I made this little colage of Sam's graduation. Of course there were many more pictures taken. EM1 iii with pl50-200mm lens. John

Very nice. ....and I'm not seeing the ultra white, washed out faces caused by florescent overhead lighting.

Good ones. I think they all apply to me. Plus, I can't type. John

If cameras with detachable lenses are really prohibited, I suggest the Sony RX100 vii with a 200mm lens or an Olympus Stylus 1 with a 300mm f2.8 lens. Either of those might work well with no flash and set up for use with the drive mode set to burst, matrix metering, and with auto ISO and auto WB. Others to consider are the Panasonic ZS100/200, the ZS80 or the Sony HX99. Rent, if needed.
John

Don't know about that arena, but have recently shot 3 of the 10 grandkids college graduations - all in huge arenas (basketball venues), and rather badly lit. I used m4/3 with a PL50-200mm f2.8-4 lens. I also took a PL12-60mm f2.8-4 lens, but didn't use it. The 50-200 lens was barely long enough to capture the graduation ceremony. Go early so you have choice of seating. We sat rather high up, near the end where they will be walking toward as they get to shake hands with the faculty and get their diplomas. Shot with continuous focus, auto ISO, auto WB, low, continuous bursts, and sorted it out later. Also took a few of them sitting, walking up, and returning to seats with diplomas. Keep in mind the overhead, florescent lighting will render faces as washed out , pale white and all the black robes will add noise. Plan to add some color back in post processing, and use a denoise program to have the pictures as good as possible.

However, after graduation took lots of family shots with Sony RX100 vii. After graduation is chaotic, and the bigger m4/3 gear is very awkward. The P&S proved much better. Lots of crowding. Get it set up ahead of time and take lots of pictures. Sort out in post. Again, lighting is problematic, and little or no time to be fooling with cameras and settings - or chimping. I found that for family pictures the 50-200 lens is way too long, so either take a good P&S (preferred) or a shorter lens for that.

So, for you, take the 70-200 lens, shoot with ISO auto, shoot in short bursts as they get their diploma, AND take a good P&S camera for the family shots after. Go early to choose your seating (We were pretty high up on the side the graduates would be walking toward). Since after gradation, family shots are so chaotic, I'd say a good P&S is a must - or maybe a phone.

That's my experience, and it has worked well. Don't forget to take pictures with the family at lunch - if planned, and posed with family members in the parking lot or where ever.

Remember when "full frame" 35mm cameras were considered "tiny?" It was considered they could not possibly get enough detail in that "tiny" thing - and people "proved" it. Now they are the "great big" thing and best of all things photographic.

yes. Looking at zoom range only, but what about lens quality and focusing in low light?

Use paper billing only. Computers and online billing are just too unreliable.

I know it's a trite saying but "You get what you pay for." Yes, the price of the RX100 vii is high (buy used or get the vi model) - but it is better then the Canons premium P&S cameras, particularly in low light. Focusing makes all the difference.

The Sony RX100 vii is better then the little Canons. Much better focusing in low light.

Get the Sony RX100 vii. It's a great camera. The Canons have a problem focusing in low light. The Sony does not. Great lens, great focusing, small and light but add a grip. It also has a one-touch, pop up viewfinder. Just what you want.

Get the Sony RX100 vii. It's a great camera. The Canons have a problem focusing in low light. The Sony does not. Great lens, great focusing, small and light but add a grip.

I've had quite a few pocket-sized P&S cameras. What i've found is their are always some compromises and none are perfect. The Sony RX100 vii is the best of the bunch. Features - Panasonics, but let down by the lens quality and focusing in low light, somewhat noisy, Olympus - Stylus 1, good long lens, except at max zoom, smaller sensor, Canon G5X ii - good lens, slow to no focus in low light, 720 HS - long lens poor picture quality, don't know about the others, Sony - HX99 long lens, small sensor, uses tiny card, RX100VA - short, fast lens, fast focus in low light, lens too short, Sony RX100 vii, fast focus in low light, slower, but longer lens - best of the bunch, Casio EX - not bad, no viewfinder, long, sharp lens.

What I've found is a "better" lens (for low light) does no good if the camera can't focus or has slow focus. It does no good if the processor or sensor adds a bunch of noise to the pictures. It does no good if the lens gives burry pictures in low light. It does no good if the menu is so convoluted as to make the camera unusable.

Best of the bunch is the Sony RX100 vii for overall picture quality, longish, but slower lens (200mm), sensor (stacked 1 inch), good focusing in low light, The menu is ridiculously complex, but the saving grace is the FN button and the My Menu where in both you can choose what to place there and what to use, and forget the other stuff, good quality pictures even at high ISO.

I have rejected some of the shorter (24-70mm lens) cameras as the lens is just to short and limiting, and some of the bigger bridge cameras as to big and many have very small sensors. That's my take on the whole pocketable, travel cameras.

John

Equilalence! Whine, whine whine!

John

Equivalency! NOTHING is ever as good as "full frame." ....which used to be critsized as being way to tiny to be able to capture ANY detail. Stop it!!!