Video on a DSLR

[DavidWayne]

You know I have a Sony Recorder, and I have a Sony A100 and both can take stills and motion....but I never use them...I like all my gadgets to be separated so I have more toys to play with

[private]

Originally Posted by xxpinballxx

I got a DSLR to make great stills and thats what I want from my DSLR.....
plus i laready have a nice video camera...lol!
I see where it would come in handy for travel and things like that but i dont think i would be happy with it as my main video camera.

I got my dslr, so it would take the snapshot when i pressed the shutter button. Now, I have it to take/learn to take great photographs. I still use my little camera to take movies to put on youtube.

[prrs4me]

My point and shoot takes very nice video. I also have a video camera. I want my dslr to take stills.
I do bring my point and shoot on vacations to use for small videos.

[Daisie]

I voted "NO!" but what I really meant was *shrug*. I don't need it and am not interested in moviemaking (especially without dedicated equpiment...) so I wouldn't pay more for that feature, but if a DSLR I bought had it, I wouldn't be offended.

[laepelba]

Why not add cell phone service and music and internet access to my dSLR, too? Oh - I guess then it would be like having an iPhone with exchangeable lenses.

Seriously, if I want a digital video camera of good quality, I'll get one. The right tool for the right job, right?

[ShutterBugMom]

Personally, I would never want this feature on my DSLR. However, I can see how a certain market would like it. IMHO if video is added, it should be limited to the consumer line (Canon XS or XSi, Nikon D40 or D40x, etc.).

[klew]

My point and shoot canon does decent enough video for me, and I imagine I would carry that around in a pocket whenever I'm primarily using a DSLR (kind of like a sidearm camera) so I'll have a video device anyway. However, I wouldn't mind more features in a single device as long as the photographic quality doesn't suffer as a result of putting more stuff in (and the price doesn't rise too much).

[RussHeath]

I guess this one took me by surprise too, particularly that Nikon picked the succsessor of my beloved D80 to spring this. That being said, it's a great thing. Why not?

There will undoubtedly be niche markets, but the first one to jump to mind for me is scuba diving. Shooting video underwater is a wonderful thing, but most photographers don't want to carry two housings etc. This is perfect -- D90 + 10.5mm fisheye opens up a whole underwater world of possibilities!

[OsmosisStudios]

I'm with Daisie on this one. It's a big "meh" as far as I'm concerned.

Sure, it's interesting that we could use our beautiful nikon lenses to shoot video, but I can;t see myself actually doing it. I'm a purist: a SLR shoots single shots.

The video itself is HD, but it's still going to be terrible if it's shaky and has bathroom sound. If you're going to shoot proper video, shoot it with a proper video camera.

The RED camera system has been mentionned and, despite it's price tag, it's a wonderful piece of kit. We have ONE (yes, ONE) at school and I;ve been lucky enough to use it. It's wonderful and once someone creates a nikon lens adaptor, we'll all be golden.

That, and the $30k price tag needs to come down a notch or two.

As far as the D90 is concerned, I really don't care much. It's got liveview, which makes it feel more like a toy than a proper tool. I cant see myself using the liveview, for fear of looking like a complete idiot. I'm totally blase as far as the video is concerned. The worst, though, is that it comes at the cost of a few features that, while not essential, were certainly nice to have.

[crazzy88ss]

It's an added feature they're not charging you for? Why wouldn't you want it? If you don't want it, don't use it!