Beginner question: Casio, Canon or Sony?

[john909kid]

Hi all, very new to this so just looking for some advice as to which digital camera would be best for my needs. In fact I only started looking at digital cameras last night as i'm off on holiday on sunday, and wouldn't mind picking up a digital camera at the airport tax free
Ive looked so far at the Casio qv-r51, Canon s500 and the Sony w-1.
From reviews i've been looking at the casio looks good but the slow time between taking pictures using flash puts me off....up to 7 seconds I think I read? And without flash I think its 2 seconds between taking another shot...
The Canon looks cool too, but I keep reading horror stories about humidity wrecking the insides and people finding their canons dead!! Not sure how true these stories are? (reviews from Amazon) Also I read the s400 has better picture quality than the S500?
The Sony w-1 looks good, but it may too expensive for what i'm after.
The 7 seconds flash time on the Casio may be a problem though...what is the time on the Canon?
I guess I just need a simple point and click camera, that can take pictures of moving images without blurring, good picture quality and colour, and is small and compact.
Thanks

[John_Reed]

Originally Posted by john909kid

the casio looks good but the slow time between taking pictures using flash puts me off....up to 7 seconds I think I read? And without flash I think its 2 seconds between taking another shot...

Have you thought of the Kyocera cameras?

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/kyocera/finecam_sl300r-review/

They're VERY fast, and also VERY compact. The "300r" version is 3 megapixels, and the "400r" version is 4 megapixels. They might be what you're looking for.

[JDR7171988]

Kyocera isn't a very well respected digicam manufacturer, and that camera looks kinda cruddy. Go with one of the digital elphs from Canon.

[D70FAN]

Or better yet, Look at (and I mean physically look at) and try all of those cameras and then include the Canon A75. High features, great pictures, easy to use and <$300.

Not a pocket camera, but easy to carry (and hold on to).

I would buy one but I can't go back. If I did (go back) I would probably own an FZ-10 and an S1 IS as well. I know it's redundant. Good thing the D70 keeps me broke.

[JDR7171988]

Don't get the A75, it's not a comapct camera. Get the S500

[Jake Conner]

Kyocera is becoming more respected every time they release new products, and the SL series is definitely not cruddy. If you're looking primarily for speed and compactness, that's what you want.

Jake

[john909kid]

Thanks for the replies.
After doing much reading on the web and also because of how much cash I can afford i'm leaning towards the Casio or the Canon 410/500.
I'm thinking now the 7 seconds flash delay on the Casio may not be so much of an issue as I had originally thought.
The only things that put off buying the Canon are these reports of humidity killing them, and also on more than one review its been stated the original Canon S400 has better picture quality than the newer S500.
Would either the Casio or the Canon be able to take good pictures of moving images without bluring? ie dogs running, fast moving cars etc
Also I must add i'm inclinded to go with the Casio or Canon over some of the above mentioned alternate models because of its size and ease to fit inside a jean pocket.

[john909kid]

I've just found out the Casio's shutter speeds range from 4- 1/2000 seconds, and I think ( I may be wrong?) the Canon's is 1/1000.
Does this mean the Casio would be better for taking "still" pictures of moving images?
Go easy on me please.....ive been looking into this for two days now
Thnaks

[John_Reed]

Originally Posted by john909kid

Would either the Casio or the Canon be able to take good pictures of moving images without bluring? ie dogs running, fast moving cars etc
Also I must add i'm inclinded to go with the Casio or Canon over some of the above mentioned alternate models because of its size and ease to fit inside a jean pocket.

I guess you must not have taken the Kyocera suggestion seriously, since their swivel-bodied cameras are more compact and "jean pocketable" than your choices. No problem.
But no matter what camera you get, taking "good pictures of moving images without bluring? ie dogs running, fast moving cars etc" isn't easy. Just like film cameras, digital cameras have to open the shutter for a long enough time to properly expose their digital "film," and to freeze motion, you need a faster lens and higher ISOs than you can generally get in a pocketable camera. The faster (generally larger) fixed-lens cameras will all have their limitations too. Sports photographers beat this by using expensive dSLRs, whose ISO can range up to 1600; not pocketable at all! Can't beat physics. Good luck in finding your best choice.