ladylotus Z3/4 Thanks so much. I just downloaded the manual for my camera. My husband wants to read it. He's the techno-nut here. If there's a hidden macro setting he'll find it. I built a website using Netscape composer in the past and uploaded it without a problem. But I had Bellsouth then and they gave free webspace with the account. It was drag and drop the files - every easy. Not all ISPs supply you with space. My first one was 17 pages with loads of pics. It took ages to make. I'm not even sure if my new ISP gives us space. If so I may make another website one of these days.

You express your needs very well. The key issue with digital cameras, is the mega-pixel value. The higher the mega-pixel value, the better quality picture you will get for the most part. But, the important determining factor most people use, is whether or not they plan on having prints made and what SIZE. The size of your prints AND their quality is largely dictated by the mega-pixel value. In short, if you only require prints no bigger than wallet-sized or slightly larger, a good 5 mega-pixel camera will suit your needs very well. If you intend to make prints of a size of 8 by 5 and larger, I would recommend a higher megapixel value than 5mp. The reason for this, is that with, let's say, a 3mp camera, and you have 8 by 5 prints made, the prints will come out sort of blurry and lack the crisp & clear details you need. The term for this defusion is pixelation. What that means, is that the lower mp camera cannot "capture" the large amount of detail & crispness that you may want for larger prints. A lower mp camera may take pictures into the camera at a size of 900kilobytes, which does not translate well onto a larger print. Of course I am speaking of generalities here. Many of the folks here in the forum probably learned the hard way by buying a cheaper camera & then regreting it later. The quality of many/most of the pictures here are for the most part excellent! Prices on digital cameras have fallen dramatically in the last few years, so you should be able to obtain a good camera for your needs. Another issue that is sometimes completely overlooked, is what program to use to adjust your pictures to their best appearance AND SIZE. A quality program makes this task a great deal easier. This can be seen by the time your have some super shots in your camera, and then after being reworked, they look really bad. A reasonably good program can be found from several companies. Myself, I have been using Adobe Photoshop Elements 2.0. It can be obtained for a reduced price and has filled my needs very well for processing pistures of coins which I take through a stereo microscope! Stunning pix can be obtained with a rather easy learning curve. If you want the Cadillac of photo editors, Adobe Photoshop is one of, if not the best of the many offered. But quality comes with a price, So don't waste money on a secondrate editing program, or you will not realize the results you desire! Another issue that many overlook, is the "size" of the picture when it is taken into the camera. For example, my primary digital camera is a 5.0mp Kodak. The "raw" piture inside the camera is over 12 megabytes! Much too large to email easily for all parties! Unless you have a special reason to distribute the pictures in their original size, it is redundant to a degree. My own formula for resizing pictures out of the camera, is to touch up anything like focus, brightnesss & contrast AND reduce them down to a much more managable size of 400 - 450 kilobytes. The reason for this reduction, is to make them more managable for emailing and storage in your computer. If someone sends you a picture, which do you appreciate the most, one or more that just take a few moments to download into your email at a smaller size like 400kb, OR a piture that has not be reworked at all and takes 10 minutes just to downlaod into your computer...in short, downloading a 12mb picture on a dialup, 56k, computer can take considerable time waiting for it to download. Large pix of 12mp for example usually take up the full screen and sometimes even more. The bottom line for this is that you should rework the original pictures from the camera to obtain the best appearance AND reduce them to a size that are easily managable. I am sure others here can recommend a couple of excellent cameras at your price range and advise you on the minimum mp value you have to buy to maitain your standards of quality. This interaction/cooperation of forum members is invaluable and can save you money! best wishes & good luck! I hope I answered some of your questions. And thank you to all of you who post such beautiful roses! : ) Sincerly, "Smitty"

The Canon Rebel XTI is a digital single-lens-reflex camera. It can be left on Auto and used with the lens it comes with, but, frankly, if that's all you do with it, you're wasting your money. Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, and Sony all sell cameras worth considering. Some things to keep in mind: - Image stabilization will let you get a better picture in low light and maybe fix some "user errors". But it won't fix every motion problem. You still can end up with blurry pictures. - Don't buy just megapixels. The way the camera handles the picture after you take it ("image processing") is even more important than the number of pixels. For the size of pictures most people will put in their homes, 6-8 megapixels is enough. Worry more about your options in managing the picture. - Watch the zooms. It sounds really good to have a 10x or 15x zoom, but most zooms get really dark at the far end. In addition, image stabilization will work the same at the wide and tele ends of the zoom even though that, too, may result in some unwanted effects. - It really helps to get your hands on cameras you're thinking of buying. Any given camera may seem too small for one person; too clumsy to handle to someone else; too difficult to operate. Take pictures, but also try some scene modes, formatting a memory card, and try deleting a shot. - If you can, either get return privileges or see if the store will either print some of your pictures or display them on a large screen. The little LCD on the back of the camera is not adequate for judging color, sharpness, contrast, or focus. - If you can, shop at a camera shop. Though it may be hard to believe, camera shops will sell the same cameras at the same prices as discount stores or big-box electronics stores. And you usually get the benefit of a wider range of cameras and accessories and a salesperson who isn't just substituting from Small Appliances. I realize this is a lot to read, but it can help you from spending a lot of money on a camera that doesn't do what you want it to do.

Just MHO, I wouldn't buy that camera for bird photos. Not if you think you might get serious about photography. Depending on your budget, consider Canon S3 IS or S5 IS (the S2 IS takes good photos also). Panasonic FZ20 or FZ50. The S3, S2 and FZ20 are older models that can be bought for around $250. The Canons work well with tele converters (you might want to get into photographing birds at greater distances. The Canons have 12X zoom lens and shutter speeds 1/3200 fast enough to capture the beat of hummer's wings. There is a learning curve with these cameras but study and practice will pay off with really nice photographs. When starting with a new camera, the thing is not to give up. There is no film to buy or processing fees so you can take a thousand practice photos for almost nothing. Visit the bird watching forum and ask this same question mentioning hummingbird photos. Ask the folks which cameras they use and if they will show you a couple hummer photos. There is a thread now about new cameras. Happy hunting. Marnie Here is a link that might be useful: Bird forum