Video mode on a DSLR

The introduction of video mode into a DSLR for me is like adding a screwdriver to the handle end of a hammer. It compromises the ergonomics of both...

I don't want to hold or be MADE to by my cheap boss hold a device shaped like a DSLR filming an event! (I am the boss but just saying).

I don't want to use a screwdriver with a hammer on the end of it to build a house!

The quality from a DSLR doing video is going to be great I am sure... but have fun using the silly design...

Would it not be great if our DSLR had 21" LCD preview screens? There is a reason they don't! You could not HOLD THE CAMERA!

Not to be funny but if you dont want to hold it like a video camera, dont use the mode.

It will not be use to EVERYONE but another feature for just in case scenario's. People slated live view when it camera out "cheapening" the DSLR image but macro and landscape photographers love it.

You have a choice, if you dont want to have it, dont buy it. Sorry if it sounds like im having a pop, non intentional.

I think it would be amazing.

Seems like camera manufacturers are starting to lean towards to the "Jack of all trades, master of none" way of thinking.

I'm against the idea. A DSLR is a tool for photographers and they are purchased for taking still images. A camcorder is a tool for videographers and is purchased for taking moving images. I see the value on p&s cameras but not on DSLRs.

Shoot videos with a video camera,, stills with a stills camera.. No compromises..

JCH77Yanks wrote in post #6196838
Seems like camera manufacturers are starting to lean towards to the "Jack of all trades, master of none" way of thinking.

yogestee wrote in post #6196902
Shoot videos with a video camera,, stills with a stills camera.. No compromises..

What was compromised? Seems all they did is to utilize the existing platform to provide an additional feature?

I agree with yogestee! It seem that the manufactures are attacking the photography market now with the duality of photo and video to gain market share! They have been doing it for years with video cameras trying to make them still cameras. I guess the natural progression would be making still cameras also video cameras. I just hope that they don't do it to all cameras. Usually when they start mixing things up like this something has to suffer or become lower quality.

toyguru wrote in post #6196989
Usually when they start mixing things up like this something has to suffer or become lower quality.

Agree!

toyguru wrote in post #6196989
.. Usually when they start mixing things up like this something has to suffer or become lower quality.

But it is not always a bad thing. Products have always mixed functionality many times with little or acceptable interaction. How many here have a refrigerator and a separate freezer. Originally cars did not have radios. You drove a car and sat home to listen to music. Today they are mixed. How many carry a mobile phone, a separate address book, a separate PC for connectivity, a separate camera for pictures, a separate MP3 player, and a separate calculator. Heck, my pockets cant hold that much.

gjl711 wrote in post #6197158
But it is not always a bad thing.

True of course but not always. However I am debating that it will be so in this case otherwise it is just a gimmicky feature. LiveView has not and never will be gimmicky. I was not of those to put down LiveView. LiveView is useful.

If you have ever shot a serious (money making) video you will know that a DSLR is a compromise for the task...

Canon could easliy put an MP3 player in the Camera so that you don't have to carry about an iPod. Do we as photographers need this?

I don't see it as a compromise. Why do you guys think they are lowering image quality on the D90? Check out some sample pictures and tell me they are not D300 grade quality images or the video looks like crap. It doesn't hurt to install the functionality. Space will definitely be an issue with 720p videos but just having the feature would be nice. For most dSLR uses it will be rarely used but if you need to capture something with video, you have the option to. Rather watch the event online with some crappy cell phone you tube video? No thanks.

pcunite wrote in post #6197288
...If you have ever shot a serious (money making) video you will know that a DSLR is a compromise for the task...

Clearly this is not going to compete with dedicated video equipment and I would be really surprised if any professional videographer looked at this and was ready to toss all their equipment in favor of the D90. But the argument is compromise. Has Nikon compromised its core functionality of delivering still images by including the ability to also capture video. I’m thinking that the SLR portion of the camera is as good as it would have been even if the video feature was left off. The video portion may not be up to a standard of a dedicated video camera but that’s not the D90s core functionality. It is a SLR first and a video device second.

BTW, having a built in MP3 would be awesome. Canon, are you listening? This might be the feature that puts you back into the lead.

gjl711 wrote in post #6197881
But the argument is compromise. Has Nikon compromised its core functionality of delivering still images by including the ability to also capture video?

This is all I will say on the point:

It does bother me, because it is yet another feature that does NOTHING to help with still image creation. Instead of increasing dynamic range, including radio triggering into the cameras, GPS for Geotagging or designing 100% viewfinders, we instead get print buttons, and video record modes.

JCH77Yanks wrote in post #6196838
Seems like camera manufacturers are starting to lean towards to the "Jack of all trades, master of none" way of thinking.

Exactly...it attracts the masses, but screws over the rest of us.

gjl711 wrote in post #6197158
But it is not always a bad thing. Products have always mixed functionality many times with little or acceptable interaction. How many here have a refrigerator and a separate freezer. Originally cars did not have radios. You drove a car and sat home to listen to music. Today they are mixed. How many carry a mobile phone, a separate address book, a separate PC for connectivity, a separate camera for pictures, a separate MP3 player, and a separate calculator. Heck, my pockets cant hold that much.

You kind of proved my point and JCH77Yanks's without realizing it. Let's take the cell phone. Camera phones take crappy pics....mp3's are worse quality,i.e. smaller dynamic range, than cds, and even worse than the quality of sound produced by vinal...yes it's true. The calculators in cell phones are basic in their functions....I think you get the point.

Look at the Hasselblad hd3...thier is a reason it has non of these gimics. The HD3 was made for a specific purpose, and to perform at it's best for it's specific purpose.

Canon...don't fall for this nikon gimicy-bull...make dSLRs for seroious photogs that outperform everyone else.