casio exilim z40 or canon ixus 500?

Hi, I'm off on holiday to the highlands of scotland and want a good camera
for taking scenery pictures. These two cameras have been short listed but am
not sure which one to choose. Is the canon worth the extra dosh? I've had a
look at the specs but as I'm no expert I thought I'd ask you guys.

The casio has lesser resolution but the difference between a 4 and 5 mega
pixel is only about 10% on the image width and height.

The casio has a bigger lcd monitor on the back 2" compared to 1.5"

The casio has the option to manual focus. Is this a useful feature?

The casio is 65g lighter.

The casio is £217 where as the canon is £277

Am I just paying for the cannon name or is it a better piece of kit?

Does the canon have better optics?

Is there another camera out there that I should be considering instead of
these two?

Thanks in advance,
Gav the confused!!!!

 

Manual focus has been very useful for me. It has let me handle action
situations the auto-focus couldn't handle (by pre-focusing on the key
area), and it's also useful for macro photography, and solves problems
with reflections when shooting through glass. And no doubt many other
things. You have to think of it and be willing to take the trouble,
of course.

How useful the *particular implementation* of manual focus is on a
specific camera is another question, and I know nothing about the
Casio in that regard.

 

What about the Canon S410? Arguably better results than the s500 in low
light conditions.
And priced about the same as the casio.

-Jack