Re: DSLRs: A Time Exposure

I didn't understand the argument to be that the future should always have video and still combined in the camera, but rather that the technology used in DSLRs is paving a way to develop lower cost and better digital video cameras. (The very idea of $40,000 video camera's is insane!)

There will always be a demarcation between casual camera users and those who professionally produce video-for-sale if only because of the application (for instance, audio needs are different between the two classes.)

Note video "quality" is subjective. I, for one, dislike film because of its constant flicker and bland colors, while many up-and-coming videographers strive for that "film" look. But with the new breed of sensors (and perhaps existing lens) doesn't it become possible to produce whatever look you desire, or easier to overcome in difficult situations, all at a significantly lower cost?