>>To the other photographers, what's your weapon of choice for taking photos?<<
Depends on the task at hand.
For portraiture, I rely on a Nikon D200 with an f/2.8 80-200 normally at 100mm and f/11 (I set the lights to give me the right exposure at that f/stop, shutter speed being irrelevant but I sync @ 1/125 most of the time).
For events I also use the D200 with a 17-55mm f/2.8.
I had a Nikon D70 that I passed on to my youngest in exchange for his N75. That way I can have different films on different bodies to match the scene in front of me.
Now, for landscapes and nature... I rely primarily on film. Yes, you read that right. FILM. Kodak Ektar 100 is almost as good as slide film. I also do B&W (Ilford) that I process myself. I have a Nikon N80 and a couple of N75's, with a variety of lenses. For $2.5 get it processed at your favorite lab (no prints, just negatives) and then scan it yourself. You can get some BARGAINS on B&H Photo (or used stuff on eBay) because people have latched on to the MEGAPIXEL wagon... They have been sold on the notion that more megapixels means better photos and it ain't necessarily so. Heck, I get offended when people tell me I must have a good camera because of the photos I take, and they don't know that photography isn't any different from music: you can have the best instrument but if your playing isn't good it's not going to sound good. It's not the instrument but the musician. It's not your camera but your vision. Not too long ago I watched Ed Friedland's review of the new Squier Classic Vibe basses and I'm convinced that the brand name on the headstock is not at all a more important factor in your playing than your own God-given talent and His anointing on you when you play. Instrument quality is a good thing to have, but if I'm not mistaken, James Jamerson almost never changed strings and the neck of his bass was so warped that hardly anyone else could play it. (I read this somewhere; I'll have to look up the reference but I'm positive I read it from a reliable source.)
To back up my claim, I have photos that my kids took with a 1 (ONE!) megapixel and ANCIENT camera that blow people away! (available upon demand in case someone wants to see them).
Now, when I see something that I know I'm going to go back to and that I must absolutely capture with the most fidelity possible, I use this:
http://macuca.net/gallery/displayimage.php?album=6&pos=2 That is a 4x5 large format camera. I do mostly B&W landscape with it, and I also process my own film. Go to your favorite Barnes & Noble and/or Borders, order a french-vanilla capuccino, go to the magazine section, grab a few landscape photography mags and sit down. There's a reason why the majority of pros are *STILL* using large format film.......
If you want to get into photography I would recommend two things:
1) A camera that you can set to manual everything (aperture, shutter speed, film speed or ISO, focus). Manual is the best way to learn how the various parameters affect the making of a photo. I wouldn't set the camera to "Program" (one of many automatic modes) and then let the camera do everything for me. That's not photography, that's snapshot shooting, with all respect to everyone and IMHO.
2) Get these books:
a)
http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Exposure-Photographs-Digital-Updated/dp/0817463003/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1259683696&sr=8-1b)
http://www.amazon.com/Learning-See-Creatively-Composition-Photography/dp/0817441816/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1259683719&sr=1-1Remember also that your LGM fam is just a post away, so if you have any questions or need assistance please don't hesitate to ask.
Blessings,
Asahel