with probably more features than I'll ever use. But it also would appear, that if you want specific features, you have to take them all. Learning how to use it properly would no doubt keep me busy. So that could be good.

Thanks for listening. I do tend to ramble. Any help would be appreciated.....................................Dave........PS...I noticed when I sent this posting that I'd been a subscriber since 2013. I had a feeling that was the case, but when I attempted to login, it said the login didn't work. So I re-registered. And well. here we are!! LoL

Many thanks everyone for your valuable opinions. It would appear that the RAW formatting technology is a very positive step in allowing one the opportunity to enhance artistic impression. I guess I should get on board.
And thanks Ben,for reminding me to restore my exposure compensation dial to zero, although I really can't remember,the last time I forgot anything! Why can't they put an adjustable timer on it?

Dave

Your comment is good to hear. I've heard that before. My camers does have that capability,although being up in years and somewhat "old school" by nature, I haven't explored this high tech feature yet. Like some guy said, "the only fear is fear itself", so I better get on with it.
Thankyou for your advice.

Hi everbody,

I've purchased a Canon Powershot G16 compact, potentially the best compact that I could afford. So far,aside from the settings and imaging possibilities of this camera, and the inevitable learning curve associated with this technology, I think that I'm satisfied with the upgrade from my 2006 Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ1 compact,an excellent companion over those few years.
My questions are,what features in a camera are critical in the quest to approach visual perfection in a photogragh,aside from the obvious necessity in having shutter and aperture control, and a natural talent for taking pictures? I'm interested,specifically in features which would determine colour accuracy,and image detail.
Are there significant differences in lens construction,in regards to glass quality,and grinding techniques,and who makes the lenses that perform at the top end? Also,does the sensor quality and sensor size play a role in, again,image detail and colour accuracy?
Up here in the "Great White North" my camera seems to be frozen in the "Snow Scene" mode.

Thanks in advance for any comments..........Dave

Thanks Nekon for your very consise recommendation. I just picked up a Canon G16. It looks like it will do the trick.

Thanks for your suggestion. I have briefly looked at bridge cameras, but thought that they might be on the bulky side. However, I do like the gentle learning curve that you mentioned. Do you have any idea which one might have a significantly better image. I know that I'm probably restricted with a camera of that caliber, but I still see, and am quite aware, of an image that is eye appealing and captivating, as opposed to one that just doesn't make it. So, I need all the help I can get, and still stay within my budget. I'm sure you understand.
Thanks again..........Dave