Mornin' Duncan,
That was all very nicely put!
.....
Initially, I was mildly disappointed with the IQ from the X10 but I realised that I was too busy looking at the individual trees to determine the real shape of the woods!

In other words, I started looking at the images as a whole rather than just pixel-peeping!
The X10 does everything I expect of it - and then some. I've been using it a lot for portrait stuff and I really can't fault it. You've seen some of the results on here and to be honest, at web resolution I'd be hard pressed to tell what they'd been taken with.
.....
Cheers
I spent the afternoon having a long lazy lunch with my Photo Guru.
She's an FRPS in her late 70's, but hugely switched on and great fun to chat to
I showed her what I typed into this thread earlier (and your response).
Not only did she agree with what I was trying to say, but she said it was true for far more than just photography.
The reason I'm mentioning this is to bring up the subject of the X10's image quality.
My guru and I were discussing candidate images for my A-panel (three rows of five images).
She's madly keen that this one is considered for use as the centre image.
She's seen it filling her 1920x1200 screen (bigger than A3) and it does look good; far better than the small web sized image I've included here - it's all about the rich colours in the fine detail.
Then I could see a little bell going off in her head just before exclaiming that it couldn't possibly have been taken on the X10!
It was....
And worse than that it's JPEG only, DR400, ISO 400, Velvia simulation and hand held


I've just pixel peeped at the original and yup it looks plenty good enough for printing to A3+.
This would be wonderfully fitting as the centre image
on my L-panel was also taken with a compact.
It was the only image in that whole panel taken with a compact. A 4Mp Canon Powershot S40. It was printed to A3 and looks great

Plus being a compact camera I was able to take the shot with a pint of beer in the other hand

