I need a camera...

[DSTRBD]

Like the post say's, I have some POS costco special (couple hundred wasted dollars) point and shoot I have been using for a couple years now...I effing hate the thing with a passion!!. We had 15 years worth of camera gear stolen from us in hawaii a couple years ago and have been so bitter that we have not got around to replacing the gear that got stolen. So, we are looking for a "inexpensive" digital SLR. (500.00 ceiling) Im hoping to just get an education from those of you that "know" what bang for your buck means.

So, we love, landscape and macro the best, what should we get?

[CarpeyBiggs]

$500? pretty low ceiling in the dSLR world... a decent macro lens alone is pretty steep. of course, perhaps you don't mean "macro" as in specialized macro. if you just want something like 1:4 macro, you could probably get away with something less expensive. but for a new camera, still be hard to do.

do you mind buying something used?

[DSTRBD]

Nope used is fine, I understand lenses are extra, I am an avid saltwater reef aquarium hobbiest (its actually my job too) I need a camera that will get some good close macro shots of coral polyps for my website. I am willing to spend what it takes, and have always been kinda partial to Canon although that has nothing to do with what I might end up with.

So lets say I have up to 1000.00 to spend.

[archbishop]

I'm a big fan of canons. I think the average person would say the two main players are Canon or Nikon. If you used Canons in the past I'd be inclined to stick with them. How the controls are layed out, down to the terminology of the cameras use is completely different between the two. Unless you had some overwhelming reason to switch I stick with canon. I think it's reasonable to say that neither has clear advantage over the other. Hard to beat what Canon is doing with the Rebel. Entry level model. I think that gets you in your budget new. If you looked used you can probably get into a 30d or perhaps 40d. 50d would be nice but might push you out of your budget used.
For what it's worth I have a digital rebel and then later bought the 30d I like both of them The 30d is clearly the better of the two. If and when I upgrade I'll skip past the 40d and go straight to the 50d.
Have fun shopping.

[ibenick]

If I were buying a new camera it would absolutely be one of the Panasonic micro four thirds models. Hell, I'm half tempted to sell off all my Canon gear for one. Seems capable of getting equal results but in a much smaller package with less expensive glass.

[CarpeyBiggs]

the m4/3 doesn't have good macro glass yet. has a 45mm macro, but i'm not sure that's good enough for this application?

then again, my suggestion was going to be a rebel (maybe even a used one) and a 60mm EFS. that would keep you below the $1000 ceiling. but it has the same problem as the m4/3 45mm macro, and that is, it might not zoom in far enough (100mm in 35mm FOV terms.) How far away will you be from your subjects? That will determine what kind of macro you will need.

I think sigma makes a good 150mm macro too.

m4/3 is lighter, but it's still not as powerful as the canon slrs. if you don't require lightweight, i'd get a canon. i only use the m4/3 stuff because it is so much lighter for backpacking.