so i'm looking to buy my first digital camera. i'm not looking for a professional grade one, just something i can take to parties and concerts and things like that. after looking around for a while i've come up with two possible buys..

Canon PowerShot S30

and

Canon PowerShot S40

now the only big difference i see between the two is the S30 is 3 megapixels, and the S40 is 4 megapixels. there's a $100 difference between the two. i'm wondering if it's worth the $100 for the added megapixel.

since i know absolutely nothing about digital cameras i'd really apreciate your thoughts on this. if you know of another camera that's even better then i'm all ears.

yeah it will make a BIG difference to the quality of your prints, especially around the edges of smooth objects.. say the edge of a glass or a cars profile or something, your forehead or something else similarly large and round

if you just want a fun cam get the cheaper one, but if you think you will use it to totaly replace your old 35mm job then get the good one. i only use mine for silly stuff, its not good enough to do weddings or something like that with. (mines very old now, fuji MX1200 1.3 mega pixels)

sorry for going slightly off topic but,

do any of you guys know what the equivalent in megapixels would be to a 35 mm picky?

like i said, i'm not gonna be taking professional pictures.. just gonna be snapping pictures of my friends and stuff. probably won't even be printing them out for the most part, just emailing them around.

my biggest concern is that i don't want to be stuck with something a year from now that's junk.

get the beter one then.

harry, not sure, but i can find out for you i think... ill post it here if i do

Canon is the best choice, I have a Powershot G2 the quality is excellent. The company I work for has the S40 I can highly recommend it for just taking snaps as it's easy and effortless to use if you want something straight forward.

Thanks

HM

I myself have a canon ixux with 2.1 megapixels. this works very well for partyshots and makes good prints if you dont want posters

I would go for the cheap one. If you really want a good digital I would go for something advanced. none of the cameras you look at will give you that. therefore go for the cheapie!

why not try something like the logitech pocketcam or something????

S.

i thought about the pocketcam, but i read a few reviews on it and they all said it was junk

I would also say its junk but since you are only gonna use it for snapshots and email-pics I would say its what you need. you could also check out some of the musteks. the should be enough. I would at least go for the cheapest of the two youre looking at.

S.

Fujifilm FinePix 2600Z 16mb flash memory.Got mine for $200 and I love it.This was my first digicam also.Man you can take a lot of pictures.I got a SanDisk card reader for $20 from the same place.

according to one bit of info I read - a standard 35mm negative captures approximately 3000 x 2000 pixels. A 2 megapixel digital = 1600x1200 and a 3mp digital = 2000x1500

LS

yeah it will make a BIG difference to the quality of your prints, especially around the edges of smooth objects.. your forehead or something else similarly large and round   

And EMPTY. You forgot EMPTY.

according to one bit of info I read - a standard 35mm negative captures approximately 3000 x 2000 pixels.  A 2 megapixel digital = 1600x1200 and a 3mp digital = 2000x1500

LS

cheers for that LS.

it's been bugging for ages.

ok, i've ordered the S40.. we'll see what happens once it arrives

the reason why it took so long for me to order it is that i had a little accident at a casino.. i walked in and they took all of my money

Hey Sed -- BTDT

You know - a casino is the only place in the world that people go to willingly and know they are going to be robbed. LOL

LS