I use a Nikon 3.2 MP. I think I get pretty good results, but I have been watching the prices come down rapidly on digital cameras with MPs rangng from 7 to 10. I can see a new camera in my future. I would absolutely love to have one of the Digital SLRs, but I'm too "frugal" (cheap) to spend the big bucks, until they come way down. I looked seriously at a Pentax since I have a Pentax 35mm with a bunch of lenses already and could use the lenses on both cameras as long as I used them manually.

The optics are what makes a camera, so you just aren't getting the best optics regardless in an under $200 camera. I would however look for one that is a true optical zoom/macro NOT digital zoom/macro and NOT the bogus add-on "lenses". All they do is help distort the clarity. Also look for one that is an "SLR type". They aren't true SLR, but they are better than a point and shoot in as you know what you are aiming at better.

As far as digital SLR's, I don't really think you are going to see them get much lower in price. Bodies are now close to the price point old film SLR's were and lenses basically are the same price.

Hi gonzer,
Mine is a Kodak C330 Easy Share,4.0 megapixel,3X optical,15X total zoom,and does video.[Lots of other features that I have yet to read the instructions about].Has a 128MB Dig.Mem.card,so I can take a bunch of pics. Paid $150 for it,an on-line special,at Comp USA.
I like to do close-ups,but can only get as close as 5 inches,which I'd like to improve on in the future.
But for all practible purposes,it suits me fine,and the results are good for the price paid.
Bob

Bob,
You can do close up work, get as close as you can and use a photo shop rogram to crop.

This spider was about the size of a quarter, every night it spun a big circular web between the awning by the side door and my van. I shot this at night with the light off, the cropped it to enlarge it. Its not perfect but close enough for me.

{{gwi:469480}}

This little moth was only about an inch in length, it took about 30 tries to get a good photo, and again while it is not perfect, its good enough for me.

{{gwi:469482}}

This little parasitic wasp was on the living room drapes one morning, it was a real challenge at about 3/4 of an inch.

{{gwi:469485}}

It takes patience, and lots of photos to pull it off but it can be done.

Exactly, the actual size of pictures now with digitals is HUGE. You can easily crop them and have a good close-up. Like Bambi, I shoot a ton of pictures when I am trying to get a good picture of something. That's the great thing with digitals, no wasted film. I use a 2 gig card that even at a fairly high setting on my camera holds over 1400 pictures! lol

Here is a reduced picture showing all of the flower. See that tiny black dot in the middle of the flower?
{{gwi:459323}}

If I show you the full size version only cropped for the dot, you can see it is an ant.
{{gwi:469489}}

This butterfly is maybe 1/2 inch tall and this is the actual original size, just cropped to the butterfly.
{{gwi:469490}}

My photos are all at a minimum of 3 feet from the subject, since I use a small telephoto lens most of the time.

Thanks for the info and pics bambi-too,and minibim.
Your photos are great! I'll have to delve into it and do some experimenting.
Bob

The main problem you will encounter is trying to get to close, so back in and out from the subject. I have found that it doesn't work well with things that are far away, when you try to crop it gets grainy.

Here are a few of mine,cropped and zoomed. Spider on bloom and close-up of the scales on the leaves. The Till. plumosa w/green bloom is about 4" across and the T. zecheri is just 2".
{{gwi:469491}}

{{gwi:469493}}