I was thinking about buying the Canon Rebel but someone suggested that I look at the Sony because its half the price. I can see a difference between the two but I'm not sure it's worth spending the extra money for the canon.
dont get the sony 8mp it doesnt proform well at all lots of noise in the pictures. The rebel will focus a lot faster and produce crisper shots but you will also have to spend the money on another lense.
The big difference between an SLR and non-SLR cameras is the depth of field. In wakeboarding, it's nice to have a shallow depth of field to make the rider "pop" out of the background. Some examples:
You'd have to be a blind man to not see the differences between Bill's shots and those from Rich's sony. These days it's no longer all about the pixels, it's the quality of the lens and of the imager itself that matters. The lens alone Bill is using costs just about as much as an F717.
I think it is all about need and $$$$$ you want to invest. i personally wanted a good all round camera to take pics of my friends boarding and general pictures. There is a huge difference but dollar wise I am in it 800.00 with bigger stick. I couldn't be happier with the sony.
I got the Sony a little over a year ago (when it cost over a grand, a little pissed they are cheaper now) I am really happy with it, it is a little bulky but the photo quality is incredible.