Can a digital non-SRL camera take professional quality photographs?

I am not looking to become a professional photographer. I just enjoy taking pictures. But if for some reason, I happen to take a really great picture, I'd like it to be taken at a resolution and picture quality good enough to submit in a contest or even for sale. Are there non dSLR cameras capable of this? I really don't feel like dealing with different lenses, and the dust problems associated with changing them.

Any suggestions?

No.

They do not have a large enough sensor. The photos produced by them can have all the components of a professional photo (perfect exposure, perfect composition and good selection of subject matter) except high resolutioin.

Sure -- 9/10ths of a winning image is subject and composition.

But point-and-shoot cameras have limitations.

They perform poorly in low light, their flashes are puny and directional, the lenses suffer from distortion and other problems, and they can't take a bunch of pictures quickly.

If you can live with these issues, great.

But once you shoot with a DSLR, you won't be satisfied with anything else.

Hope this helps.
V

Back when I was teaching commercial photography, I would tell my students: The camera a photographer does not make. I can take a picture with a hole in a cigar box (and did, several times). Photography is still an art and it does take a certain amount of talent and a heck of a lot of practice. One advantage with digital is you get to see your own crap before anyone else can. Stay with a consumer class camera until you think you are getting good enough to go up to a pro-sumer SLR class. Then don't be afraid to look at options, such as Konika, Pentax, Olympus and others. In the long run they will give you more bang for the buck than the over priced Cannon and Nikon brands.

Sure. It can be done. Look for a camera that has at least 8 megs. You can blow them up to an 11x14, which is great for contests. An SLR is much better because you get a better preview of what the picture would look like. Also, SLR is better for telephoto shots. For landscapes and such, a point and shoot is fine- just get one with high resolution.

It's all about how the user composes his picture, and the subject matter. Pictures are supposed to tell a story. Point & shoots take very nice pictures IF:

The user uses the camera's best settings. Too many folks I know buy a decent camera but, they use the worst compression settings. "normal." Do not use this mode for taking good pictures. Use the fine, or superfine mode if you have it.

Point and shoots are limited in their abilities. An SLR is the way to go, and will be my next step. You can take very nice pictures with you point and shoot. If you go point & shoot, avoid ultra long zooms.

Look for a camera that has image stabilizaion. That feature is SO important. Don't go for 10 and 12 megapixels in a point and shoot. The sensors are too small for such high numbers, and will generate their own image noise. Stay between 6 and 8 megapixels. More megapixels don't give better quality, only the ability to print very LARGE pictures.

I have seen the Canon Powershot A720is on Amazon.com going for $177. You can't go wrong there. I have (2) of the A710is. I love them, but also understand their limitations. Good luck in your search. Above all else, enjoy what you are doing & have fun. Everybody has opinions about cameras. In the end, it's the best picture quality for the least amount of money, not staus quo.