A friend of mine is from Thiland and she is going back there in May for vacation. She tells me you can buy cameras there for very cheap. I want to give her the camera I would like and for her to see if she can get one for me at a good price. NOw the question is which camera, I still dont' know. I was thinking about a Canon Rebel?? not sure which rebel. I would like to take landscapes etc. and how many megapixels? If you were in this situation which camera would you get? Dependign on what you guys think I may just buy one here. Warranty wise etc Your thoughts and suggestions would be appreciated.

Hi Colleen,

If you're going with a Digital Rebel - there are two different ones - one is the original 6 mp & the newest version just came out last month or so - it's 8.2 mp . . . if you're able to get one - I'd go with the 8.2 mp version.

I have a Canon 20D - absolutely love it!! About to get another one to have as back up at weddings!

Good luck!

Robin

Robin thanks for the info. Is more pixels better? I think Canon has a 10 megapixel too.

Colleen,do you want a good light camera which you can take in your bag everywhere?a camera that could take quality photos from macro to tele without changing lenses or you don't mind carring a heavy camera,changing lenses and cost?If you want a D-SLR like a Canon Rebel you have to buy 3 different lenses to take QUALITY photos from macro to tele
I,with the lenses that i have i can't take good macro photos and i need to buy a macro lens,and also one for landscapes.Don't think only the cost of the body of the camera
To me a D-SLR is better than a bridge camera,only if you buy the right lens for every situation. :)

Is more pixels better? I think Canon has a 10 megapixel too.
Canon has even a 16,7 megapixel with the EOS 1Ds Mark II (http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=10598)
More pixels is better for large prints and for resizing/cropping a photo as the cropped part will still be large enough.
Keep in mind as Sophia wrote that it would be good only if you have good lenses. There are several compact digicams with 5 megapixel that are bad compared to some high quality 3 megapixel digicams with good lens and sensor. The problem is quality lenses cost a lot (the Sigma I got costs more than the D70 body) and if you want a "lens that does all", I think a bridge camera might be better (plus they have a movie mode, if you like to take little movies).
One big advantage with digital slrs is their ability for taking photos at high ISO without a lot of noise compared to bridge/compact cameras. Only for that I would take a slr :)

I agree with Robin: between the 300D and the new 350D, take the 350D because it is much better and the difference of price between the two isn't big (about 130 euros here).

Just to add that not all quality lenses cost a lot: you get can a 50mm 1.8 for a low price. It's an excellent lens for portrait but not a zoom.

Olly

With my 8.2 mp (Canon 20D) - I've printed portraits as large as 20x30 with no apparent pixelation to the images. The quality surpasses film (35mm) by far.

I personally shoot with a D-SLR b/c I shoot professionally - if I didn't shoot professionally, I would probably get one of the new digicams 7-8 mp.

Robin

Well, digicam isn't a word found in a dictionary so there is no exact definition but you can be sure it comes from "digital camera" :D
Some people use the word "digicams" for all non digital slr cameras as it is an easy way instead of saying "compact cameras/bridge cameras" but a digital slr is a digital camera, same as a (film) slr is a camera (=equipment for taking photographs).
A site like http://www.steves-digicams.com is about all digital cameras and it includes digital slr :)

Olly