is out now and has all the stuff people expected inc.1080 HD video (yawn) but is so expensive its barely worth talking about.

**shuffles off to look at the Pentax K20D. again **

No links? The video feature works great Phil...although I agree it is a little gimmicky.

Link Canon 500D

Thank you Mimi. Are you going to buy one;-)

it would be cheaper to buy a 'normal' DSLR and a separate HD video recorder.

seriously - whats the preoccupation with manufacturers for this - the camera body isnt ergonomically designed for doing it and you have to pay more as a consumer due to taxes that need to be built into the price because of video recording licensing legislation.

yeah, yeah - I know the ultimate aim is to have one video unit that stills can be captured from but ( a ) who the hell wants to dumb it down that much and ( b ) even when Ultra High Definition arrives in a few years the quality of stills will still only be good enough for desktop images or newsprint photos.

Not being a video nut I can't say. But, from what I've listened to, the lens/dslr combinations and resulting video are not achievable with video cameras. So, I see that as a unique opportunity for capture.

great - little johnnies baptism in glorious L Series ultra wide angle nonsense :-)

I wish only for a SLR..no particular kind as of this moment :=)...
And I doubt that I would ever use the video feature. We did a lot of videos of some of the grandkids...looked at them once and surprise! they are gathering dust somewhere unknown....not as practical as pics IMO :=)
And Darryl, I thought you were going to buy me one.....the link was a hint.....:o)

Would you really pay a premium for that gimmick also? Bearing in mind this is just a bonsai version of the 50D but in cheaper clothes – why wouldn’t you just get the 50D instead, which is actually cheaper and doesn’t have the yawntastic video option?