I know this is not related to CDVDRWs or anything like that...but whats the best digital camra to get around $300 or under? maybe up to $500 too. (Example: Sony DSC-W1)

Personally go for either Sony or Canon. Look at the reviews at http://www.steves-digicams.com. They are pretty accurate.

(in reply to mikeemei)

I concur. I have a Canon PowerShot S40 (a couple of years old) and I love it. A Friend of mine has a Sony with the Zeiss lens and loves it. I just don't like memory stick technology... too "betamax" for me. Sony has a track record for trying to force the world to do what they do... no luck yet. I think you have to share the technology to achieve that...

Sharing my opinion here...
BETAMAX vs. VHS, ATRAC vs. MP3, MiniDisc vs. CD-R, SACD vs. DVD-Audio, Digital8/Hi8 vs. MiniDV/VHS-C, MemoryStick vs. CompactFlash, xD, etc.

MiniDisc was a cool idea and I thought it had a chance to replace the floppy disk if sony played it's cards right.
HI8 was better than VHS-C, but MiniDV is king of the hill now.
ATRAC??? What the heck are they thinking??!!??
SACD - when it was conceived it was too expensive and too hard to find good music recorded on SACD unless the artist was licensed under SONY music.

I've had my share of Sony equipment in my life... still have a Hi8 HandyCam and an older MiniDisc recorder for recording live shows that I could sneak the little thing into. Also have one of their flat panels on my wife’s PC. I’ve personally had too many problems to put much faith in them. Perhaps as a single income family, I am just too critical of what I buy and research a little more than most would.

I think it's up to the consumer to go with what works for them, but IMO, Sony's track record makes it a gamble to own any of their products that use proprietary standards. Don't get me wrong, sometimes their stuff may have better quality (betamax sure was), but it's all about standardization and appealing to those that set them -- more power too them if they think they can beat that system on their own buy putting their product out there... because people are buying it. Just seems arrogant to me.

(in reply to Zeral1ty)

Man, so many options... Most people perfer Sony or Canon, but even within these two brands there is still so many option!

I like the Sony W1 because of its big screen and rechargeable battery, the P150 also seems nice because of the high 7.2MP...but I don't really think I need that high of MP.

(in reply to SithTracy)

Another site to check is:

http://dpreview.com/

(in reply to mikeemei)

Not sure you need more MP? If you're used to 35mm 4x6 prints, I guess a 2.1 or 3 MP camera will be okay. But the prices are coming down and their is so much more you can do... Personally I'd jump on the MP and better lens band wagon. Once you get involved in digital photography you'll know what I mean.

I currently have a 4MP Canon, but I do want to upgrade... I am just waiting for the technology to mature more and get an SLR so I can change the lens out... Plus I am in no hurry. I am a huge hockey fan and with no NHL season, the telephoto lens is certainly not needed (plus the Wirtz familiy is making it harder to afford to bring the family to a game -- those of you in the Chicago area know that).

If you got the cash, go for the Canon Powershot (you pick it) or Sony with the Zeiss lens (don't know what model -- I'm not a Sony supporter). If you have kids or are a sports fan, enjoy and play with it some... you'll want more and one day digital will compare in quality to a film camera and you'll be ready.

(in reply to PatM)

Oh, that brings up another question. How many MP is comparable to a film camra?

And the Sony P150 is one of those camras that have the Carl Zeiss lens with 7.2MP

(in reply to SithTracy)

I don't believe the technology is there yet... I recall reading about a year or so ago that the MP's needed to compare to a SLR film camera was considerably more than what would be available to the general consumer in the near future... I think it was around 20MP, but don't quote me... I just recall it being high. Plus it was a combination of technology and lens quality.

(in reply to mikeemei)

I think most people in the know would argue that Digital SLR cameras have already surpassed 35mm film by quite a margin (especially the likes of Canon 1Ds Mark II). Even the lowest end Cannon 300D or Nikon D70 are at least as good as 35mm up to 12x8 prints.

The problem with counting pixels is that it is not the number but the size that matters. Digital SLRs have much bigger sensors than digicams and so a 6MP DSLR will easily outperform a 8MP digicam in terms of picture quality (and pretty well everything else).

dpreview.com is a nice place to look for comparisons if you love pixel peeping. However, any 4MP or bigger digicam will give lovely results today. Go and try the cameras and find one that makes you feel good. You have to love to use it! Last year's high end models like the Canon G5 would be a great place to look at your price range.

HTH
Andrew

(in reply to SithTracy)