Camera

I want to buy a camera, one that will last. I want it to have certainl features, like the red eye and blink features. I was just wondering if anyone bought one and has an opinion on it.

People's opinions on the meaning of "inexpensive" vary.  You'll get better advice if you say what that word means to you.

I got a Kodak Easy Share digital camera that has been working well.

With more photo storage space or the ability to post external links, I could show you some of its pictures.

Yes, please let us know what price range you consider inexpensive so our members can suggest something that's within your range.

I have both a Kodak Easy Share which is OK (I have no idea if it has red eye reduction, etc) and a Canon PowerShot which I like very much and would recommend but the price ranges vary vastly.  I got the Kodak for $40 on Black Friday and the Canon was more than $200 a few years back.

you wanna good camera? get a Canon,or Panasonic.

Kodak was ok during the 35mm days.now the make nothing but cheapo stuff.

Canon PowerShot SD1200 IS (I own the 1100 model.very nice)
($120-$140)

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS12K for $135

Sony makes nice cams but the problem is the Memory Stick PRO Duo.many pc's/laptops don't support/read those cards.

Got me a Kodak, on clearance for under $100.

I still got the Owner's manual and am exploring the digitimal "features".

I've learned how to dumb-down its photo size, for faster Internet uploads and downloads.

And, the picture sizes are even more smaller when you "crop" the size of the picture down to only what you need to be seen - although that is a MARVELOUS looking workbench top.

Took me a about two days to dig down through to, too.

Does anyone know the difference between 12.1 and 10.1? Which one is better? Is a Canon 10.1 better than a sony 12.1?

If a camera is 10.1 megapixels (Mp), it means that any pictures it takes (on its highest quality setting) will consist of 10.1 million of these pixels. Therefore, a 12.1 megapixel camera will consist of 12.1 million pixels. The higher the number of megapixels, the higher the resolution, or detail, of the picture. But, just because one camera has a certain amount of megapixels doesn't mean that it will take better pictures than one with a lower amount. There are many factors which affect this, including the type of camera, build quality, lens system, etc. So, don't just jump and buy a lower priced 12.1mp over a higher priced 10.1mp just because it has more megapixels. Do your research, read reviews, and find out which one is really worth it.
 

Megapixels also give you the ability to create larger photographs with great resolution.  So the more megapixels, the more "small detail" you'll be able to get when the picture is made larger (or blown up in size).  There will be a redunant point, as most people won't be printing bigger than 8 1/2 x 11", and 10MP is a pretty good resolution. 

If you are printing your pictures, you'll want to ask yourself:  does your printer have the ability to print really good pictures?  Many people with the budget "office printers" may be disappointed in the results, and the weakest link (picture, printer, etc) will be the limitation. 

DrMaxx is right - Megapixel isn't the only consideration.  Lenses, and other factors come into play.  I've seen cheaper cameras outperform more expensive ones in terms of ease of use and quality of picture.   Shop around, ask questions and read reviews.

Mr. Samsung

Some of the early digital cameras claimed "VGA Resolution!" which meant 640 pixels wide by 480 pixels high, for a 300 Kilo Pixel image.

I have a Pentax Optio E-40 (bought used on eBay for about $60) and for a little 8MP camera (an image 3264 pixels wide and 2448 pixels high), it's working out pretty good for me. 

Definitely, the quality of the lens is very important. Plastic lenses are usually in cheaper cameras, and don't usually have any of the lens-coatings that keep internal reflections (and other stuff) down to a minimum.

I consider myself a "serious amateur" photographer, nowhere near the "advanced amateur" class yet. The camera I've finally determined to save up for, to replace my old deceased Pentax K-1000 (though I got a P30t body recently) 35mm SLR film camera, is the new (late 2009) Pentax K-x DSLR at 12.4 MP. It comes in four body colors, and in Europe there are an additional eight colors available.

Unfortunately, searching for it on Sears, the only ones coming up as available in the red body are from a third-party seller who has a very poor rating on the ResellerRatings.com website. I guess I'm going to be doing mail-order elsewhere when the piggy bank is full enough.

Another thing to note about megapixels is that it in no way determines how clear your picture will be. Much more important is the CCD inside that captures the light. CCDs from the higher end cameras even with lower MPs will almost always give you better looking photos. CCDs also vary in size within the camera which can change the image quality. Since a 5mp camera can generally print very nice 8x10s, megapixels don't really come into play unless you crop your image and then print that cropped picture at 8x10. For a cheap camera here are a few things to consider:

At regular and sale prices the lower end will inlcude poorer lenses, poorer CCDs, and poorer builds. These cameras can still take decent pictures in bright light of non moving objects, but will usually not last like the higher end cameras or take good all around pictures.

Higher end cameras, even if on clearance, will usually have better lenses, better quality CCDs, more features, and a better build construction. My suggestion is find a camera that sold for $200 last year and is $120ish this year as you will probably be a lot happier with what it can do.

You raised some great points, Retail. You really get what you pay for!