Camera for Web Publications

[enzodm]

Thanks for the information. That photo taken of the house was incredible (to my eye's at least), though I'm assuming it's mostly a post-processing job. I figured that I could get away with a $200 camera, which is the what the powershot is exactly.

what I wanted to show is the falling lines you obtain with a normal lens (e.g., here , mine with kit lens).

The first has that noise I was talking about, which I attribute to using the camera's auto settings in a room with no lighting. The other two, though still suffer form poor sharpness. I can't even view them full size without them looking blurred, and that's just on a computer. I can't even tell where the focus is on them.

Yes, the first has noise (AUTO settings may mean ISO is raised automatically in low light). Your EXIF reports ISO800 at 1/50. I know is a snapshot, but also please note the subtle but dark shadow projected by the girl on right: this is something you do not want in a people picture, and you avoid it with careful lighting, needed for any camera.
The cow-woman picture is at ISO125, and more than noise I see some other problem. In fact is blurred, but I'm not able to say why; it has been taken at 1/400 which is fast enough. Difficult to tell where is focused; at f/4, even with a P&S, not all the scene can be on focus.

The last one is not bad, except for the blown out sky (in such a scene with light&dark, you will have some problem also with a dSLR). I see it sufficiently sharp and no noise, perhaps needing some adjustment. At f/8 should be all on focus (check DoF here: Depth of Field Table).
If you look for sharpness, try to put online a 100% crop from the original image (e.g. the grass on the other side of the river, just behind the wood).

I assume I won't have that problem with a powershot or Rebel XS. Thanks for your help, I think I might end up going for the Rebel XS, since I know it's not a "wannabe" dSLR or anything like that.

For even less noise, Nikon d3100 is more recent and with better control (Canon has yet to substitute its entry level). However, a dSLR does not ensure you perfection, in particular when using auto settings.
If you want to look at other pictures made with your camera: Flickr: Camera Finder: Sony: Cyber-shot DSC-W80 . As you see, some of them are outstanding (usual house sample: The Farnum House | Flickr - Photo Sharing! ).

 

[Nigma]

Yeah I knew nothing about taking photos when I did these (I'm not even sure if I was the one holding the camera). Even looking at the photos in the gallery, though, I still don't think I'd be satisfied using them for publications.

So, if I brace the camera and slow the shutter speed indoors, do you think I could get away with ISO 100? I'm assuming that the aperature width doesn't have much leeway on point and shoot cameras.

I originally had an assumption that the quality of the lens played a big role in the clarity of the image. I know that with scopes used on rifles, the difference between a walmart model and a $1000 piece is like SD & HD. They even seem to be outsourced to the same manufacturers that do riflescopes; Carl Zeiss made the one on the Cybershot and I'd love to get a hand on one of their high end scopes. Perhaps the thing you can't put a finger on with the blurriness is the poor optics? Even if that's true, I guess it would be difficult to know whether the lens on the Canon Powershot is that much better. All the more reason to use a DSLR that can change lenses, then.