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

I am going to bet that most professionals will not be looking at movie mode as other have said. If I was going to spend that much on a camera that I wanted movie mode on, I would get a g7/9 with all the trimmings for about the same price.
Nick

If they spend 1 cent on something that doesn't give me better photos
they are misusing my money.
But maybe they'd say extra sales to people who want to score videos
along with their stills
help to pay for advancements in my photo gear.
OK, maybe...

It might just be me, but I just thought of carrying the 70-200 on a DSLR Camera with battery pack, trying to shoot some video. Suddenly, my cheapo Powershot seemed like the best deal on earth.

Just some afterthoughts. And I am not in their workflow process (I know nutt'n):

- Video Issue: Image Stabilization. Cannot use IS from lens, software and buffering required to create a reduction in perceived movement such as shake.

- Video Issue: Sound input and output. Power is now needed to supply a mike and sound board to process and encode the sound. No biggie, but no DSLR has ever had that onboard. (as oppossed to say a Sensor, which vid and pic cameras have in common to a slight degree).

- Video Issue: Exposure controller, in order to protect sensor and automatically vary the gain and sensitivity of the sensor. Here is a biggie. Replacing a State of the art photography exposure manager, for something crappier but that can do video management, many would probably not enjoy it, if the solution is implemented in the wrong camera. (Say 1000d with video, hey, a plus; now a 5D/7D with Video mode, taking 5% of its imaging potential just to give $2500 camera owners a glimpse of video from a photo camera?... Not so much).

Super-Nicko wrote in post #6258588
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?

Yes. And they need to include GPS in case I get lost in the woods on my own with nothing but my camera.

To correct some misconceptions from people with big video cameras, ATSC standards HD video only supports 50, 59.94, and 60fps with 720p. When it comes to 1080p, it can handle 50,59.94, 60 FIELDS/s, so for 1080p, that means only 25, 29.97, or 30fps. For american and japanese tv sets, you will only use 29.97 maybe 24p or 30, for european and south american sets, you will use 25, maybe 24p as well. If the camera can record 1080p images at 25fps, it technically is HD video, regardless of the compression format. The thing you will never get is XLR inputs/outputs, genlock, etc.

And if 720p @24fps isn't enough for anything but youtube, why did the film industry use (and still does in many movies) 24 fps for the last half century? Why did news stations use (and many still do) cameras that support only 576 lines? 720p @ 24p is more than almost anyone really needs right now, youtube crowd or small town advertising agency.

The main reason for my opposition to this monstrosity is the fact that people will expect me to shoot video and photo at the same time, even if I only shoot photos. Much like the crisis with weekend 200 buck wedding photogs, this is just another thing that will hurt serious photographers in the long run.

I shoot some video with my A590IS. So far, that has been ok. If I plan to shoot more (like on a December trip to Disney World), I will probably buy a small video camera that will fit into my camera bag. Don't want anything else on my DSLR. Enough to learn already.

Just how I feel, but: if I want to shoot video, I'll buy a video camera.....since I want to take pictures I bought an SLR

I feel the same way about cell phones with cameras and mp3 players and whatever else they are packing into them these days......if I want a camera I will use my P&S or SLR. If I want to play mp3s I will pull out my mp3 player. When I need a phone I want a phone, not a 10 in 1 gadget. Seems to me that you can't get a decent phone these days for a decent price. Maybe if they didn't have all the extra crap in them, the cellular companies would be able to put out a phone that worked well for a reasonable price. The only cells I have been completely happy with were my older ones that were just cell phones, thats it thats all.

I would be afraid to see the DSLR go the same way......

Wellll, speaking for myself, we just got an XSi a few months ago, so there's a little of that "Coulda had a V-8" thing going on. I'd love to be able to shoot video with my DSLR. The D90 has some other nice features, too. I also have some nice film SLR lenses I'd have liked to use so I really thought about pre-ordering the D90. But the video is only good for a short amount of time, if I'm not mistaken (please correct me if I'm wrong about that). It's nice, it's a great feature, but it just seems a tiny bit like they released the camera before all the little gotcha issues were worked out (like not being able to open the RAW files in CS3). I have both Nikon and Canon products. I enjoy and use both so for me it isn't about brand. I think there's a little ways to go before this feature is more than an introduction of technology to come.

I pay £600+ for a SLR body for its photographic abilities.

I do NOT want to pay for canon to R&D some ****** addon that compromises IQ of stills, buffer, the DIGIC processor, etc.

Fine add it to the consumer cameras, NOT to the xxD and above.

aspiringphotos wrote in post #6259697
Wellll, speaking for myself, we just got an XSi a few months ago, so there's a little of that "Coulda had a V-8" thing going on. I'd love to be able to shoot video with my DSLR. .

I hear that a lot, but I think most people don't realize how horribly limited the D90 video feature is. Here are the critical points:

1. It does not have auto exposure adjustment. If the subject of your video walks from shadow to sun they will be blown out. The entire scene must be shot in constant lighting to work.
2. It does not autofocus. You must AF while clutching the camera and studying the LCD. This precludes any shots of action more strenuous than old people sitting on a porch sipping lemonade.
3. Lousy sound.

JeffreyG wrote in post #6259788
I hear that a lot, but I think most people don't realize how horribly limited the D90 video feature is. Here are the critical points:

1. It does not have auto exposure adjustment. If the subject of your video walks from shadow to sun they will be blown out. The entire scene must be shot in constant lighting to work.
2. It does not autofocus. You must AF while clutching the camera and studying the LCD. This precludes any shots of action more strenuous than old people sitting on a porch sipping lemonade.
3. Lousy sound.

Actually for someone shooting film/video seriously those first two are benefits. How often do you see AF and AE adjustmenst in films?

Also, to the person saying 720p 24fps is only good for Youtube, huh? Films are shot at 24fps dude.

JeffreyG wrote in post #6259788
I hear that a lot, but I think most people don't realize how horribly limited the D90 video feature is.

That's the conclusion I came to. It's a great idea, IMO, but it's not quite there yet.

deeeez wrote in post #6257976
2. Nikon did it first, so naturally it is evil and useless.

Finally the truth. I wish I had this 5 year ago. I could have used it to enhance wedding photography. Actually all sorts of things would change for me.

A Camera is a tool. Give me more gadgets and I just might make use of them. If they don't make sense for me fine, it might make sense for someone else.

JeffreyG wrote in post #6259788
I hear that a lot, but I think most people don't realize how horribly limited the D90 video feature is. Here are the critical points:

Yes! The average joe will not now what to do with it. The Pro has already thought of its uses in his/her arsenal , limitations and all.

I think movie mode is only for Point and shoot cameras. So is the D90.

What I want from Canon is a clean high ISO 6400 and a useable/acceptable ISO 12800 and ISO25600.