Take another look at Nikon's D60 specs: http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?ca ... ctNr=25438 "Stop motion video: Creates a stop-motion animation from a sequence of images for added creative fun to your pictures. " Since the D60 can take 100 jpegs at 3 fps, you could reasonably take about 30 secs of stop motion animation with this feature. Add the new live-view on the Sony A3xx series, and the rumor of OLED/LCD viewfinders to take the place of the old fashioned optical pentaprism/mirror viewfinders, it seems that the old fashioned way of taking pictures is going away. First, film. Now this. With the higher res live view screens it is much easier to tell if you have focus then looking into a viewfinder which (unless you've got a pro model) probably doesn't even show you 100% of the image! The next generation of dSLR users will have grown up on P&S cameras that don't even have a viewfinder now. And those P&S took video. Five-to-seven years ago the migration began the opposite way - digital stills on camcorders. The quality of the captures were horrible because the sensors weren't even HD size, which is still much smaller than basically every digital camera on the market today. Previously I mentioned the rumor of Canon adding video to their photojournalist camera series, but it seems that video is the next big thing. Except for Sony's monster chip, the general race for more MP is slowing in favor for less noise and better features, such as this 'stop-motion' ability. I think the biggest thing holding it back is that the EU taxes video capture electronics much higher than still capture electronics. (their outdated specs for even 2007 is another discussion) Is this really where we are going? What does everyone else think?
I usually have my point and shoot in my bag if I need to shoot a low quality video. I wouldn't mind having a kind of all in one camera. I wouldn't mind having one if it didn't degrade the photo quality. I don't want a camera that does everything mediocre I would rather have two cameras that are good at one thing.
That's why I think they're going from the camera side - the biggest problem is the heat from the CMOS sensors. But I think the day is coming. The day when a dSLR will have a dial with the following modes: P Av Tv M ISO Portrait Landscape Night Sports AUTO YouTube PictureMail VideoMail (Don't forget the built in cell phone, GPS device, and MP3 player)
And with the new Casio camera announced on the horizon, the lines have blurred even more. A 'still' camera which is using Sony's new superfast HD+ sensor that can shoot up to 1200fps video (or 60fps at HD quality), or rattle off 6MP still photos at 60fps. It's tied to a huge 36 - 432mm zoom lens (35mm equiv), like compact superzoom cams, using a 1/1.8" sensor (with only 6mp, that's actually kind of refreshing compared to the typical 8-12mp superzooms using smaller 1/2.5" sensors). The image quality will be the tell-all; but with DSLRs starting to commit to live view and replace high-end prosumer P&S models (which are all but faded out of the marketplace), and high-res video being built into high-end superzooms...it does seem like the still camera market won't be recognizable in another 10 years. A few years ago it looked like DSLRs were going to dominate the world and crush all but the compact P&S market...but now the fairly old-tech SLR technology around which they were based is being updated - ironically to behave and shoot more like the high-end prosumers they pushed off the market in the first place! Which I consider a good thing - while I'm not really on the market for an all-in-one device (I don't want a camera on my phone or a videocam in my compact still camera)...I can see how a high-end device might adapt the best technologies from both ends of the still market - exchangeable lenses, superb speed and high-ISO capabilities, and focus systems from DSLRs, but without the old mechanical mirror-slap systems, replaced by quiet electronic shutter and aperture mechanisms...and with true live-view functionality on the LCDs(without the mirror-flipping delays and slower focus of the current live-view DSLRs). Sony's A300/350 hint at the evolution of live view DSLRs...already significantly improving the functionality and speed in just one generation. I like digital photography for the same reason I got into it in the first place - because of how different it was than film photography...having that live-view capability to watch adjustments to exposure, white balance, color, contrast, focus, depth, etc right on the screen before even taking the picture - a true what-you-see-is-what-you-get. It was a refreshing change from my SLR. But rather than continue to advance and evolve that market, DSLRs caught on - mostly because of the pro photographers who had instant familiarity and a digital body to go with all of their expensive lenses. Once the marketing departments realized they could reap much more profit from selling lenses and accessories...DSLRs were pitched high-and-low as the only way to shoot digital photography. But as great as the IQ is, I always had hope for the new technology - a new way to shoot photographs. I wanted to see further evolution of truly digital cameras - live-view, wysiwyg, no mirrors and moving internal parts, silent shooting capable, and with advanced technology like IR modes and superfast electronic burst modes. It looks like things are finally moving in that direction...odd hybrids like the Casio or the new Fuji S100fs look interesting and show that higher-end P&S cameras are still innovative, and DSLRs like Sony's new A350 show even better integreation of live-view without compromising DSLR speed and functionality. I can't complain!
This is sort of something I've been wanting for a long time. Not exactly using DSLRs for video, but I wanted a video camera that wasn't tied to television standards. I don't care if I can plug it in to a standard NTSC input, I'd just as rather be using the footage on my computer instead anyway. So give me more variety in video settings, like size and refresh rate and compression. Digital cameras have offered control over such details for more or less as long as they've existed. They work off of a different paradigm, if you'll forgive my use of that overused word. The storage medium is problematic, either we're going to need compact hard drives that attach to the cameras or else we're going to need a lot of high capacity flash cards. But I'd still prefer to go that route. If my Dslr can do that and still shoot high quality stills I'd be very happy. About that Casio camera that can do 1200 FPS video.. that excites me a great deal. I've wanted a high speed video camera for ages. For no particular reason, mind you, it's just that I've always loved watching slow motion footage of various things and I'd love to have that ability for myself. I think as soon as I got something like that I'd head into the bathroom and start shooting water drop sequences. Just one thing. At 1200fps it can only shoot 336x96 resolution. That's kind of limited. That's a pretty weird aspect ratio as well, I'm guessing it's somehow related to a quirk of the sensor.
