The video was a part of the success of the D90 at the outset but the fact remains that if it were not a good DSLR, it would have slowed its selling pace by now, even being a Nikon. I work in stores every day around a fairly large territory. I’ve sold my share of D90s. I can tell you unequivocally that the video aspect of things rarely comes up in conversation at all and when it does the conversation usually ends up with “Well that’s neat.” or “Cool, but I’ll never use it.” People just want a good camera, and the D90 is most certainly that. The video aspect of things really hasn’t caught on to the masses at large. Which is fine, because all the reasons I posted up there are 100% valid. There are more family photographers that are buying the D90 than pros. I totally agree: the pro has the hardware (the time? maybe, maybe not lol) but the boutique camera buyer, these family photographers with better budgets, of which there are MANY… shoot, man, they’re still trying to figure out how to organize the thousands of photos they can’t bring themselves to delete… let alone shooting, importing and editing video. They would LIKE to… they just aren’t. And when they find out what’s in store, they’re going to view it as an inconvenience to be avoided save for very brief moments, and very infrequently. Who has the time?

I completely agree that Nikon will have video on their next D700 class body. They’re also going to need a few other tweaks because the total package of the EOS 5DMkII is pretty impressive in comparison. People have been more than willing to give up a little bit at 6400 ISO to get the extra linear resolution… and the landscape, macro, and studio freaks have also been buying the A900 as they need high iso even less… and just want all that color (and some of the most amazing out of camera black and whites in digital).

I dig that you need a video DSLR, hey, sweet! You’re going to love it. But we can’t forget that nobody makes a system that works for everyone and nobody is “THE BEST,” I don’t care what the hype says. So Sony isn’t making a camera for you right now. That’s perfectly valid… and it happens all the time. For example, I know people who won’t touch Canon until Canon have true built in wireless ttl capability that doesn’t require the ST-E2 or a 580EXII on cameras with a built in flash (how they’ve managed to escape doing this for this long is beyond me). I do know, however, that Sony make a lot of cameras for a lot of people and that they sell pretty well when stacked up to the cameras that they most closely compete with. The specs on the forthcoming A550 alone will sway a great many people. Especially for the money. No video? For most people, that’s no problem. For you, sure! The D300s is going to be awesome. And you’ll have a blast! Post the Youtube link to your stuff. We’d love to see it.

There will be 3 New Alpha’s launched ( again )

A850 / A550 / A500

Specifications DSLR’s:

Alpha 500
12 Mp EXMOR R CMOS sensor
New Quick AF Live View
5 Fps

Vertical Control Grip / Sony VG-C50AM

Alpha 550
15 Mp EXMOR R CMOS sensor
New Quick AF Live View
5 Fps
Sony VG-C50AM

Vertical Control Grip / Sony VG-C50AM

Alpha 850
24.6 Mp Full Frame EXMOR CMOS Sensor ( A900 )
98 % Viewfinder
3 Fps

No HD Video!!!!!

Lenses:
SAL 28-75 mm f/2.8 SAM
SAL 30 mm f/2.8 Macro SAM

SAL 500 mm f/4.0 G SSM

Flash:
Sony HVL-F40AM

ps. Screw the Video – that’s feature for masses. Focus on photos quality – that’s the one for photographers.

Perhaps the another Alpha to be released will be in the “old look” of A700/200/300/350, but still… we have no idea what it will be.

There been press people using Alphas at the Athletics WC in Berlin 8where Bolt run new wr @100m).
And they are Professionals using Alpha as their second system.
The A900 is perfect Camera for landscape photography.
Not to mention the superb quality of Sonys high grade lenses.

And btw:
There are many pro and semi pro users who actually dislike Video and some even Life View.
The argument is that this makes the Camera more expansive and other functions might been changed from perfect as a trade off.
Many want better AF System for Alpha Line up, better IQ on high ISO and more user options (e.g. AF micro adjustment).
But this stuff doesn’t look good on feature sheet in electronic stores….

I’m with others here… I don’t expect (or want) video on the next batch of Sony DSLR’s.

Anyway, last time I checked, everyone was putting video capability in all their new cameras. Sony is basically in a world of their own when it comes to video (i.e. out of touch with consumers.) They are at least one cycle behind the leaders.

I’m going to buy a new camera in the next month or so. Probably the D300s as it is the only offering with video in my budgeted range, although I will take a look at the new Canon 7d/60D that should be available in the next week.

Sony doesn’t have video so it is not on my radar (well, that and they don’t have a mid market camera beyond the aging A700.)

I think we are mixing signals here as I am thinking about upmarket cameras and I think you are talking about A300 level stuff. If someone buys a 24.6 MP A850, they probably have the hardware to handle video being they are already dealing with GBs of RAW files and would probably appreciate a video implementation. I promise you Nikon will be adding that next to their D700…

then arrive RED ONE, with a big success, but still expensive to many people…

then arrive the 5D II , first generation dsrl whith HD video and THAT’s the beginning of the story!

A new era!

and I don’t think sony will sell a one 850 or 900 photo camera to a profetional !!!???

Now. Tell me again why video is necessary in a DSLR right now?

In my experience I can tell you that the VAST MAJORITY of the consumers out there see it as “nice but not necessary” and some of them frankly see it as a feature they’re paying extra for. The rare percentage of people “demand” video in their SLRs and of those an even smaller percentage are aware of the compromises. Canon can hand a DSLR off to Soderberg all they like… he’s a millionaire writer/director/producer with all the time and the hardware and the ability to put together something professional. The modern american purchasing a T1i, on the other hand, is only going to be disappointed… and are frankly still looking for just a good DSLR.

Point and shoot video is an entirely different story as the sensor size (and the fact that Sony makes nearly 70% of the point and shoot sensors out there) allows for cost effectiveness, the file type and compression chosen allows for the bit rate to be nominal, and people who point and shoot are less likely to give a rip about their video quality. Handycams will blow away even the best video quality of a point and shoot (the DSC-HX1 has superb video but still won’t hold a candle to the CX100).

Video will become necessary because the reviewers will deem it so… not because the public needs it. Just like LiveView. When Olympus brought out LiveView the reviewers called it a gimmick or an accident just waiting to happen (though you can bet if Nikon or Canon had brought it out it would have been a “revolution”). Now if you don’t have it, you’re negligent. Seriously. Cameras are toys for most people, completely unnecessary in their daily lives. The need for status features still completely appalls me. To many times compromises are made just to stuff it in (D5000? How about that AF system in the 1DMkIII?) and it’s ACCEPTED because it’s a major manufacturer and that makes it ok.

Pentax? Panasonic? Niche players for now. They hold no threat for the Sony Alpha system. Envelope pushers and innovators to be sure but someone bigger will eventually take those innovations, refine them, have the money to market them better… and the cycle will continue, whether any of us like it or not.

People now DEMAND video in DSLRs. Why buy a low end Alpha when you can get a D90 or a T1i with HD video? You are getting more for your money.

As a casual shooter, I’d like to have video as an option when I need it. If another vendor has a comparable camera with video at the same price point I am going to go for it over the Sony.

Just look at the Canon 50D. No video, no buzz. While it is a great camera, it was completely usurped by the D90 at launch and now is being usurped by the K-7/GH-1 and D300s. Why? Video.

Sure, on the A850/A900 front it really doesn’t matter (although liveview would be nice) but I personally feel that not including video in some incarnation on the low and mid range models will hurt sales.

Sony has video in all sorts of Point & Shoot cameras, some that cost as much as it’s low end Alphas! Why didn’t they have to meet the “handycam” standard?

No video means Sony will still be relegated to “also ran” for the remainder of this cycle.

And no EXMOR-R either. Give that a bit, too.

Still, the A550 is going to turn heads, for SURE. And the A500 ain’t no slouch, either.