I have one as well I also have Kodak that is much thinner and has a extra wide lens. The Kodak is "only" 5 Meg and take good pictures as well; I would go with the Canon unless you want a camera with a extra wide lens.

Not to add confusion, but I would seriously consider a Lumix (Panasonic) FX3. It is tiny, sleek, and has two features almost none of the other inexpensive p&s's have: Image stabilization and "high sensitivity" mode. Those features will let you take photos from moving vehicles and in other situations where you'll just get blurry shots from most other cameras. You can get an FX3 for $229 at J&R Photo right now:
http://www.jr.com/JRProductPage.process?Product=4126385

Note: I just posted some photos from the FX3's "big brother" - the 10megapixel LX2 - in another thread, but it is twice as expensive -- if you're looking for inexpensive and ultra small/sleek, the FX3 is a great choice! I've owned several Coolpixes and several Canon Elphs (e.g., SD550), and IMHO, these Lumix p&s cameras have both of those lines beat.

The Lumix looks really nice and since it has a wide angle lens it might be a better way to go? It does look a little bigger than the Canon and Kodak and that might be a factor?

The measurements are:
3.7 x 2 x .95 Lumix FX3
3.56 x 2.24 x .8 Canon SD630

IOW, the Lumix is a slightly "longer" and thicker, but the Canon is 1/4" taller.

Note that the Lumix weighs (WITH battery) 5.8oz, whereas the Canon weighs 6.2oz, so the Lumix is actually lighter.

The bottom line is that they're both equally "pocketable."

Frankly, you won't go wrong with either of those cameras. My experience is just that one of the major drawbacks of p&s cameras is the difficulty avoiding blurry photos, and Lumix has a significant advantage in that regard.

BTW, if you have time, you might want to check out these (and any other cameras you are considering) at www.dpreview.com -- it is the most respected independent source of reviews for camera equipment around, and is used by most of the professional photographers (and semi-pros) I know.

:iagree: I've read some very excellent reviews about the Lumix FX line over the past few months. Two other features worth mentioning - it comes with a Leica lens which even in today's world is still a quality high performance lens. Also the battery life on the Lumix FX line is rated to be excellent. Costco carries the FX50 which is an slightly upgraded version of the FX7 with a rubberized black surface and larger 3" LCD. Price if I remember correctly is around $350. If I could get my wife to give up her awful Sony T1 (it was good 2 years ago), this is what I'd advise her to get.

The FX50 and FX3 came out at the same time (a few months ago) -- the FX50 is 7mp vs. 6mp for the FX3, and the FX50 has a wider angle lens. Checking dpreview.com, it looks like the widest the FX3 goes is 35mm (film equivalent), where the FX50 does go wider - to 28mm. Both should be excellent cameras. I should note that if ultra-compact isn't your primary concern, and just "compact" will do, consider the 10mp LX2. It is a fantastic camera with many DSLR-like functions...and it's only $100 more than the FX50. I just posted some info about it in another thread today -- do a search on "LX2" and you'll find it.

Good luck on which ever you decided.
oh and buy me one too:thumbup:

In my opinion, Canon has the best technology in the market right now. Their new DIGIC image processors are exceptional. I would check out www.dpreview.com and search for something in your pricerange.

I agree when it comes to D-SLRs (I have 3 different models), but with point & shoot cameras, any of these big-name brands (Canon, Nikon, Panasonic/Lumix, Olympus, Sony, Kodak, etc.) make outstanding equipment. I personally recommend getting one that uses SD cards (they're smaller than CF, but with similar capacities and cost per gig), and as I think is clear, I think Lumix has some obvious advantages, but I don't feel nearly as strongly that Canon is the "only way to go" with p&s's as with DSLRs.

:iagree: I agree