That's almost like asking which car you should buy.

A lot more information is necessary before anyone can give you suggestions, based on your real needs, photographic skills and whether or not you already own a camera. The range is from a $20 disposable to $20,000 worth of high end digital equipment and a laptop with a DVD burner to back the images up while traveling.

Where do you think that you fall within that range?

Larry's right that you've asked too open-ended a question, but I have a suggestion: go with small and light. You're more likely to take pictures if you have the camera with you. Compare the ideas of hauling a bunch of unfamiliar gear through unfamiliar territory with slipping something smaller than a pack of playing cards into your shirt pocket. See the difference?

And buy plenty of spare batteries whatever sort of camera you buy; they may or may not be available where you're going

Light is definitely the way to go. When I reviewed the CoolPix 5000 a few years ago, I did a trip to the Southwest with just the camera and a small light tripod. The pictures ended up in two magazine articles and I've been selling prints for years.

A few general rules that apply to any camera. Shoot at the lowest ISO that the camera is capable of and always use a tripod for the highest quality images possible. It's better to come back with a few excellent images than a lot of mediocre ones.

Speaking of tripods, I spotted a tiny little one for sale at a WalMart a few years back. Now I'd never really been a big fan of tripods before - they were just another piece of bulky equipment I took along but rarely used. But this little thing was great - well, great for the $4.99 price anyhow.

About the size of three pens, it went right in a pocket and was no problem to use. Now it's inappropriate for an slr, but for my CoolPix 880 it was just the ticket. This isn't the same one, but it's roughly the same idea and the bendy legs would probably make it more stable than mine. It won't replace a "real" tripod, but if you're trying to keep the camera steady and still travel light it's a gem.

Oh, and if you do get a small Point & Shoot camera be certain it has the threaded tripod hole on the bottom before you buy.

Ok fair point. I don't currently own a camera and looking for one that will give me high quality images, without me having to fuss around with the camera to much. Price range about

Film or digital? They both have their advantages and disadvantages. The main difference between the two is that your skills are your main limitation when shooting film and when shooting digital, both skills and $$ limitations are a factor. All things being equal, the more you spend on a digital camera, the higher the quality of images the camera is capable of capturing.

PHat, it aint the fiddle, it's the FIDDLER.
In order to get "amazing pictures" the photographer is required to know how to manipulate the camera settings to achieve a desired result, compose a picture so that the photographer calls attention to what he/she believes is noteworthy and lastly, how to control, modify light or be at a destination when the light is most flattering to the subject.
IMHO, too much is made of the camera as an entitiy that in and of itself produces a picture. I just don't believe the adverts.
A good photographer can get a good picture with a disposable camera, he just will not be able to use certain techniques like motion blur/panning or selective focus because of the limitation of the equipment.
have you thought of the advantages and disadvantages of film vs digital? How much time before the trip is there for you to learn?
In your current situation, no camera and wanting very little to fuss with, I would suggest a ZLR, or zoom lens reflex that has some subject modes that will take you away from having to do a quick study on apertures and shutter speeds.
these units caome in both film and digital models; if you are not comfortable with image editing software, the film units may be better for you.

Dear Mr. Berman & anyone else with an answer. I'am considering a 4A-109 TLR Seagull which is medium format. I know that 75mm is equivalent to 50mm on a 35mm. If I also purchased the telephoto lenses increasing 1.5x to make the original lenses 112.5mm would this addition make the "normal" lenses more suitable for portraits. Thank-you all who respond. Steve