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"

One of the best digital camera sites around is dpreview.com. You can spend forever reading their reviews and forums. The canons are indeed highly regarded, but there are also many nikon and sony fans as well. Personally I'm a canon guy, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that they're hands-down the best in all areas. There are digital cameras available in all price and quality ranges. It really depends on what you want to spend. I love the elphs like lowspark has, but you do pay extra for the small form factor. Canon has a range that's cheaper but larger, with similar quality in terms of lens and imaging. You should generally plan on buying a separate memory card as the ones that come with the camera are pretty lame. Figure on getting a 512MB or 1GB card. The higher the resolution of the camera the better, in general, however there are some technical issues as resolution gets above 5 megapixel. So a camera with 7 megapixel isn't necessarily always better than a 5 megapixel camera. I'd generally look for a camera with 5 megapixel or higher, and a 3x or better lens in the range of 35-135 or thereabouts. Image stabilization is very nice to have; canon has optical IS, which is generally considered better than electronic IS. Also important is speed in several areas. How long does the camera take to turn on? How quickly does it take the image once you push the shutter button? How quickly can you take multiple photos in sequence? How quickly does it focus? Those are things you can get a feel for by playing with the cameras in a local store. In general, you can't go wrong with canon, sony, or nikon.

We are looking at the Canon S3IS- I want a good zoom and image stabilization. We already have a Canon Digital Rebel but we have to carry different lenses and all. It has it's place but I want a smaller camera. Circuit City has them for $475.

greenhouser, May I suggest that you try using your zoom. What you need to do is find out the closest you can get your camera lens to your subject....and still get a focus. What you are trying to do, is fill the frame with your subject. Some cameras have capabilities to let you get really close some don't have this feature. Move your camera closer without zooming and see what happens. Be sure you can still get a focus. You also may want to try the portrait setting on your camera and see if that does what you want. The second option you have without buying a new camera is to take your photo at the highest resolution your camera will allow......then crop your photo in an image editor. Crop to make the subject fills the frame if you can. Once you crop, you can resize your photo. Most basic image editors will allow you to do this. The resolution of your camera will determine the size you can make your photo in an image editor. If you stretch it to far it will look pixelated. Micro is a term used by Nikon for their Macro lenses. I believe Canon uses the term Macro. I don't know of any other name for cameras or camera equipment for Macro. So when asking about this, ask about macro capabilites. Don't be surprised if you get weird answers...not everyone that sells cameras knows their products. Some point and shoot cameras have an extra macro lens that can be attached. The flower setting, usually gives you shallow depth of field.....which means the flower or bug will be in focus but the back ground will be blurred out. DSLR's have macro lenses, extention tubes, tele extenders and macro filters that can be used.You can also use a reverse lens, if you want to get into some really interesting macro photography. I hope this helps, it can be very confusing when you are first starting out with these things.