Anacharis, dwarf hair grass, alteranthera (pink and purple), african fern, java fern, amazon sword, micro sword, red & green tiger lotus, 7 different aponogetons, hornwort, cabomba green, watersprite, moneywort, rotala rotundifolia. And some other crap I cant think of at this time. Trace elements are more important then ferts. As long as you dose correctly your betta will not mind. CO2 injection is a big help. A product like flourish excel will help greatly also, to put it simply it is a source of organic carbon that can be used instead of CO2 injection or along with it. I like and trust flourish products. Lighting is also important, correct color temp., or Kelvin rating, helps. Between 5800K and 8000K is ideal, lab studies showed that 6700K is optimum for freshwater aquatic plants. Intensity is important also, 2 watts per gallon fluorescent lighting of correct color temp. for low and some moderate light needing plants. 3-4 wpg for some moderate and high light required plants. Tricky part is after 2 to 2 1/2 wpg you should have some sort of carbon source or CO2 injection or your asking for troubles (algae, pH flucs and so on). Substrate should be "micro gravel" for most plants, at least 50% "florite" will really help root feeders. Try the link below for some good info.

I'm going to stick my 2 cents worth in here. I've had many Canon cameras and have loved them all. My current one is an SX10-IS which has a fantastic "Super Macro" feature that allows 0" focusing distance - yes, you can set something directly on the lens and it focuses beautifully. Amazing feature. Also has a 20x optical zoom and an excellent lens, many options for control or total automatic. I can't recommend this series of cameras enough. Quality is *this close* to a dSLR (we also have a Canon 10D) and it really takes stunning images. There are 2 other models in this range since I bought my camera - the SX1-IS and the SX-20 IS. Good luck with your choice - there are sooo many options out there! Nancy Here is a link that might be useful: Canon PowerShot SX10-IS

Marylu, I don't know much about the Sony H5-- it came out after I'd already moved on to my Canon camera. But! There's a really active and helpful Sony forum over at DPReview.com. There are lots of "personalities" over there, but more often than not you'll get some great help. Even if you didn't want to get involved in another forum, it would be well worth reading through posts. Every conceivable question gets asked and answered. Thanks wigardenerwannabe. I mostly take photos for my own pleasure, but have used them for my work (graphic design) quite a bit, too. I've sold a few images, but it's not something I actively promote. I'd like to do that someday, but have to get to the point where my portfolio is a lot stronger than it is now. The good news is that I am finally almost to the point where I am pretty consistent at being able to grab the shots I want, but I still have so much more to learn. As far as knowing when things are in focus, it's likely just going to take some practice. I know nothing about Panasonic cameras, but check your manual to see if there is an option to turn on a beep when it's focused. Or some cameras have a blinking "shakey hand" icon which shows up when not in focus. It took me forever to realize that a sort of moire pattern would show up when my Sony was focused. Lisa's settings will likely help you the most. It's cool that it's got a macro/flower setting. One other thing to consider is that camera lenses generally need something contrasty to focus on-- light/dark or hard edges usually work. For a kind of decent tripod at a next-to-nothing price, check out Walmart. I used one of these for a couple of years before moving on up and it did just what I needed it to do. Anne, something you'll need to get used to is that Canon images are generally not sharp right out of the camera. They've done this on purpose, because in the long run it will give you a great deal of flexibility. Do you have Photoshop or some other image editing program? Are you after trying to zoom in for macro shots or are you wanting to zoom into things that are further away? If you are like me you probably want to do both, but I am going to guess that you are wanting to zoom closer to things further away. Heh... you can always do what I was told to do after a friend got tired of my whining-- zoom with your feet. ;-) In all honesty, the best image quality comes from lenses designed for each specific job. Most of us would give a lot to own one lens that does it all (macro, landscape, zoom zoom). There are a few lenses that come close, but they all sacrifice quality. A DSLR owner eventually has to wrap their brains around the idea of switching lens. A lot. I still hate it, but I've finally accepted the notion.... though I still look for and dream about *the* lens. Disclaimer: Lens selection is an extremely personal thing. There are so many choices and so many individual needs. You can read up on these lenses (highly recommended!), but for every pro recommendation, you'll read a con. Photographers are very opinionated and aren't shy about saying what they think... and what they think is often based on limited experience with a particular lens. I guess I am no exception. No matter what I tell you, you still need to make the decision for yourself and you need to know that you won't make me feel bad if you end up doing what you want to do and not what I think you should do. (lol) So here I go, telling you what I think you should do. The Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM is a lens that I actually have on my Maybe Someday list. I've researched it like crazy, because it has a super duper range on it -- great for a walk-around lens. The IS is really attractive for sure. The problem is that it's only F4, which means it's a slower lens-- you can't stop it down any further to let more light in. The IS compensates, which is great.... but you're not going to get the great creamy backgrounds that you'd get with an F2.8 lens. The other thing that concerned me is that I've looked at hundreds and hundreds of images from that lens and have seen only a small handful that I really loved. The color isn't even as good as the kit lens, which strikes me as odd for a Canon brand lens. A couple of lenses you might think about: Canon Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM The 24-70mm is an "L" quality lens, which is about the best quality you can get in a Canon lens. It's just so hard to put into words the differences between L-quality and the rest. Incredible sharpeness, incredible bokeh (background magic), color, brightness, etc. This lens doesn't have the IS, but it's an F2.8 lens, which will let you shoot some really low light shots. The older version of this lens (28-70mm) is my current walk-around and portrait lens and I wouldn't trade it for any amount of money. The biggest drawback is the weight (loads of glass inside there!), but I found I got used to it fairly fast. Having waxed on about the 24-70mm, the lens I would really recommend to you is the Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM. Oh man, this has everything, including a great price! Great reach on the long end, plus you can focus this thing at a distance of only 5ft., meaning that you can actually get some decent macro shots. What I am trying to say here is that you won't often miss the 24mm on the wide end.... unless you want wide angle (landscape) shots, but then you'd probably switch to the 18-55mm kit lens. The color is really nice on this lens and it has a decent brightness to it. Even though it's only an F4 lens, you can get good creamy backgrounds by zooming into subjects. On this lens, the IS really does count toward getting those lower-light shots. The really good news is that if it turns out that you don't like your lens, you can sell it without much loss. There's a real market for these lenses-- a great place to sell them is on FredMiranda.com. As for that 18-55mm lens being sharp, hang in there, because for such a cheapy lens, it really is a workhorse. Check out the link at the bottom, then read the EXIF info below the photo. This image was taken at a super low speed at ISO1600, no flash. Just imagine how sharp it might have been with decent light. Nancy Here is a link that might be useful: Miss Em

Marcia, I thought you lived in Thunder Bay... wow I really did drive past your place, mind you that was at least 7 years ago. Wanna know how embarassingly lost I was? I was going to Rushing River - DUH! Missed the turn! Motherduck, that sounds like a great camera. I was hoping to get something in the sorta $300-$400 range. Just to keep up with the Jonses you know... if you've seen some of the horrible fuzzy pics I have posted here...