I've got the Kodak DX6490 and while I love it, it does have it's limitations. You cannot add on lenses to the Kodak, which is a major drawback. I've seen some pictures taken from the Canon digital rebel and almost all of the photographers that I've been envying lately, that's what they've been using (with add on filter/lenses, etc). The Kodak is great for the 10x optical zoom, however some of the negatives (besides the no add on's) is that it's pretty bad in low light situations, it can be slow on focusing, start-up and zooming. I'm wanting to start digiscoping at some point (because of birding), but I'll have to get another camera before I can do that.
The Kodak can take some great pictures, but if I had it to all over again I'd probably get the Canon Digital rebel if I had the money.

Good luck in whatever you do.

Some very smart person once said, "There isn't a lens that is too long for bird photography!"

If you are serious about photographing birds, you should bite the bullet and buy the Rebel. Having an SLR will allow you to add lenes, multipliers, filters, extention rings etc. With the SLR you can also use a independent flash or multiple flashes. I don't know about the Kodak, but the Canon allows you to easily use a tripod which can be a big benefit in low light or when using long lens.

Hope I haven't gone on too long. I use a Canon Digital (D-30)and 4 lenses. It makes bird photos much easier to get and to get close.

Terry aka Birdfoto

Here is a link that might be useful: My birding photo site

Thanks for all of your advice. I guess I'll go ahead and save up for the rebel. In the long run I suppose its the best idea.

As a dRebel owner with a 75-300mm zoom, which I bought for nature photos, I have found that a longer lens would be very helpful. Canon has an image stabilized version that I should have waited to purchase because it would allow slower shutter speeds and therefore more light. I find myself in low light conditions a great deal - birds seem to like trees! Also, invest in a good, solid tripod. A $50-$75 won't do it!

You won't find the 18-55mm lens useful for wildlife photography. With the Digital Rebel, you'll find the 100-400mm L IS zoom lens very good for that type photography.

{{gwi:2110910}}

That's the one I want to buy but it cost 1500 dollars! I think the 75-300 would be a cheaper alternative if it has image stabilization mine doesn't!! So most of my pictures are too dark and blurry. Sarah

$1,360 at B&H Photo for USA lens, after rebate. Still a lot of money.
I have to use IS lenses because of shaky hands.
B&H has the Canon 400mm lens for $1,049.95, after rebate. That's non_IS of course, but if you have steady hands it's a good lens. The import model of that same lens is $1,029.95.

That's alot less. But I think whatever lense I get will be with IS because my pictures are too blurry. I think I will have to save my money and eventually buy the 100-400 IS lense. Sarah

Have you analyzed your photos to figure out why they're blurry? Is it camera shake, shutter speed too slow, movement on the part of the subject, not enough light, ISO setting too low, aperture setting too high? You can learn a lot by studying the EXIF information in your images.
IS is very good, but it's not a magic cure-all, and it's more expensive than non-IS. If my hands were steady, I'd use a Canon 400mm lens for bird photos instead of the Canon 100-400mm L IS lens, which costs about $450 more and doesn't produce as good an image at 400mm.
Here is a photo of a little bird about 60 yards from where I was standing, taken with the 100-400. There was a wind of about 15 mph, causing the twig the bird was on to bounce up and down. The bird itself was moving, as were my shaky hands. I've kept this photo only because this was the only time I've seen this bird and I'm not likely to ever see it again.
{{gwi:2111194}}

And here is a photo taken with a non-IS Canon 16-35mm L lens. The subject was not moving, there was a lot of light and I managed to get a very clear and sharp photo despite my shaky hands and slow shutter speed of 1/60 second.

{{gwi:2111195}}

That's a beautiful picture. Although my hands don't shake I can't seem to get a good focus on any of my winter bird pictures The birds are always too far away and its too grey never sunny. If they are flying forget it. Today I tried t0 get some close ups of cedar waxwings that came down to drink from a puddle but I could barely see them with my eyes let alone with the camera set at 300 Birds generally don't cooperate for me.

Here is the waxwings
{{gwi:2111196}}

Well, the combination of too far away and not enough light are killers. Those gray skies are really ugly, aren't they?
Hang in there. You'll get some sunny days and better pictures eventually.
This one posed for me no more than 15 feet away:
Canon EOS D30 ,Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM
1/350s f/5.6 at 350.0mm iso100

{{gwi:2111197}}

Great picture!

No lens is long enough for bird photography.. A tripod is essential, and develop field-craft to first find your bird, and then get close enough. Practice being invisible ( to birds ) while you are saving for a good camera and a really long lens.

Another law of bird photography... if you see a rare bird.. your camera ia at home...

... but its great fun!!

What about the Nikon D70? Does anyone know if it measures up to the Canon Rebel?

Sorry to butt in but may I suggest that you check out the Fuji S7000? I wanted the Cannon you are dicussing but found that the Fuji had the more zoom capabilities BEFORE I had to add a lens. The cannon would need a tripod and an added lens just to get to the original starting point of the Fuji.

I didn't want a heavy camera, either. It's rated exceptionaly high and now the price is about $800. Takes beautiful pictures. Here is a link on it.

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/s7000.html

I guess you have to copy and paste. Sorry.
Most people only hear about the Cannons. Good luck, Debbie

I own a Digital Rebel and the photos it take are awesome (Compared to other digicams i've owned). The price, performance beat anything out there in my opinion. I think I paid a little over $700 with the lens (like it was said, not good for nature shooting) and the rebate. IS would be great, but waaaay to much money for me right now :) Taking pictures is a skill that must constantly be practiced. I'm still VERY amateur so my shots can really stink sometimes, even with the excellent equipment i have.

Ive been using a 5year old Tamron (70-300mm) and it seems to work pretty good.

Good luck and get out there and shoot some pictures.

Just going to jump in here......I have a fuji S5000 and love it. Here are a few that I have taken from the window at home. I mostly do birds photos.{{!gwi}}
{{gwi:2111198}}
{{gwi:2111199}}
{{gwi:2111200}}