OK, Really Digital Cameras
The last post pointed to c/net's <a href="http://reviews.cnet.com/Digital_cameras/4520-7603_7-5023995-7.html?tag=tnav">Digital Camera page</a>. This is good but not nearly good enough. The only thing that makes it a worthwhile starting point is that it has clear star-ratings of cameras at the top.
However, by far the two best digital camera reviews pages are <a href="http://www.steves-digicams.com/hardware_reviews.html">Steve's Digicams </a>and the <a href="http://www.dcresource.com/">Digital Camera Resource Page</a>. On Steve's, if you want his opinion fast, just click on the conclusion.
Another page that is useful is the <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare.asp">Digital Photography Review </a>page. This allows you to specify what features you like in a camera, and it will search the database for a match. My particular recommendation was <a href="http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/fz10.html">Panasonic's Lumix FZ10</a>. But they neglected to mention it was "bulky as 'ol hell, biatzch".
In light of which, I have decided to buy<a href="http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/s1is.html"> Canon's Powershot S1IS</a>. The 10x optical zoom solves my temple roof problems (Panasonic, Canon, and now <a href="http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/z2.html">Minolta</a> offer "Image Stabilizer" or "Anit-shake" features that counter blurriness on telephoto lenses–in a word, a "must"); the sports action shutter speed solves my children picture taking problem (I believe Lumix is the fastest in this zoom range, but too bulky); and the size will allow it to roughly fit in my pocket (<a href="http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/c770uz.html">Olympus C-770 </a>is best, but no Image Stabilizer).
For the cost, features, and size of the camera this decision has made itself.