is the appeal of the slr then that it gives them a greater range of iso and f-stops? and a better lens? is it still worth it to make the jump in price if you're not yet ready to be doing most things manually? (i ask for myself, as i've been pondering a possible slr purchase in the coming year, and can't quite figure out if i'd be better off just getting a newer pro-sumer camera.)

I got the Sony A100 for better lens, manual control, greater range of ISO, f-stops, etc etc. I also got it because Sony gave it to me.

The Sony also has a full range of semi-automatic features that I like. The macro function sucks, which is why I bought the compatible beercan lens, which is out of this world.

I think a lot of your decision will be based on your planned use of the camera. If it's primarily for dog and parasite photos, you might be just as well off with a high end point-and-shoot.

That's why I would study http://www.steves-digicams.com/ and http://www.dpreview.com/ for comparisons, if you haven't already. But I bet you have.

If Mongo can continue to post Mooli shots like cristina's squirrel, that's quite exhilaration enough. The world is at peace.