Well this is like asking “what’s a good political party?” in some sense. Because every brand of camera manufacturer has pretty good stuff. Check out Digital Photography Review and you’ll see that it frequently amounts to splitting hairs amongst the best cameras. One thing that is very different these days, compared to the past, is whether you intend to use your camera for video or not. Not every camera is good at both still and video photography. There are also tax rules (import taxes) that cause some cameras to only allow up to 30 minutes of video at a time. (Frequently they claim it will overheat, but I have heard that it’s really because video cameras are taxed higher than still cameras.)
The fact of the matter is, still photography frequently becomes a money virus. The initial camera is expensive enough, but where you can really go nuts is on the glass (the lenses.) Before you go into this pursuit, be wary that many a person before you has gone done the rabbit hole and ended up a broke raving lunatic with a dozen nice lenses. (Mostly kidding about the lunatic part.)
Because the lenses have a specific mount, frequently that will tie you into a specific brand for life. This is a reason to choose carefully at the beginning. The best of all possible options is to do some research, and then be able to try, in person, each camera that impressed you in your research.
I have a friend who is about a month and a bit ahead of you… he did his research, and decided that the viewfinder was more important to him (he’s blind in one eye) and then after that was size… he wanted a small camera. Despite being recommended to consider full frame, he ended up with a Sony APS because of the desire for a small camera.
I am a fan of Canon. My first DSLR was a Canon, and I have an investment in Canon lenses now. I cut my photographic teeth on a friends Nikon SLR and I while I liked the Nikon user experience, the Canon experience was pretty similar, and once I was invested, I felt unwilling to make a change. I stopped budgeting for keeping up with the latest, and now I have lenses I never use any more because I find my Pixel 2XL takes pretty reasonable pictures without all the bulk and lugging.
I’ve moved platforms four times, at great expense I might add.
My first DSLR was a Nikon D70. What an amazing leap from a point and shoot. But when I played with their top of the line full-frame, the 1D, it was so massive I couldn’t go on.
Next was the Olympus OMD system. It’s MFT and I had a bunch of bodies and lenses. It’s a great system which Andy Ihnatko still uses. I gave Lisa several OMDs, as well. We both liked the size and weight of the camera and the plethora of lenses. But the MFT sensor is pretty small and I wanted to go full-frame.
I moved to the Canon 5D and was blown away. I probably bought $10,000 worth of lenses for that model and moved from the Mark I through the Mark IV. It’s an amazing system with great glass (stick with the L lenses - that 50mm f1.2 is mind bogglingly good). I miss the built-in GPS but not the heft of the camera. I donated the entire system to my son, Henry, who is using it professionally and loves it.
From Canon I moved to mirrorless and the Sony Alpha series. I have four or five Alpha bodies including A7R, A7S, and A9. Lisa is currently shooting with the A9, I’m using the A7R IV. Sony doesn’t have the huge variety of lenses but they come out with one or two excellent lenses a year. I stick with the GM lenses and have a very good assortment by now.
For “point and shoot” I use a Leica Q2. It has a fixed 28mm f1.7 lenses with a 47MP full-frame sensor and that nostalgic Leica look. If I don’t want to be weighed down with a lot of gear it’s the perfect carry. Increasingly it’s the one camera I have with me all the tme.
It really is an expensive hobby, I’m afraid. In my opinion, you’d do better to stick with a quality cell phone camera like the Pixel phones unless you are really set on spending significant money. If you want a full frame camera, you’re looking at around $2000-$3000 Cdn minimum just for the body and a kit lens.
The kit lens will be good, but it will not be great. You could spend another $1000-$3000 Cdn on a high quality zoom lens (something like 70-200mm) which seems to be the most generally useful zoom factor for still photography. (There are cheaper prime lenses, but they have specific uses, because they’re not zoom, and you don’t want to be changing lenses that often.) With lenses, the factor you are interested in is how much light they let through. A smaller number means the lens is more optically transparent and it will also generally mean it is more expensive. The best zoom lenses are usually like f2.5 or so, whereas you can get prime lenses that are f1.5 or better. A kit zoom lens will likely be f4 or higher.
Check out B&H Photo to see “baseline” [American] pricing.