-----------------------------------------------------
I have budget units and it's my experience that there's no camera in the sub-$300 range that's not going to be extremely annoying on a regular basis. I've used dozens... You do get what you pay for and low aperture lenses and fast operation cost money. Shutter lag is the enemy and Panasonic is the only camera company is even attempting to fight it. The low-end panasonics will give you quick operation in that price range, with glass that isn't good, (but better then most down there), the real cost is a slightly noisy image. (but it's a 'party cam' so who cares?) I think panasonic would be my option. I *HATE* waiting for the first blinky-light to turn green and the second one to stop flashing before it will let me take the picture. Dealing with film is far preferable to that. You think the photographers annoyed, try being the person holding the fake smile. Panasonic digitals, on the other hand, let you snap pictures even if the camera doesn't think it's ready yet--like a real camera. The digital revolution has gotten people used to paying good money for annoying junk. You'd be surprised how close disposable film cameras get to outshooting a 'bargain' digital. The only thing digital does is save processing/viewing time. It's more expensive and generally takes inferior pictures for its cost.
on my own digital front I'm hoping I get a hand-me-down D100 to replace an old N90 around xmas time when we upgrade to the D200. (much more durable shutter, the d100 has had to go in twice for it) The wife and I are mainly glass freaks, so our bodies are behind. I used to shoot for the navy before I came out here (grip & grins, event, and aerial work), spouse used to do catalog work for Boston Store (only midwesterners have heard of it), but now manages the studio here.
a recent forum shot with that d100 and a Nikkor 35-70mm f/2.8 that I'm rather proud of.
no reason, I just really like that car...