Why all the resistance to a movie-mode, to meet the D90?

petiot wrote in post #6257678
resistance to movie mode on this forum is because the feature has not been released by canon. If it was, you'd only hear praises and how great of a brand canon is
(Unfortunately then cannot get around simple SLR feature evolution like proper weather sealing, so, no need to mention really innovative features)

That's a broad brush.

Personally, I don't need live view which was released by Canon. I think the implementation may be handy for a few people (macro for instance) but I think the purpose was to appeal to the P&S shooters who are unaware of how much better the optical viewfinder is.

Next comes movie mode, for the same purpose I suppose.

Neither live view nor movie mode detract from the camera so they are not negatives, but I simply don't need them and I won't use them.

The implementation of movie mode in the D90 is manual focus via the live view (while recording). I cannot imagine getting a decent movie handheld this way, so what is the point?

I totally understand, and relate to the comments that basically say to get a video camera, if you want a video camera - and that by adding video features to an SLR, i will eventually compromise the function of is being a normal camera.

My issue with that is, even if canon does come out with something to meet the D90 with a similar feature - that just means all of the other SLRs in Canon's lineup without that feature, would be reduced in price - right?

It seems like such a feature would be a win-win - win for those that want it, and win for those that dont, as other non-video models will be reduced, all because of features they don't want, being added to a camera that they don't want.

producerism wrote in post #6257164
I've been doing as much research as I can into what Canon may have in store to answer Nikon's new movie-mode, but it seems everywhere I look, canon users are clamoring to not include such a thing.

Personally, being able to shoot video through these awesome canon lenses is the stuff dreams are made of. Sadly, I haven't even come across a rumor of a rumor that Canon plans to include a similar feature, nor have I seen much enthusiasm among the various forums.

Does this mean if I want such a mode within the next 3 years, I should be looking into Nikon?

Also, why would so many people not want this additional feature. It seems like it would be non-intrusive and an optional mode (stating the obvious here).

1. DSLR owners are elitist, and do not like to associate themselves with the P&S crowd.

2. Nikon did it first, so naturally it is evil and useless.

3. Seems to be getting a similar reception as live view, I remember a lot of people knocking live view, including myself. Then I zoomed in on my D300 lcd, to fine tune focus of something i was shooting. Now I can't imagine a DSLR that doesn't have Live view.

4. In a couple of years, all midrange, perhaps even pro level DSLRs will have this feature.

For me, the dSLR is viewed as a specialty tool for taking the ultimate in still images. As time goes by, the platform is being tainted with needless fluff such as movie mode (currently print button, ADEP, CA mode, etc).

The dSLR is an artists tool, not a do everything gadget.

its just one more thing that
A. could verywell raise the $$ of cameras for those who dont want it
B. one more friggin thing that could break and cause you to be without your cam for some period of time or worse, cause you to have to either buy a new one or spend tons of $$ to get it fixed so's you can shoot again..
No thanks, Ill leave the video to my video camera!!

producerism,
I am personally looking forward to seeing it.
I also believe (hope) Canon will start producing them real soon. After all they have plenty of P&S that already do video

I think video mode would be amazing. Imagine taking a vid with a fisheye lens. Why carry two cameras at the same time when you can carry one. I don't understand this price thing either. D90 is not very expensive is it? It would probably around that price even if it didn't have the video mode. But even if Canon makes a camera with video mode I won't be able to afford it till after a few years so who am I to speak.

As an owner of two Canon XHA1s, i wouldn't my digital SLR trying to do video...to coin an old phrase...no machine can server two masters....The XH's have L Series glass as well

I really wouldn't want it. Professional photos with mediocre videos. Extra dead weight for me. What's next? Unlimited weekend phone calls? GPS? Web browser?

If you want good videos, get a Canon HD camcorder. If you want crap videos, stick to your mobile phone. Ironically the reason Nikon introduces videos to their DSLRs is because they do not produce any camcorders to compete with Canon.

One all singing all dancing gadget is enough for me. And that is my mobile phone.

If I had wanted to "do video" I would have bought a video long since.
Various pocket digital cameras I have owned, including the Canon G3 and G6, have a rudimentary Video mode, I never found a use for it.
I can not see any reason to include expensive Video capability, when the money could be better spent improving still capability.

I think Camera makers are wrong in thinking DSLR users will suddenly become videographers, who would be satisfied with a hybrid camera; especially one that could not provide both facilities to the same high standard.

These are separate areas of interest, and are best served by specialist equipment, especially for an advanced user.

If this had not always been the case, would magazines specializing in those areas, not have merged long ago.

JeffreyG wrote in post #6257750
That's a broad brush.

Personally, I don't need live view which was released by Canon. I think the implementation may be handy for a few people (macro for instance) but I think the purpose was to appeal to the P&S shooters who are unaware of how much better the optical viewfinder is.

Next comes movie mode, for the same purpose I suppose.

Neither live view nor movie mode detract from the camera so they are not negatives, but I simply don't need them and I won't use them.

The implementation of movie mode in the D90 is manual focus via the live view (while recording). I cannot imagine getting a decent movie handheld this way, so what is the point?

Well said. Definitely not serious features, but designed to appeal to a broader audience, and sell more cameras. I can certainly live without either one, and neither will influence my decision to purchase a camera body.

I vote no Video mode!!!!!

Terrywoodenpic wrote in post #6258368
If I had wanted to "do video" I would have bought a video long since.
Various pocket digital cameras I have owned, including the Canon G3 and G6, have a rudimentary Video mode, I never found a use for it.
I can not see any reason to include expensive Video capability, when the money could be better spent improving still capability.

I think Camera makers are wrong in thinking DSLR users will suddenly become videographers, who would be satisfied with a hybrid camera; especially one that could not provide both facilities to the same high standard.

These are separate areas of interest, and are best served by specialist equipment, especially for an advanced user.

If this had not always been the case, would magazines specializing in those areas, not have merged long ago.

You lot are all mad... stick it in there - and dont use it or buy it if you dont like it...

are the ones who dont want it - are you the same people who dont have kids... ? i always have my DSLR with me - i rarely have my video camera with me... when my son walked for the first time while holidaying in Phuket 2 weeks ago - i had to ditch the DSLR and go grab the IXUS 85 to take the video... - the SONY handycam was stuffed in a bag somewhere -

I got the vid - crappy and small and non hidef / 12.8 sound etc etc but im a dad and jeeez that video is cool in its crapness...

it wouldnt sway me in a purchase.... im looking to the 5d2 at some point and i know it aint gonna be in it - i dont care! but if it were i know it would get some use.....

sometimes the ambience cant be captured in a still - like the awkward toddle of those first steps... but hell its better than a slap in the face with a wet fish...

isnt it?

ouch

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

If they want to put it on the xxxD and xxD bodies for the consumer/prosumer market, go ahead. But leave the xD series pure SLR. Still photographers who use the professional bodies are just that, professional photographers, not videographers. I doubt owners of the AXH1 will come running to buy one so they can get crappy video and great still photography from the same camera.
I have no doubt it will happen, it's a marketing ploy to hook P&S owners into the SLR realm, I just hope it happens in the way I see/hope it will... xxD and xxxD cameras ONLY.