I picked up a Cannon "Powershot"SD100 IS 8.0 mega pixels, out in Colorado at the PX... normally around $279. they had these marked down to $159.

I love it... also has video recorder built in, compact and I carry it daily on my belt loop...

Ummmm Cannon "Powershot"SD100 IS = Cannon "Powershot" "SD1100" IS

I'm looking at the newer model of that same camera! It's a bit more expensive but looks like it has some good upgrades

^

Doesn't matter if it's digital or film SLR versus point & shoot of same technology, the argument is the same.

Yes, the (D)SLR is going to have a faster and more advanced auto-focus system with a greatly superior light metering system. The glass on all but the crappiest interchangeable lenses for the (D)SLRs is going to be superior to almost every point & shoot. Very few p/s cameras can hold a candle to the SLRs - in the film world, these were the Contax's and Nikon Ti 35's w/ Leica glass - among other cameras, I own a Ti 35 - so long as someone is making 35mm film, I'll never sell it, the pictures are too damn good, and it fits in my pocket, Unlike my EOS 1N's and Rolleiflex TLRs (intelligently or stupidly, depends on how you look at things, I sold all of my Hasselbalds a decade and a half ago).

For the most part, anything a scratch & sniff, errr, point & shoot, can do, a (D)SLR is going to do better and more of, but you are going to pay for it, and in some cases exponetially. It's a matter of how far down the rabbit hole you want to go.

24 for 19

Canon Digital Rebel xti

I was going to buy a digital SLR camera before the wife and I went to Italy on vacation. Let me preface my recommendation by saying I had done quite a bit of film SLR photography back in the day, took a lot of classes and spent a lot of time in the darkroom developing my own prints and being artsy fartsy. I say this only because I know some of the SLR Elitists may scoff at a non-SLR recommendation.

After considering Nikon, Canon and Olympus Digital SLR's Here is what I bought:

http://content.costco.com/images/content/misc/pdf/ITW_408465_Panasonic.pdf 

This Panasonic DMC ZS1 is an incredible camera for the money (~$250). It has a quality Leica F3.3 - F4.9 25MM Wide angle up to 12x Optical (300MM) Zoom lens. It has burst and video modes, stabilization, and very good auto exposure SW. I've been amazed at the clarity of the pics I took with it many under low light conditions in churches and museums with no flash It is compact and easily carried in an unobtrusive belt case. The latter advantage is non-trivial especially if you're shlepping baggage onto trains from one destination to the next.

The rechargeable lithium ion battery pack goes several hundred pictures between charges.

The URL has all the specs on the camera. I think this is one of the best cameras you can get that is Non-SLR.

I saw a lot of vacationers in Italy carrying SLR's around their necks like millstones, watched a Japanese tourist drop his hefty Nikon SLR on the cobblestones outside St. Peter's in Rome, and was really glad I opted for something more practical and convenient at a much lower price point that did 90%+ of what a Nikon D40 or the like would do. I'm usually, "that guy", that buys electronic gadgets, cars, and other equipment with far more features than I'll ever need, so this camera purchase was a triumph of common sense and I'm really happy with it anyway. Don't feel like I settled for less.

Just my $.02

Is it safe to assume nothing has changed in the last couple of months? I'm looking at the D90 kit, but it's a lot of money...

Buy used with confidence at KEH.com

They're the world's largest used camera dealer based just down the road from me.

I have to either buy it here in Guam or in duty free on my way back to Fiji - the import tariffs on things like that in Fiji would be ridiculous.

I'd consider the Nikon D90 or the Canon equivalent. I shoot Nikon, so I'm biased ... Consider getting an after-market mid-range zoom with a constant 2.8 aperture. Most kit lenses are a f/5.6 aperture & that doesn't let much light in ... Manufactures such as Tamron & Sigma offer good quality lenses at 1/3 the cost of Nikon or Canon ... I'd also pick up a Nifty-Fifty for about $100 ... This little 50mm f/1.8 lens is a bargain & great for portraits & low-light situations ...

You can probably get a good deal on a Nikon D40 or D60 ... Same goes for a Canon Xi, XSi or XTi . . .

In regards to build quality, most DSLR's are made of plastic ... The Nikon D200, D300, D300s, D700 & D3 have an alloy body and rubber body coating and are water resistant.

Those cameras are also larger than the consumer cameras as they're much smaller and don't fit in my big hands as well . . .

I've never used a DSLR before. We're getting it to take pics of the kids. I don't know anything about photography, and, to be blunt, my interest in the cameras is limited to taking pics of the kids. I can get the D40 for $440 at the Navy Exchange. It's only 6.1 megapixels, though, which doesn't seem like much. I figure the D90 would probably be a good camera for a long time - less chance of outgrowing it, I would think. How long do these things normally last? Decades? The point and shoot cameras we've had tend to last 3 years or less (the kids broke mine 6 months~ ago - it was maybe 6 months old).

I've read this thread start to finish for the second time now.

As far as megapixels is concerned, 6.1 is plenty ... I've blown up a photo taken with my D70s to 16x20 and it was beautiful ... I can't give you a definative answer on how long DSLR's will last, but a standard gauge is Shutter-Life ... Try to do some reasearch on the shutter life of the model you're choosing ... Any model should be fine for your type of use, though ... For me, it's not uncommon to shoot 300-400 images for events, but I use pro-level cameras ...

One difference between the D40 & D90 is the sensor ... The D90 has a newer sensor & handles low-light conditions much better than older generation cameras ... (the sensor is the equivalent of the piece of film, of which light transposes the image.)

I second Jet's assertion that 6MP is plenty.

Back in the day, I blew up 2MP images to 8X10 size with good results (good glass too).

Megapixels, to me, are much like the number of blades in razor blade cartridges.

Most people get great results with two or three; much more than that and you are just bragging about your ****** size.

If'n you have any interest in a pre-digital Nikon FM-2 film camera drop me a line.

huntertcb(at)hotmail(dot)com

disregard, just read the earlier posts.

there is nothing like a 4x5 speed graphic.