What kind of camera should i get?

i browse the forums everyday. i just recently dropped my Canon Digital S40. i plan on buying a new one real soon. but i wanna step it up a notch. i dont know too much about canon cameras, the accesoies needs (lenses in particular), or cameras in general. i just want to be able to take eyecatching, jawdropping photos. and i know that Canon EOS cameras are as topnoch as you can get. but at the same time, i want to buy all the equipment all at once, without having to buy extra lenses, tripods, etc. ec.... i'm willing to spend up to about 1000 dollars.

so, what kind of camera should i get?

XT willl give you the basics, but in order to get jawdroppin pics, you will need more lenses and a tripod for sure.
I lov emy XT and will reccomend that.

I dont know about need as far as more lenses and a tripod go. I've taken some "wow" pics with my 50 1.8 (and more recently my sigma 30) in low light handheld. If the focal length hadnt felt 'off' with the 35/2, that lens gave me some nice results as well.before spending tons on gear get used to the camera and see what you like to do with it. I bought my 350 with the 50 1.8 and used that for a good couple months before I even started looking to buy anything else.

In order to get really good shots, you have to learn and practice photography. No epipment will do that. Great equipment make it easier though.
If $1000 is your limit. I'd recommend a Nikon D50 with a Sigma 17-70 lens to start. The total should run about $500 for the body and $400 for the lens.
Getting an XT will cost about $760 for the body itself and that will not give you enough money for a great lens, CF card and other accessories to start you off. The D50 uses a SD card so you won't need to buy a CF card (assuming your prior camera used a SD card).
Good luck
P.S.
"Top notch" Canon camera is currently the 1Ds Mark II and the body alone is about $7000. Good lenses for this camera would probably run $5000 or so alone.

Instead of a dslr, have you considered something along the lines of a G6 or Pro 1 ? Yes, a dslr has the ability to produce jawdropping pix, but also at a somewhat higher learning curve. If you expect dropdead pictures straight out of a dslr without any post processing, you might disappointed. An advanced point & shoot, like a G6, is more likely to produce those jawdropping pictures you're after straight out of the camera. More importantly, a G series, or Pro 1, has the ability to operate in full manual mode, letting you learn how shutter speed, and aperture, work with each other, and how different settings give different effects. Also, they can be had for about 1/2 of your budget (check the marketplace), plus, when you decide to upgrade to a dslr, they make a great backup camera.

ditto

Sorry, but this is complete and utter bull****.

Now, there are $ 5,000 lenses (and even $ 100,000 lenses) for certain applications, but a good lens for that camera (and all other Canon cameras) would be a sharp prime like the 50/1.4 or 85/1.8 ... both about 350$.

Best regards,
Andy

I have taken some great shots with my G5 incl a 'first place' winner last year and a 'best of show' this year at a major local festival.

Yea I have an XT and it took some really ncie pics. with the Kit lens and the 50mm 1.8 i got.
now I just got the 70-200f4L over the weekend and I went to the zoo and WOW...they are AMAZING. It blew any other pic I took out of the water in color, sharpness and everything. Glass will make a HUGE difference no matter what body you buy

Remember, before you start using words like "utter bull****" you should re-read my post. It states good "LENSES" as in more than one. In the U.S. LENSES denotes more than one. I understand that you might be German and in Europe, they might call a single lens as lenses.

To be more specific, I was thinking of top notch, eyepoping LENSES that Canon makes such as 16-35L, 24-70L, 70-200 F2.8 L IS, and even a 100-400L that many pros and serious amateurs consider as necessities in the glass collection, not to mention some primes such as 85 f1.2L, 50 f1.4. and the like. I was guessing that they would add up to about $5000.

Lets all relax and take in a deep breath before we start calling others rude names and start making rude comments.
Plus I don't see how just critiquing others posts even help the original posters question.

Can't resist:
1400
1160
1700
1435
1500
0320
_____
$7,515 total

Good set by the way almost matches mine (except I have 28-70 vs 24-70 and TS-E 24 as well as 1.4x and 2x extenders).

Back on topic,
I think the Canon 350XT would be the best choice with the kit lens and a 50/1.8 for starters. Adding a tripod and a couple of CF cards should be pretty close.

Hey no counting the primes. Zooms only.
Sorry about the rant, forgot to take my chill pill

I'd still say the Nikon D50 would be cheaper and with money saved over for good glass, it would be a cheaper to get great pics for the same money than the XT with a kit and 50mm.

I vote for:
1. Used 300D + 18-55 kit (Approx. $400)
2. EF 85mm f1.8 ($350)
3. Tamron 28-75 f2.8 ($330)

Total: approx $1080 and you have a nice camera with 2 good lenses and one handy walkaround lens.