In reply to Short&Savage:
The answer depends a lot on what you want to do.
If you really want an SLR then you can get a decent SLR for that kind of money, but you won't get a hell of a lot in terms of lenses. For 400-500 quid you will get an awesome compact.
The SLR will give great versatility and be vastly superior to most compacts for specialised jobs - sticking it on a tripod and shooting in the dark is classic SLR territory. That's not the whole story though.
If you hang around with photographers long enough then you will hear the cliche about "the best camera being the one in your hand". It's not a joke.
I just had a look at my pics from a recent 4 day backpacking trip. I carried an SLR in my bag and a compact strapped outside. I took about 150 pics on the compact and 17 on the SLR. All the SLR pics were at the start or end of the day when I wasn't walking. When climbing it is even worse - if you can't just reach for a camera and snap then it may as well not be there.
Now there are people who take SLRs climbing and use them, but you should really ask yourself if you are that dedicated. Do you care enough to either stop and dig or have a large camera strapped to the outside of your bag?
And finally, the middle ground of compact system cameras is worth a look. SLR quality sensors with nearly* SLR quality lenses. TBH unless you have a strong idea of what you want I would suggest loking at a high end compact or system camera before an SLR at the moment. I love my nikon d7000, but if it weren't for the lenses I would seriously consider ditching for a NEX or similar.
And actually finally, lots of people will disagree with me. That's ok as everyones requirements are different.
*close and getting better.
Post edited at 23:17