I would choose ISO over MP if I had to make a choice, that is because of the shooting I do. Many, many times I have wished I had a faster one. My current camera (which was considered "high" MP under the pro bodies when I got it) I need to upgrade as it is way too low MP. I'm going for something around 16 but would settle on 12 if the price was good.  Last I investigated the working MP without high-end software was something like 16. Hard to work with higher MP if your monitor and graphics software won't support it. Nearly everyone who is anyone has at least photoshop. (not me, I can't afford it)

One thing to do is to look at the pro photos of the type of shooting you want to do. There are many sites that give you the EXIF info and you can read the F-Stop, ISO, MP, and model. This should help you decide. There are some great web sites like DPReview.com and Steves-Digicams.com. I subscribe to Outdoor Photographer magazine and find the "how to" parts extremely interesting, as well as drool over the pro shots. They have an online version, but the glossy is well worth it.

Personally, I own a Canon DSLR camera. Its an inexpensive one any more and I paid well over that for my best lens. I had Nikon SLR before, mostly because I got a good deal years and years ago. I much prefer the Canon. The nice thing about SLR/DSLR is that once you decide on a model, everything is interchangeable. You can invest in lenses and then when you are ready upgrade your body and still have them all work. Even though I'm working with 8mp camera, I'm collecting lenses. They have made a difference in my shots. Perhaps I would upgrade to 24MP, but I'd rather go for 16mp and buy a good lens that I will use. I can always upgrade the body after I get the basic lenses I want and learn to use them. You'd be frustrated learning the camera with one or two medium quality lens. Get a good lens at the distance you will be shooting most. I have a lens that cost me $100 more than my camera and the two lenses it came with. I've never regretted. Next I want to replace the longer of the two lenses that came with the camera with a similar one (again, will be more than the cost of the camera) Kinda hard to do when hubby works barely 40 hours a week for minimum wage. He is a paramedic who just spent 8 years teaching in the middle east, there are just no jobs here.

Get a couple better lenses, the body can be upgraded later.

Some of my shots can be found at MyDigitalOregon.com

I've been using a D300 for the past 4 years but I'm now awaiting my D800E (pre-ordered but don't know when it will show up). I agree with F.L. here, the D3200 is a great value for dollar camera and is in your price range. You don't have to shoot max resolution with any Nikon D-SLR, there are several jpeg sizes to choose from. You also get the 18-55 Nikkor lens with the purchase.

I have one other suggestion, maybe you could find an excellent condition Nikon D7000 on eBay? My niece has one and it is spectacular, it's a big step up from the D5100. I have seen samples of the new D3200 and I am really impressed, so I can strongly recommend both of these bodies.

CopperHill

http://www.copperhillimages.com/index.php?pr=galleries

You might consider the Sony SLT-A55.  The price point is good for the feature set.  It takes any A-mount lens (meaning old school Minolta as well as newer Sony) and has a 16 MP sensor.  I recently purchased the slightly bigger brother to this camera, the Sony SLT-A65 as I had an older Minolta Maxxum 7000 film camera with several (decent) lenses so when I made the jump to digital SLR it made sense for me not to have to rebuy those. The other nice thing about the Sony is it is a pretty decent digital camcorder as well.

Thanks everyone.

As for outgrowing my current camera, i do a lot of macro photography, and the camera i have works "ok" for that but i want more, it cant focus on the things i want to shoot.  Thus the reason i want something that can do interchangeable lenses. 

The thought on the 5100 over the D3200 is in a large part, the back screen.  I am finding myself with worse and worse eyesight every year, and i also like to use the camera at low or strange angles.  The monitor on the back of the 5100 rotates in just about every way possible.  The MP matters to an extent, but the ISO is important to me too.

I am a fan of the Nikon, mainly because im use to the settings i have, and i do like the quality i have been getting.

I would love everyone's input on my photos, i have been adding some to my 500px page.
http://romanda.500px.com/

I also love to take night shots, etc.  I understand the lens is the key, but i cant use a lens until i get a body for it.. LOL.  IT will be a long process, as i dont have a lot of "Extra" cash to spend on this "hobby".  I am already spending a lot more then i ever thought i would.. LOL

Since i have issues with my right arm, i understand the "shaking" thing.  I will be looking at lenses next, but probably not till next year, as i said, just dont have the spare $$$.

I keep hoping Nikon will drop a D5200 with the same sensor/MP as the 3200 they just dropped, but i dont know if i can hold out that long. LOL

Thanks again for all the excellent input!