Pegasus - I gather you have a problem with my rather profuse use of the ellipsis (series of dots - used to denote pause) in this comment. I find its utilization to be rather useful in comments of this type. Whilst I do delight in its use, and found it to be more than useful, here - I do take exception to your return comment. I feel it has NO PLACE in a forum of this type. Having said that, I do admit it's rather amusing. That said, it shall be reported to the Administration.

Bob ... I am also amazed at how well Pentax bodies handle ISO, compared with most Nikons and Canons. My K-50 does an excellent job, selecting max. ISO without causing "measles" ... and I had a K-3 for a short while, which also did. The K-70 carries on the fine work of the K-50. That new KP, though - costs more than the K-3 II ... and it lacks top-deck LCD
.... for not much more than the KP - you could pick up the full-frame K-1 ....

Think about it ....

rehess ....

When we look at our OWN EXIFs in this way, of course - all the details are there. But, when you look at those of somebody else - you get a vastly shortened version.

Donald ... thanks for the tips ....

Glad you find the time both for embedding extra details, AND shooting ....

Why would you throw a Pentax or a Nikon, and not a Sony, bull?

Since the former have movable mirrors, I suspect they are even MORE fragile than Sonys - which have fixed ....

Aschweik ... what about the chargers, though .... you HAVE to plug them in, somewhere .....

Yeah, I know what you mean .... having similar problems ... have to get used to Nikons and Fujis using the dial to switch on .... and Canons always have that switch you have to slide .... sometimes, takes TWO fingers, and all ....
Aschweik ... ever have that problem?

Perhaps, that should have been directed to Mr. Gallagher ... about having time to shoot ....

rmalarz - seems like you've cut yourself out a full-time job, there ....

When do you have time to shoot?

Photoman ... I think you meant - right-click - no?

The problem with that is the details available are very basic ....

It doesn't tell you the camera used, or the lens ... just ISO, f-stop and shutter speed ....

Jerry - Homebrews are NG anymore - for Net use anyway. MS advised they will not be supporting them, anymore - instantly causing me to have to phase out my dozen or so, and buy some with the OS pre-installed .... and, since doing so ... I, too - have expanded ... current count is five - 4 desktops and a laptop ... you always want to keep ahead of the hackers - faster speeds will help, but - the most important way is to find ones with all the security measures built-in .... and, then - there's USB 3 ... and, so on ... and - NO - I don't need a psychologist, thanks ...

BTW, Jim ... beware of using shutter speeds too high - you will get green banding problems - which are caused by the camera shutter picking up the beginning of the NEXT scan from the transmission, BEFORE it has ended the last scan ... which can totally mutilate the entire image. This is why I zeroed in on the "grey area" between 1/15th and 1/30th ... 1/60th and above always seemed to lead to this problem. Now, I am much more careful. Seems like a great idea of yours, waiting for the slo-mo replays of the action between rounds. I think I'll try that, as well ...
Happy Shooting!!!!

Jim ... sorry it didn't work for you. Then, I suspect your TV uses a higher refresh rate than mine. Either that, or the inherent "shake" caused when pressing the shutter release - was felt by the shutter at such a slow speed. The area between 1/30th of a second and 1/15th of a second is a grey area. Most guides tell you not to use anything lower than 1/30th - because of the "shake" problem. But, I found 1/20th of a second perfectly satisfactory for my TV shots - as it allows for a complete scan of the TV picture, without getting into the vibration problem. You might try 1/25th, and see if that helps. If not, stay at 1/30th ... which should null all vibrations caused by shutter-plunging.

dyixman ... Standouts are many. First of all is Sony's RX Series, which use a 1" sensor. Early models had a fixed zoom - from 24mm to 200mm. The current model extends that to 600mm. Some of Panasonic's Lumix series use Leica lenses, typically, extending out to 600mm. The FZ series lacks Leica lenses, but have an extensive range - particularly, on the wide end - going from 20mm to 1200mm. The latest model FZ-80, even adds a touch-screen. The Olympus Stylus SP-100EE adds a laser point beam, to aid in focus of distant objects. Also - 24-1200. Canon also has joined the wider bottom end, with their current Powershot SX-60 - which starts at 21mm, and extends out to - I think - 1365mm. On the farthest reach category, apart from the aforementioned Nikon Coolpix P-900 - is Sony's H400 - which extends out to - I think - around 1400mm, also. Nikon's P-600 and follow-ups - is also out to 1440 (or thereabouts.) Most of them have a start at 24mm, or 25mm, or 27mm - some Sony Cybershots, and then extend out from there. Once you have the zoom factor, you can figure it out yourself, once you have the wide end. Sony, and Fuji - have, by far, the most models of Bridge Cameras, with Nikon and Canon, not far behind. Although, the Panasonic Lumix series, are certainly right up there. Most camera manufacturers, have, at least - one or two models, in their "Bridge" line. The top-end ones, all have viewfinders. The lower end ones, rely on "Pixel-Picking" - on the LCD screens. You pays your money, you picks your poison. Personally, I prefer the VF models. At least, that way - you can choose your method, at the time you decide to shoot. Pricewise, apart from Sony's RX series (which are way over a thousand bucks) Bridge cameras can cost anywhere from a low of $300 to an average (for viewfinder models) of $500. The Nikon Coolpix P-900 may be just a little more. Hope that helps!

dyximan - The term "Bridge Camera" is relatively new ... they always used to be called Long Zoom Cameras - because of the range of the fixed zoom attached .... which has gone from 12x to 30x in the early days, to the average of 50x to 60x in the current crop (with the exception of Nikon's Coolpix P-900 with its 83x - 2000mm) ... the term signifies the "bridge" between basic "point and shoot" cameras, and full DSLRS. Most of them look quite like DSLRs and many of them, particularly Fuji models, have equal dimensions as the smallest APS-C DSLRs. The disadvantage is they use a tiny sensor. The main advantage to them - is they have more consistency than DSLRs.