The (nearly) perfect camera?

I'm back to using my old Canon S110 (2-megapixel) camera until my Sony DSC-P200/R (7.2 megapixel) comes back from warranty service in Texas (hopefully without the blob on the image).

The Sony is in fact a very nice camera.

• Fast startup.
• Compact and easy to carry (144g).
• Very sharp pictures (sometimes).

But it does have some failings in my usage - failings likely common to all the current high-resolution point-and-shoot digital cameras.

1. Still pictures are often blurry.
2. Twilight pictures are too dark and/or blurry.
3. Distant pictures (an aircraft flying by) show the subject too small.
4. Fast action pictures (a running deer, a flying hawk, a kid chasing a soccer ball) seldom turn out.

It seems that the slightest hand tremor is enough to blur the picture, even in normal light. I can largely get around (1) by using the camera in "burst" mode. The 1GB memory card essentially never fills up, and throwing away 3-5 blurry pictures to get one good picture is tedious, but not difficult. Both low-light (2) and "fast" pictures (4) require better light-gathering by the camera - which translates to the need for a bigger/wider lens. Distant subjects (3) require greater zoom (much more than 3x) and high zoom values require either image stabilization or very high light-gathering and very short exposures.

While image stabilization is less needed in bigger/heavier cameras, this is the not the direction I would like to go. Someday the image sensors may become more sensitive and lessen the need for a bigger lens. I would guess this requires some big advances in the underlying technology, and is probably 5-10 years out (at least).

My requirements for the "perfect" camera are simple.

• Capture pictures at least as good as what my eye can see. Fair warning - blue eyes and ancestors from northern Europe mean I can "see" into twilight better than most.
• The camera should be unobtrusive and require the least possible amount of ceremony in use. Big/heavy cameras and extraneous controls count against usability.

Meeting those requirements is far from simple, and doubtless at present requires compromises. The ultimate point-and-shoot camera would track and capture whatever I was looking at. This is not likely to show up anytime soon (though DARPA should have a similar project in the works for battlefield use).

How close can we get? The photography sites have a lot of data, but how to answer my pragmatic questions is not obvious. I have no idea what expectations are reasonable.

• Can I capture a kid kicking a soccer ball? (Conditions: daylight - full sunlight or overcast, auto-focus, zoomed or unzoomed).
• Can I capture a bird or aircraft in flight? (Conditions: extreme zoom, daylight, handheld).
• Can a capture a deer under the trees at twilight? (Conditions: low light, unzoomed or modest zoom, handheld).

The Canon Rebel gets good reviews and sells well. Apparently the stock lens is not very good, and with a better lens (or two) the 20D looks to be around $1100-2000. No doubt this takes great pictures, but there is no chance lugging this camera around qualifies as unobtrusive.

The Nikon Coolpix 8800 looks interesting - 10x zoom with image stabilization, and a rather large looking lens (good light capture?). The camera can only capture limited length movie clips.

The size of the image sensor on the Sony DCS-R1 is interesting - better fast/low-light performance? No ability to capture video clips, and weighing 990g makes this is a klunky single-tasker.

The Sony Cyber-shot DCS-H1 and Canon PowerShot S2 IS are interesting - 12x zoom with stabilization, moderate weight, and modest ~$500 price - but only 5 megapixel - which at present is pretty much the best you can do in this category. Between the Canon and the Sony the features are about the same (with the Sony a shade weaker in some areas I care about). Bought the Canon as I just had to return my new Sony for warranty service (manufacturing fault), and my old Canon still works perfectly.

Not the perfect camera - too bulky and a bit light on resolution - but apparently about the best we can do at present for capturing more distant objects.

Update: the Sony came back from service about 10 days after I sent it off, and seems to be OK. Update(2): after a bit of use, I find that the smaller 1.8" screen on the back of the Canon is much less pleasant to use than the larger 2.5" screen on my Sony. The bigger screen gives you a much better idea about how the picture is going to turn out.