Hi i would like to buy the next after compact digital camera to take clear focused photos of my 15 month old son and wildlife pictures as well as indoors low light photos. Beginner but would like to explore things in photography. Budget around £400. Shall i go for one of the Canon powershot S3 IS or SX20 IS group -are they more easy going - or shall i try for an SLR Canon EOS group 450D, 500D? Does an SLR really make a difference to the quality of pictures taken ? want to avoid the disappointment of all blurry photos taken by my compact digital.

you are looking to take varied photo's. low light to wild life, active child & family etc. The best option is to use a camera with interchangeable lenses (i.e a dslr). the Brand of dSLR is less important to a 'beginner' than the handling of the camera. Spend some time in a shop like jessops handling different brands. Low light & wild life photography in a compact/superzoom mens buying a superzoom costing over the price of a budget dslr with less satisfying results.

Hmm, infants and wildlife require quick reaction time, from your side and the camera's. A time lag of 0.7s means that your child (or wildlife subject) will have a chance to move by the time the picture is taken rendering them out of focus or blurred. DSLRs like the EOS 450D or 500D react much quicker than compacts, and also allow you to take a rapid sequence of photos so you can pick up the best; most low budget compacts can not do that. Besides, the electronic detector is better and in the future you can always add another lens to the system to suit your (new) needs.

I would add to the previous suggestion, spend some time at a store checking how the camera feels to you, but buy online, the price difference is huge, and it is even more so for memory cards and other needs.

If you go to a store and take their time and pick their brains, knowing you will go buy on-line, you deserve all the pestilence that could fall upon you. And if, in today's market, you cannot go out on your own and negotiate a price for an important item, or for a bundle of lesser ones, that will only contain a premium over on-line prices that is justified by the availability of hands-on support and advice, you should not be allowed out to buy things without your parents.

I often go the other way: look at the prices available from serious web-sites, then go to a local store to buy what I want from a person I can judge to be trustworthy. I tell the salesperson what price I have seen on the web, (and I don't count any "dodgy sites" from the land of all the possibilities), and look for a compromise that is good for both the store and me. It works very well, and not just for photo kit.

Otherwise I research different solutions for what I want to do, reading reviews, manufacturers web-sites, magazines and discussing the topic with people I know well and trust, and buy at the best price/service point without screwing up anybody's source of money for their family by asking them questions and then crawling, (those who do abuse of people's businesses can only crawl), off elsewhere to buy at the cheapest price.

My kids, now adults, still avoid going shopping with me if they know I have something important to buy, because they know I will haggle, and they feel emnbarrassed, but I don't feel embarrassed and neither does my credit card. But waste someone's time when they need it to run their business to raise their families? That stinks.

Do as I did, opt for the Nikon D60 bundle. Works like a dream in any auto setting and is brilliant on advanced modes. Very user friendly and the results are brilliant.

Buy Digital SLR you wont regret it, I have nikon D60 which is best entry level dslr and results you get with this baby is far better than normal digital ones.

Quote from DCresource.com:
"Overall, I consider the Nikon D60 a "good, but not great" digital SLR. While entry-level buyers will enjoy its point-and-shoot features, I think more experienced photographers will frown on its overprocessed photos, mediocre set of manual controls, and autofocus lens support. I think there are better entry-level D-SLRs out there, but the D60 is still worth looking at."

Here's my thruppence worth. Do try out a few models of both DSLR and D-compact in a reputable store to get the 'feel' of the camera; you'd be surprised how much you can bond with the right grip, the controls in the right place, the sound of the shutter-click, the styling, the options, how it reproduces photos, etc. And then I'd recommend you get one of the better D-compacts, like a Canon SX-200 IS with the larger lens area and, say, 7x - 12x zoom, as you seem to appreciate spontaneity, for which one-hand operation might be a bonus; try holding your kid and attempt a self-portrait with a DSLR in your other hand - it won't work!!! If you take to outdoor photography more (landscapes, etc.), then a DSLR with its interchangeable lenses is, of course, far better. CAVEAT: as the manufacturers seem to be bringing out new DSLR models almost as rapidly as D-compacts, you might regard your recently-purloined DSLR as 'outdated' by newer models and you'll want The Next One. In which case invest in a really good lens that will work just as well with whichever next DSLR body you get.

I agree completely with the comments re. leeching all the technical advice and hands-on opportunities in a shop only to buy on-line. Have some shame people! - there is no way these shops will continue if everyone takes this policy. There are plenty of places where you can do a deal and pay a similar price or one thats only a bit more. You then get the added benefit of somewhere to actually take your camera and/or lenses back to - I wouldn't fancy having to ship them around all the time. By all means get the smaller consumables whereever the price is best.

I went with a 450D, but I moved up from a Fujitsu bridge camera (an old S5500) - I think these might be really worth you looking at. They have a very versatile lens and many of the features of DSLRs. Panasonic also make some excellent bridge cameras, with truly fantastic lenses.

Hooray for P McCleary. I sometimes wonder if no-one can see and understand what he has written.

I'd like to say "Hooray" for MarmiteMan as well, but "Marmite"? Yecch!

To be serious: both MarmiteMan and P McCleary have made great comments, IMHO. There are a few points I disagree with: Nikon have decent entry level DSLRs, but they are low on features and, apart from the budget lenses in the bundles, Nikon lenses are a bit pricey. But I would advise a beginner to look at two from, (alphabetical order) Canon, Nikon, Olympus or Sony. (The more the better.) At the moment there are cracking deals on Olympus, but that can change lightning fast. Once you have had a good look: BUY NOTHING!!! Take a day to soak up all the information you have gathered, and separate the un-biased opinion from the sales-babble. All photo stores can have deals that will only last a limited time and which only the sales personnel can tell you about, and they could carry incentives for the sales personnel. So take a little thinking time.

I agree that it is a bit unreasonable to waste a shop's time if you dont intend to buy from them, but not that buying online could be pestilential! I nearly always buy online (live in the middle of nowhere) and have NEVER had a problem. Amazon, Pixmania, and Warehouse Express in particular are 100% safe to buy from!

JF: OK, you're right about pestilence. I must have had a communication from the 19th Century. But scum who waste one vendor's time because another, cheaper, vendor knows diddly-squat about the product in question deserve some uncomfortable punishment. Maybe a non-fatal version of Black Death, with its revolting facial disfigurement and reportedly life-long scars?

As someone who moved up from a digital (canon) to an eos 450D, then yes an entry level slr is great. BUT don't forget it's not just the camera as it is with digital. I have spent a small fortune on my newfound passion! From memory cards, lenses, tripod, filters and the rest. You can use a D-SLR as a glorified digital camera, but if you really want better quality images you need to take time to learn how to use it effectively. And by doing that your wish-list of kit can end up costing far more than you ever anticipated. So, for what it's worth, my advice is if you have the time and money to develop your photography skills go for a D-SLR, but if you are limited to the £400 you mention for everything, then maybe a compact digital camera is for you.
I do agree with the others that the best way is to go and look and get a feel for what you are buying.
Happy photographing, whatever you decide
;0)

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ38EB-K Digital Camera - Black (12.1MP, 18 x Optical Zoom) 2.7 inch LCD
I would check out the Panasonic FZ38 bridge camera with a 27-480mm (35mm equivalent) f2.8 f4.4 minimum superzoom with a Leica Lens, its only about 260 GBP. It has really good image quality. Its very easy to use , plus it has really good auto features + the manual features you find on a DSLR without the weight.
I have both DSLR's & an FZ38 & I use the FZ38, 95% of the time, why?
It takes really good sharp photos at 12 megapixels . Pop up flash, I ve never had red-eye
Lots of features, so value for money ie really high Quality HD video with stereo, so you dont have to carry a camcorder + this. Also most entry level DSLR's wont do video
Fantastic battery life 470 pics per charge, + spare batteries cost only 3 pounds on amazon, & they work well
Excellent family camera for photos & video using the full zoom , great for travelling as its fairly lightweight unlike DSLRs, great for filming family get togethers & weddings. To get this lens range on a DSLR would cost 7-800, because most entry level DSLR's only have a basic short zoom ie 18-55mm (which is actually 36-110mm because cheaper DSLRs have cropped images so you dont get the full wide angle for landscapes ie 24mm etc. No need to be worry about changing lenses & getting dust inside or buying external flashes. + Most pics are fantastic straight from cam, no need to photoshop. You can learn about photography on this, then go to a DSLR at your own pace, they keep their value well if you change ie look up prices on model FZ28. But basicaly it a Hiqh Quality but fun camera. It takes great night scenery shots too. I managed it well handheld the Image stabililisation is good & Face Recognition. Its better than the SX20 etc. Try 1 in a shop.
I agree that usually you buy SLR's to get better quality pics, but this one breaks the rules.

Mega-zooms all run into a basic physics problem, that would require so much glass and money to manage, (think of the prices of the best lenses conceived for use on Leica bodies) the resulting lens would be extremely heavy and 99% unsaleable. That's distortion at each extreme of the range of the lens.

There is also a problem with the light, which can lead to vignetting, because the aperture values are always too low, there can even be serious focus problems, with the centre better focused than the corners. I have an Olympus 50-200mm lens with a good, near constant f/2.8 to f/3.5. It's pretty heavy, probably about the same weight as one of the smaller ultra-zooms, and its RRP is over £1,000. I was darn fortunate to be the only person to see that its Buy It Now price was ridiculously low, and it cost me less than £300 including transport and VAT sales tax. An ultra-zoom that could maintain those f values and control Image Quality over a range twice that would be a monster in size, weight and price.

But if you only want one thing to carry above all else, then an ultra-zoom seems inevitable. Unless you buy a good quality, less exaggerated zoom camera, shoot at the highest jpeg setting, better still RAW if it's available, and zoom in on the essential interest object in the shot on your PC (just don't go too far and start to lose Image Quality that way.)

You choice very much depends on what you consider important in your photography.
Generally I've found that DSLRs have less "noise" and higher ISO (equivalent to old film speeds) ratings than the Compact cameras so low light photography won't look as grainy on a good DSLR than with a compact camera. That said, the compacts are getting better all the time and are pretty amazing now.

One reviewer points out a very useful point. The lag time between pressing the shutter button and getting a picture taken is much much lower on an DSLR than a compact, in most cases. Compacts can be as much as 0.7s whereas DSLRs can be 0.1s, so great for capturing that moment.
They also made a good point that a compact camera allows you to do easier fun self portraits, or put the camera on the floor and all rugby scrum huddle over it... you can't do that with an SLR easily!

SLRs give you that nice "blurred background" effect when using low aperatures and your subject is a few feet, or more, from a background. Generally a Compact will put both foreground and background in focus, so you don't get the real "punchy" photos on a compact that you can get on a DSLR. It has a lot to do with the tiny sensors in compacts compared to DSLRs.

If you want to avoid camera shake then you'll need to either better your camera holding technique (plenty of advise on internet) or use a faster ISO speed on your camera, or employ the use of Image Stabilization enabled cameras. A lot of compact cameras have this feature, less DSLRs have this.

DSLR cameras are much larger and heavier than compacts, but then if you've got a 15month old child, i'm sure you've got a pram and are used to carry shed loads of stuff each time you go out ;-)

I bought a good compact (Canon G7) but then later on bought a DSLR (Canon 400D) as I couldn't achieve that punchy "blurred background" effect with the compact, also the 400D allows me to use a higher ISO (1600) without the risk of a really grainy picture, like I would get on my G7.