I've been using a Coolpix 990 to shoot various odds and ends of computer
hardware for years.  Decided to try it instead of my old Leica M to shoot a
local sporting event the other day and realized that while it's very nice
for electronics in a studio, it has severe deficiencies for anything
involving movement and varying distances.

The issues I found with it were that first, the shutter delay is way, way
too long even with "hold at half"; second, the zoom range (for that
particular event anyway) was from "not quite wide enough" to "not quite
long enough"; third, the zoom controls are very awkward and slow when using
the viewfinder; fourth, the viewfinder doesn't show me whether the part of
the image that I want to be in focus is in fact in focus and doesn't give
me accurate framing.

I could try to find another point-and-shoot with the capabilities I need,
but I'm thinking I'd be better off to bite the bullet and get an
interchangeable lens SLR.

I'm leaning toward a Canon 350D with the 17-85 lens, which will give me a
little wider zoom range than the Coolpix.

There doesn't seem to be single Nikon lens that hits the zoom range I'm
looking for except the 18-200.  The 18-70 doesn't quite make it on the long
end and the 24-85 and 24-120 don't quite make it on the short.  The 18-200
is a temptation though.

Another concern is that sooner or later the Coolpix is probably going to
break beyond economical repair and I'll miss its macro capability, which is
greater than can be achieved with any lens in the Nikon range without using
extension tubes, while Canon has a purpose-made 65mm that covers the range
1:1-5:1 without even pretending to be a "normal" lens, unlike the Nikon
macros that only go down to 1:1.

So, anybody have any comments, am I overlooking something?