Picking the first lens is easy: Panasonic 25mm f/1.4. It has has some magic touch to it, specially for people. The best lens I ever had in 20 years in the hobby and 30 lens or so. The second one is much harder, as there is only one left. Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 is lovely, but would miss tele too much. I think it would be the Panasonic 14-140mm f/3.5-5.6, a great all around lens. BTW, another great question is, how many lens you have and how many you really use (e.g. take more than 10% of pictures with it). I bet many people who have many lenses use only a small subset of them.

I also did not get it why no IBIS on the 6300. They lost a client on me right there...

Hi Mike! Would something like the Motorola Atrix address your needs? (I don't fully understand why it is not popular.) []s Walfredo

An old prosumer body, say, Canon 10d or Nikon d70. (I had a 10d and it produces wonderful images.) They are better built than the entry-level (say, Canon Rebel) and you can have a body + lens for ~ $250 on ebay. Not sure about fish-eye. Maybe he can get a 50mm (a good idea anyhow) and a fish-eye filter?

It was the Olympus E5 + Panasonic 20mm for a while. Now it is the amazing Sony RX100, expect if it is night but not a party, when I go back to the E5. :-)

Mike, you are forgetting the amazing Sony RX-100, the best pocket camera at the moment. []s Walfredo

I got it when it was $420 because I was interested in the lens and having a back-up body doesn't hurt. The lens is awesome!! In the same league of the 20mm f1.7. And the body is lovely. The sensor won't let you down unless you are printing *huge* sizes (totally fine for 13x19", which is the largest I typically print). The only thing I complain about the body is the lack of IS. I was very happy with my purchase at $420. For $100 less, this is a no-brainer. []s Walfredo

Thanks so much for the very insightful article, Ken! You changed the way I photograph!!! My first digital camera was the awesome 3MP Canon G1 in 2000. At the time I did a careful RAW vs JPEG evaluation. RAW was clearly better. I never reevaluated that... until I read your article. I redid my own test with my favorite camera of today: Olympus E-P1. The JPEGs are just nicer than my Lightroom-processed RAWs, specially with the lovely Olympus 45mm. I don't doubt that, given enough time, I could make the RAWs look as good as the JPEG. But, I can use my time for other things... :-) So, expect for special conditions (which you described well), JPEG it it!! Thanks a bunch!! []s Walfredo

Swan M10, Mike? :-) BTW, your posts on Audioengine and tube amps a couple of years ago started my on audiophilia. :-) It has been great fun!! Looking forward to your article next Sunday. []s Walfredo