I think every mfr. is going to have their strengths and weaknesses. Personally, I find Sony's lower end cameras to be somewhat inferior to their competitors, but they have been steadily improving since they first entered the market. Their high end cameras, on the other hand, are quite good, and I salute Sony for trying different storage mediums on their cameras, such as the floppy and CDR. I have always admired Canon, and use Canon exclusively for my 35mm SLR cameras, and have never had a complaint. Their digicams, IMHO, tend to be innovative with a good mix of features for the money, and they pioneered the ultra small digicam with the digital elph series, which I still like. Nikon has always had good lenses and well sorted CCD software, and have always been highly regarded. I have never liked their camera design though, as I am more of a traditionalist, and swivel lenses and the like do nothing but annoy me in everyday use. With the exception of Olympus' reliance on SM, I always felt they made some of the best low to mid level cameras out there. Especially their P&S cameras, which have consistently out-performed their competition in just about everything. As far as the 2100 is concerned, for the price it is an excellent value. My limited experience with it as been very good. The lens is very good, one of the best I have run across on a digicam, and the pictures turn out amazing. Far better than I expected. One other thing to consider is the IS during low light shots. It does allow you to take some low light shots without the need for a tripod, which comes in quite handy on vacations, etc.