So, i am considering two options here (talking digital here).

1. Kit out my Powershot A95 with various add on lenses and filters to have some more options when taking a shot.  That would cost an extra £150 i would say.
   Benefits: Cheap, Smaller/more portable, used to the camera, has inbuilt macro which i enjoy
   Drawbacks: Good but not a great quality camera

2. Get an SLR and only be able to afford a normal lens to start.  Somewhere in the range of £600-700
   Benefits: Great quality of shot, versatility in terms of lens choice, a step in the more professional direction
   Drawbacks: Bigger than my A95 by default / less portable, Expensive investment, would have to buy a macro lens after the original (because i would want a normal lens first for it)

So, i was wondering if anyone has had a similar experience and had any input.  Also i was wondering about SLR vs non-SLR high end digital cameras like the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ30B , and if there was any point in spending that much money on something when i could just go the whole hog and get an SLR.  Basically are there any benefits of an SLR that i am missing out on?

Thanks for any help

The basic question would be about your photographic behaviour.

The "prosumer" cameras on the edge between compact cameras and SLR's have the advantage of "no dust on the sensor", essentially one lense (perhaps some small add-ons) and fairly good quality (Panasonic, Samsung... I love my Fuji S7000 with 12MP and gorgeous colours). Very good allround equipment.

More sophisticated with more degrees of freedom are of course SLR's where you only are restricted by your budget. (I love equally my Fuji S3 with Nikon lenses....)

My advice would consequently be to get a very good prosumer camera and check whether you really need more for what you are doing....

I bought an Olympus E-500 Dual Zoom Lens Kit for 808 Euro (must be less than 700). It's an 8MPixel DSLR with the most creative options to be found in that category. The lenses are 14-45mm (28-90mm equivalent) and 40-150mm (80-300 in 35mm equivalent). The dual lens kit is the most popular buy here, because it's such a good value. Only drawback (at the moment) is that Olympus have developed their own line of excellent Digital Specific Lenses, based on the Four Thirds standards, which means that you are limited if you want to use non-Olympus lenses. Luckily they have the widest range of lenses in the market, but they're a bit short on telemacro lenses, I discovered. But I'm almost sure they're still widening their range... The obvious advantage of DSLR is that you can have more variety and more quality for the lenses. There may be no point in buying A DSLR if you're perfectly happy with the fixed lens on a hybrid prosumer camera...

You (and Gerald and Geert) have pretty much laid out the pros and cons here. It all comes down to personal use. The A95 is a pretty good camera, and if you want to continue to enjoy the portability and ease of use, without breaking the bank, then I would say stick with it. If you are going to be trying to sell your photo and take the more "pro" route, then a SLR would probably be the road to take. For me, my C-8080 provides the best of both worlds. Very portable, high resolution, versitile built-in lense, and fairly good quality. I would like to get an SLR in the future, but for now, the C-8080, even with it's limitations, fits my needs pretty well. It all comes down to you.

Oh yes, just something to bear in mind: if you invest in some good lenses for a DSLR, you can still use them on your next camera (10 years from now?), if you buy wisely... Lenses can last several camera-lifetimes... At least that's what most DSLR buyers take into consideration when they decide to buy. Just another advantage of DSLR that you might not have thought of...

Thanks for the input, and that is a good point about the lenses girsempa... depends on me again... will i continue to have photography as a hobby?  i hope so, but i tend to be one of those people who goes from one hobby to the next, i play the guitar (not much any more), i dj (not much any more), i do judo (not much any more)... so will photography go to the wayside like the rest?

Anyway current fervour for photography taken into account, it seems that i may be better off with one of these prosumer cameras.  The A95 is a very nice portable camera, but then there are other prosumer cameras out there which are seemingly portable as well. The Canon Powershot Pro1 i just took a look at and it looks like a good compromise between the A95 and an SLR.  It has a retractable lens, which is always a plus for portability, i might go see if the local camera shop has one so i can pick it up and have a feel for it.  Anyone else got a similar camera / price range, as this looks like a pretty good option (CF memory a plus because i already have CF cards for my A95)?

:)

Well, taking into account your history with hobbies ( I do hope you stick with it though), there are several cameras in that class: Sony Cyber-shot H2 (12x zoom) or more expensive Sony Cyber-shot DSC-R1, Nikon Coolpix 8700, Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom (yeay), Konica Minolta DiMAGE A2, and the Kodak EasyShare P880. Possibly others as well. (not taking into accout the CF card issue - memory is cheap these days) If I were on the market for a prosumer right now, I would seriously look at the Kodak P880. The price has really dropped on it recently. I see it for sale at Beach Camera of $411, and Costco was giving a $100 rebate off their already low price. I'm not sure about in the UK though. Do some research on dpreview.com and stevesdigicams.com, and narrow down your choices. Good luck! (Great tip about the lenses Geert!)

i hope i stick with it too, i am enjoying it and other people are enjoying it as well (my friends/family are all very impressed with my shots - i just point and shoot in my mind, not too difficult), plus a £2 clip frame and a 30p print make a nice (and cheap) present for certain people - doing that for a friend this weekend.  I'll take a look at those cameras some time later on... i have to get on with my day and not laze around browsing through loads of cameras online and drooling ;)
Cheers guys :)

I'd suggest going with a DSLR, regardless of your habits. I bought Olympus 5050 three years ago. Got E-300 a year later and never looked back. But then, I like using telephoto (40-150), so a compact camera is usually not enough for me and for some reason, I never liked the UltraZoom compacts. I also suggest buying E-500 double zoom kit. Even if you get fed up with the photography after a year or two, it will almost certainly be better than a compact.

I got a Nikon D70 about a year and 1/2 ago...my previoius cam was and is a compact Minolta Dimage 100...ahead of its time "at that time" but far surpassed.  This little cam had manual overrides, etc and many of my gallery images come from that.

As for the DSLR, I would not step back  and will continue with the DSLR direction.  Having been here with the D70, I totally love it even if the need for lenses can be a budget problem.  Shooting raw is great(didn't check the Panasonic to see if raw is offered) and actually having some prime lens like a tele are a great touch.  My tele is a full format 35mm size, since I thought of moving to a full format DSLR.  Likely, that will not happen since newer DSLR cams look pretty good and the sensor smaller than 35mm size is not a problem.  

I have had little trouble with "dust bunnies" on images but have had a few. These generally blow away easily.  Sure the initial cost is higher and so is the upkeep if you add lenses.  Consider that the newer zoom lenses are really getting very good and some opt for those instead of prime lenses.  Purists would not believe that could be happening!   One fine quality zoom will work wonders.   And, macros leave the lens to your choice...and empty the wallet a bit, too.

Still, the final note from me: I would not go back to a cam without interchangeable lenses. I do love the DSLR.   Then again, I have not tried the panasonic...still, believe the single all purpose lens of some of these fine cams will make me feel a bit cramped..maybe not...haven't been there with the new cams.         TomDart.

PS. we always say, the eye behind the lens is more important than the camera. With a decent camera, that is true.  With a fine camera, that is true. What makes you happy ands continue with photography is the bottom line.  If budget does not allow future espense for lenses, etc., go another direction.   If it does allow(mind didn't but I got a few lenses anyway!) go for the DSLR.  There is not much to compare with the sound of that shutter and mirror flip...for what that is worth. LOL>