If you are just switching from analog to digital, it will take a little bit of time to get used to how digital images look on screen: there's no grain to focus on and the images sometimes appear soft when they actually aren't.
Be forewarned: no matter which digital P&S camera you end up buying, it will be updated by a newer model before you buy another calendar for your wall. I don't think the G10 even made it a full 12 months before news of the G11 was widely circulating.
Canon was smart enough to back off on the megapixels with the G11 from the G10 (G10 images are fairly noisy above ISO 100) but the inclusion of that flip-out screen really annoyed a number of users who were fairly happy with the G7/9/10 models. - especially those who put them in housings for water work.
Another thing to consider is that camera makers tend to hype the zoom range on these little P&S cameras and I have yet to see one dialed out the long end of the zoom that will produce decent results (granted, I shoot photos for a living and am rather picky about images).
There's a LOT of choices out there in terms of cameras that will suit the needs of most. If you have access to a store that actually has the models you are considering in stock, play before you pay.
Lastly, buy a spare OEM battery.....manufacturers have been known to overstate battery performance.
Loc: Meadow Valley, CA
I compared a shot with my SX10 which I bought locally, as the price was the same as Best Buy to a guy who had a $1,000+ camera with a rented $3000 lense. Except for my shot not being zoomed in the exact amount, not much difference in quality from a photo taken 3/4 to a mile away of a rock out cropping. He was able to manipulate his photos more as he had the camera and mostly the experience in photography. I'm used to a cheapo $30 Kodak or lately, a disposable camera until this July, when I sprung for a decent camera for a trip to Alaska's backcountry in August. The 4gb card and original batteries lasted for 200 shots and the batteries gave out less than five minutes before we landed on the return trip to the bush pilots abode.
I brought up the subject Canon S90 because of the supposedly wonderful ergonomics according to Rockwell. Which is the only reason he called it worlds best digital P&S. His fav DSLR is a Nikon by the way.
My only experience (considerable) is with heavy 1950's era bulletproof 35 mm dedicated stereo cameras using slide film. By the way camerarepair dot com does CLA (restoration adjustments) on many old brands of those (Realist, TDC, Kodak, Revere, Wollensak, etc).
I have been told/lectured--in all seriousness--on a photo forum that I didn't correctly perceive the Rockwell genius solely because I didn't understand him, see?
A finer bit of circular reasoning I've never encountered.
So all hail Rockwell, jolly good, well met and all that.
Coincidentally, the "discussion" was about his S90 preview that I was pointing out didn't appear to warrant the hosannas being strewn and especially, his snide dismissal of missing key pieces (e.g., hooray, no pesky hotshoe!). I wasn't familiar with his stuff or his reputation so was taken by surprise with my trip to the principal's office.
I'll be pleased as a kitten if the camera proves brilliant in every way, but I don't need it because I have a more competent camera (based on features and specs) already.
Originally Posted By hatidua
Originally Posted By kbennett
I'm not sure how seriously Ken Rockwell's site is taken by most photographers.