You are probably bumping the button that Sarge doesn't like on the SX40! It is the top button beside the thumb rest, if you push it, it 'pulls' the zoom back for focus and tracking purposes and then goes back when released! I was frustrated by that also until I realized what I was bumping, and most times didn't hardly feel the button because it doesn't take a lot of pressure to activate it.

I don't see any way to call the Canon a winner. I'm not saying it's a loser but it doesn't dominate the comparison at all. The author of that article is clearly biased toward Canon. The Canon seems to have better movie features (Whoopty-doo. Personally I don't care because I use a still camera for stills and that's a still camera's main function), has four supposed advantages which are even stated as being the same or almost the same so they're not really advantages at all. It doesn't shoot RAW and only features a longer zoom and a lower price. That's it - longer zoom and currently lower price. Big deal.

The Panasonic has a very definite advantage with constant f/2.8 across the zoom range. I also really enjoy Leica glass although the Canon glass is just fine. Those are BIG advantages when doing a side by side comparision - not something trivial to pass over in a list or not mention at all. The two cameras even use completely different sensors that can't be compared with a simple MP number - which again were virtually identical numbers anyway.

That review is lame and just a spec comparison that provides absolutely nothing of value to shop with. It's very possible the author never touched either camera and did the article from spec sheets on company websites. I haven't seen a real hands-on reviews of the Panasonic yet except reviewers fondling a prototype at an electronics show. When extensive side-by-side reviews with examples of output are available then we can start to make real assessments.

The SX-40 also is now at a street price that is much lower because it's not a new model. Its retail is higher than it's current price. The $599 retail of the Panasonic will come down after it's been out for a while, I suspect to around $425 street price or so. Thus one more of the two Canon supposed advantages is no longer valid.

If the FZ-200 is as good or better than the FZ-150 I'd say the FZ-200 will be a clear winner over the Canon SX-40 for a while and Canon will come up with an SX-50 quickly to be a direct competition - and it will also start out at around $599 retail.

Digital zoom probably turned off. When in Auto Mode, look at the top of the LCD while zooming. Does it have a little white line about 2/3 of the way from left to right? If it does not have that the digital is not active. Also when zooming with Digital Zoom activated, there will be a 'stop' at the end of the optical zoom so you have to release the zoom lever and start it again to go into the digital zoom range. Then be sure to hold it REAL STEADY because it will be difficult to really hold steady!!

I have just bought the SX40 and absolutely love it. However, I am having trouble with the digital zoom setting. When I go under "Menu", the Digital Zoom choice says "off" and it is faded out so I can't turn it on. The same thing is true with Program, Shutter Speed, Aperture and Manual. Also, when I go to Auto as suggested above and zoom, there IS the white line at the top as described above, which would seem to indicate that the digital zoom is activted (as per the above paragraph) But it doesn't stop and start again to zoom further in digital.

I am sure there is just some small obvious thing I am overlooking here. Can someone enlighten me, please? I hope there is nothing wrong with my camera. Thanks in advance for any suggestions.

I had a problem with that once myself. Couldn't figure out which setting was preventing me from changing it, so went into the menu and then under TOOLS, the middle tab, go to the bottom and RESET ALL which should take it back to Factory Settings and then you should be able to get to it again. IF the digital zoom is activated, it should stop. Also while zooming there should be a little blue or blue-green number below that bar showing the magnification ( 35x, 140x, etc)

I had a problem with that once myself. Couldn't figure out which setting was preventing me from changing it, so went into the menu and then under TOOLS, the middle tab, go to the bottom and RESET ALL which should take it back to Factory Settings and then you should be able to get to it again. IF the digital zoom is activated, it should stop. Also while zooming there should be a little blue or blue-green number below that bar showing the magnification ( 35x, 140x, etc)

I had a problem with that once myself. Couldn't figure out which setting was preventing me from changing it, so went into the menu and then under TOOLS, the middle tab, go to the bottom and RESET ALL which should take it back to Factory Settings and then you should be able to get to it again. IF the digital zoom is activated, it should stop. Also while zooming there should be a little blue or blue-green number below that bar showing the magnification ( 35x, 140x, etc)

I don't see any way to call the Canon a winner. I'm not saying it's a loser but it doesn't dominate the comparison at all. The author of that article is clearly biased toward Canon. The Canon seems to have better movie features (Whoopty-doo. Personally I don't care because I use a still camera for stills and that's a still camera's main function), has four supposed advantages which are even stated as being the same or almost the same so they're not really advantages at all. It doesn't shoot RAW and only features a longer zoom and a lower price. That's it - longer zoom and currently lower price. Big deal.

The Panasonic has a very definite advantage with constant f/2.8 across the zoom range. I also really enjoy Leica glass although the Canon glass is just fine. Those are BIG advantages when doing a side by side comparision - not something trivial to pass over in a list or not mention at all. The two cameras even use completely different sensors that can't be compared with a simple MP number - which again were virtually identical numbers anyway.

That review is lame and just a spec comparison that provides absolutely nothing of value to shop with. It's very possible the author never touched either camera and did the article from spec sheets on company websites. I haven't seen a real hands-on reviews of the Panasonic yet except reviewers fondling a prototype at an electronics show. When extensive side-by-side reviews are available then we can start to make real assessments.

The SX-40 also is now at a street price that is much lower because it's not a new model. Its retail is higher than it's current price. The $599 retail of the Panasonic will come down after it's been out for a while, I suspect to around $425 street price or so. If the FZ-200 is as good or better than the FZ-150 I'd say the FZ-200 will be a clear winner over the Canon SX-40 for a while and Canon will come up with an SX-50 quickly to be a direct competition - and it will also start out at around $599 retail.