Alex, essentially I'm with you, but there's still a time and a place for these new types of cameras.

I like to think of it in the kind of way that people like me moved from print design to web design, purely because the technology allowed us to. I'm sure there's room for photographers to make video, and vice versa.

The kind of work I'm keen to try out is HD movies of scale models. The camera won't move, at least not much. I'm hopeful I can get high f numbers so I can get superb depth of field that's crucial to fooling the viewer into thinking these tiny models are actually the real thing.

I may need to arrange a meet with Mr Miners at some point to see if his camera will do what I want - try before I buy, as it were. If it can't manage it to my satisfaction, then I'll still get one but it'll be used as the stills camera Bob intended, and I'll have to go back to looking at "proper" HD camcorders to do the other job.

Hey! This is fun. It's good to get this kind of discussion going.

What do people reckon of Canon's 7D and where it fits into the range. We've been discussing this a fair bit at work of late.

If I'd just bought a 50D I'd be a bit peed off.

Well yes. But why the 50D and the 7D? They seem to have two, serious-amateur-semi-pro speedy cameras. One's a sibling to the 5D MkII, and one is left providing an additional step between it and the entry level cameras. Will they phase out the n0D-line? The 50D doesn't seem to provide too much of a jump up from the 500D for those who consider themselves serious-amateur-semi-pro-speedy-camera-types, when the 7D is available. Without the 50D things are a nice clear 500D -> 5dII/7D -> 1DsIII/1DIII, or as they were before with the 50D in the same role as the 7D. Then after the entry-level D-SLR, there's either a speedy, sporty camera, or a more pricey, and slightly slower (frame rate) full frame camera.

I'm not going to sweat it too much. I'm happy with the camera I have, but as far as I can tell the 7D fits between the 5DII and the 50D; Canon tend to be consistent about (concurrent) models with the smaller numbers being better cameras.

Which adds something else for you to lug about?
So not only do you have your camera, spare lenses, camera bag now you need to carry an extra gizmo which gives you decent audio? Then there's the microphone. What does that attach to? Then, unless you're capturing picture and sound to the same medium, where's the timecode to marry the two together?

I certainly wouldn't say it's the same for most camcorders - especially in the price-point of this stills camera.
My mate just bought himself a video camera which cost less than this body-only stills camera and it records in full HD, has pro audio ports, records to the same media (I think it's SD cards) and has a microphone attached to it.
Oh, did I say that it came with a pretty bloody good f/1.8 lens attached to it?
There may be a place for video on DSLRs, but at this price- point it's completely outclassed and out-priced by proper video cameras.

Mark

Not really a 'new' camera, just a concept...

http://www.designboom.com/weblog/cat/16 ... ncept.html

I quite like the look of the Panasonic GF1 with the 20mm (40mm equivalent) pancake lens.

What a relief to see that the comments on that page are so mature, constructive and polite.

What's that you say?

I'll add to that the Nikon D3xs.

Mark

I might be making some progress... I found THIS but as I've never heard of the company before was wondering if anyone had any experience of them, before I start pestering Mrs. V. Again