It ~is~ really hard to choose a digital camera, isn't it? I was shopping for one this past fall, and what a nightmare! I didn't even know what the different megapixels were all about. Cena's advice is really good. Play with it in the store, so that you can decide if the zoom and clarity are good enough for your needs. But even though you say that most of your pics will be plants, I think that you'll likely find that you end up taking more and more pics of other things, too - friends, family, outings, sunsets, whatever. I find that I take way more shots of *everything* now, since I can easily delete them. I ended up getting a Canon Powershot A510 (3.2 megapixels). It's a good little camera for the price (somewhere around $250), but I have two problems with it. One, I find that the flash is WAY too bright, even when I set it to the lowest intensity, so that if I take a closeup shot, the people/plants look washed out. This means that unless I have optimal natural lighting, my shots are either dark or super-bright. And two, unless I have it on the "action" setting (for action shots), my shots come out a little fuzzy. Now, I know I'm not *that* spastic, so I clearly chose a camera that was too sensitive. Also, I wish it had a delay so that I could get into some of the family/friends shots that I take. And I would have liked a bigger screen to preview the photos. The pluses are great, though: the price was excellent for the product I got; the camera has a panorama setting, so I can take shots of an entire garden, or group photos of my gigantic extended family; and transfer from camera to computer is quick and almost effortless. For what it's worth, though, I've never heard anything bad about Nikon cameras... I just couldn't afford one. As for fussing around with the photos once they're taken, I've been told that it's much better to use a computer program, rather than do it on your camera. I only have Kodak Imaging on my computer, and I absolutely hate it. I can't do anything - resizing is minimal, I can't really play with colour. Also, with Kodak Imaging, the photo quality is really poor when I look at the shots on my computer (although they print out fine). And finally, I can't modify any shots (not even rotate them!), and then save them again in jpeg. Kodak Imaging is the absolute WORST. I'm getting Photoshop with my next computer, no question. Friends of mine use it, and it's wonderful. But because Kodak Imaging is so horrible, I tried zooming photos on my camera (after I've taken the shot), and they looked rather pixelated. I asked a friend about that, and apparently it's pretty standard. He suggested that I only edit photos on my computer, because even with a crappy program, it's generally better than editing with the camera itself. If you want to take a look at some of the shots I've taken with the Canon Powershot, I'll link to my yahoo photos account. This shot is of my tattoo - it was taken without a flash, and with no zoom. I just held the camera really close, maybe a foot away. Here is a link that might be useful: Canon Powershot close-up shot, with no flash

I think I finally found a winner. I am going to be posting shots from the other cameras too. The Nikon coolpix S8200 does great zoom shots and can get good closeups of flowers and that wasn't even on the macro setting. I posted some pictures here. Great detail on the sweet alyssum and that was a zoom taken from a standing position. The gazebo close up one was taken from the deck at the top of the property. The gazebo is almost at the bottom. You can see the difference between using the zoom and taking it wide open. Also see the property denuded of trees. DH has been cutting down all the Monterey Cypress but that is another story. Clare Here is a link that might be useful: Camera comparison

Clam Digger, OK, this one isn't cropped (from a P&S Sony with an amazing flare resistant lens). The point of the cropped photos was to show the level of quality available from a viewfinder camera. Sorry about the dig with the pelican photo but you asked for it when you patronized my cat. I understand that you have a long lens on an SLR and that's a capability that few viewfinder cameras possess. And if you want to shoot wildlife then an SLR is the way to go. Long lenses is the biggest reason for an SLR. People are different. The most important lens for me on a 35mm camera is a 28mm and I must have a 24mm as well. Using a lens longer than an 80mm is an occasional experience for me and I could do without it. Different cameras for different people. As for stubborn denial, I prefer to think of it as stubborn assertion. I assert this and I'm right about it: It is fair to say that the much more expensive DSLRs as a group are more capable cameras than the cheaper consumer oriented viewfinder cameras. But there are enough exceptions in both groups that the groups overlap at the edges. A novice like Jean may be very happy with a camera like Susan's 5 megapixel Lumix... And when did someone say something bad about Tokina? I said digital sensors and film have different requirements and lenses designed specifically for digital maximize the performance of the digital sensor. Tokina knows that, that's why they're making a series of lenses for DLSRs. That doesn't mean older lenses are useless, it's not a B&W world. Back to the original point of this post. Jean is shopping for a camera and buying a DSLR isn't the only or necessarily best option for her. Joe, you're a nice guy trying hard to keep the peace. You and Susan are right it's about the photos first. Clam Digger, that's a nice shot of the water bird, what is it? is it some species of tern? Joe

Here you can find a review of this camera. http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/hp735.htm I find a digital slr, like my Pentax ist*D better for pictures of my garden, but the HP sounds like a good camera to start with and learn about taking pictures of your garden. You can decide after using it for awhile if the HP is all you need or want to move up to a better camera. I hope you enjoy taking pictures of your garden as much as I do, taking pictures of the flowers and wildlife in mine.