I think Ive narrowed my next digital camera purchase down to the:

Canon SD550

or

Casio EX-S600

I was originally looking at the Nikon D50, but have decided Im just not going to get enough proper usage out of a D-SLR to justify the price.

So since im back at compact point-and-shoot, which do you guys think I should go for? Right now im leaning towards the Canon, as the image qauliy seems to be better, but the Casio has better asthetics. Oh dilema, dilema .

here's a link of the 2 in comparison. Clicky.

my opinion, i'd go with the canon.

So you considered DSLR, I agree they are pricy.
Have you considered the super zoom range? For example Canon PowerShot S2 IS or a camera from Panasonic or Sony?
They might just justify the price.

I bought the Canon PowerShot S2 IS last summer and I am happy that I didn't go for a real point-and-shoot type of camera. This thing is a bit more expensive but it is well worth it.
Feels more robust and has a wide range of features that makes it the ideal camera for me.

ah, im the owner of its rival, the Pansonic Fz5! haha..

My personnal choice is Nikon coolpix P1 (their P models are their highest quality compact camera)

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_po...n_cpp1&show=all

and to add something more, Nikon uses his own battery. Often last longer and also cost less

ok just checked those two cameras. Both the canon and casio have their own positive and negative sides.
if u check this link: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_po...exs600&show=all then u can see all the specs.
The thing that makes me favor casio model is the manual focus, which canon doesnt have but what makes me in favor of canon is the optical viewfinder which casio doesnt have.
Casio raises its lead with ISO sensitivity also allowing u to take pics @ 1600 ISO settings and casios zoom seems to be slightly better than canon's.
When it comes to shutter then canon does what it does best on the market Canon model has superior minimum shutter speed which is 15 (yes i said 15) seconds and casio only has 4 seconds. So if u want nice pics on a tripod and steady objects then canon is the way Also with the canon model u can use extra flash.
Damn this seems to be one sided competition Canon has a 2,5'' lcd screen while casio has 2,2'' lcd display.
To sum things up. If u are more of an experimental type then go with casio because of the manual focus (big advantage when taking pictures in low light conditions) but if u want a nice partner for just doing everything with just point-and-shoot then go for the canon. and if u get tired of those small compacts then get a 12x zoom panasonic fz5

the problem with the Canon Powershot S2 IS is the price. For alittle over $500, Id rather just save up another $100 and grab the Nikon D50.

The Panazonic Fz5 seems more reasonably priced around $400.

Oh, hell I just cant decide...

I mean these compact point and shoots have their benefits, but I cant seem to make my mind up if Id rather have the size and ease-of-use of the compacts, or the quality of the super-zoom or D-SLR.

Canon. Why would you care about aesthetics? If the pictures stink, why does it matter? No professional photographers get their cameras because they look cool. Who cares?

Do you already own a digital camera? If so, and you have a compact already, then get the D50. If not, well, hey, I say get the D50 anyway.

Oh, and I own a Canon S400, and it still rocks.

well in this case our friend here ck2k01 is deciding whether to get a compact, megazoom or a dslr. now the factor that comes into play is the price.

in my country dslr's like the 350d kit would cost $2000( at the minimum, not sure about D50 ) and yea, i could only afford a Fz5 which costed me $800( plus some free goodies ).

but since ck2k01, you did say you bought a S2 IS, why not wait up a bit and save for a dslr? or get accesories for your S2, im sure there's plenty of em.

oh no no, i never bought a s2 is. ive actually got a canon a70 which is starting to show its age.

the whole idea behind my thinking is, although I would really love to have a magazoom or dslr, im just thinking a nice compact would be more practical in my case.

if it was up to me, id buy a compact and a d50, but i dont know if i can justify spending that much.

oh well, thanks for all the input guys, it basically sounds like i know what to buy for each type of camera. now i just need to make up my mind and deside on which type i want

but the only question left is, if i do decide to go for the magazoom or dslr, is the D50's $200 price increase enough to warrant it over the Panazonic Fz20?

FZ20 or D50 guys... what do you all think?

Is the $200 extra for the D50 really worth it?

I'd go Canon, but I've never had any good experience with either camera.

Casio makes good Cameras, but I think they're not as good as they look like they are. Stick to something like Canon.

i have the sd550 great camera. www.dpreview.com

i second that. kudos to canon.

Canon SD550

I've heard nothing but great things about Canon's, same with this SD550 model. IMO it is THE best compact digicam on the market.

I have another Casio camera (EX-P600) and it's caused me hassles & has had problems. Personally, I'd go with the Canon and don't think twice about it. You know what you're getting with a Canon.

Get the canon - the lense will be better and canon cameras are generally more reliable.

obviously, you have no idea what you are talking about. Just to enlight us, do you have any comparisons, reviews and articles of what you are saying?