Oh yeah, definitely, sometimes it takes a video to bring your point across. But unless they do both decently, I'd rather them make the camera so at least it's really good in photos and sacrifice a bit of quality for the video, when the camera could be so so in one area and just crap in the other.

And you can bet all your photo equipment that they'll come out with something better in the future.

I remember when photographers cried about how auto focus wasn't needed in cameras because it was expensive and you could focus faster at exactly what you wanted to shoot at. I feel those who resist video are on the same boat as back then. People want video of their kids birthday party and not just stills.

Even the media is embracing this combination in the field. Look at all the multi-media presentations that go along with a particular news story. What do you think is going to get you more hits on your website, a slideshow of a pics from a 767 landing in a river or an HD video clip of the event as it happened? Even if you don't want to use video I guarantee the person looking to buy your camera in the future will!

canon makes their own sensors NSX. That's what's so surprising about the rumor of a G11 with a Sony one.

HD video is a nice addition, but not absolutely necessary. People forget that they're buying cameras and not video cameras, picture taking should be the primary concern, not video taking.

Yes, I do understand Canon switched to a Sony sensor. Did Canon use their own sensors in the past? Does this mean Canon understands their sensors aren't that great? :D

I was refering to the fact that they switched to a "Sony" 10mp sensor and it doesn't offer HD video. This exclusion has really upset some who thought for sure it was a no brainer it would be included.

Like I said the consumer is driving the market in a new direction. Like it or not, video and stills are morphing into one.

Indeed Kodak makes sensors, and sells them to other companies, they also get a lot of money from licensing, as they are one of the most innovative companies nowadays, they also are number one is digital photo frames.

Niko - as for the G11, shit... the specifications looks good - hopefully one day Nikon will deliver us such a great P&S

Kodak is a major player in medium and large format sensors. They make stuff for other camera co's but I don't think those company's want to advertise Kodak sensors inside their products. The new Leica M9 will supposedly carry an 18mp full frame sensor which perhaps also found it's way into canon's 18mp 7D? 8^O

The reaction I'm getting from canon's recent point & shoot announcements seems overwhelmingly negative. It's sad that COOLPIX announcements never stir up emotions no matter how crappy the camera specs are. We just expect cheap underachieving cameras. But canonites were hoping for more from the new G11.

It seems the new generation of mirror-less compact cameras (EP-1, GH-1, etc) are really driving the entire market in a new direction.

NSX - kodak is leading patent company, they focus on technologies and digital photo frames nowadays

At this rate could Canon eat up Nikon's share of advanced point and shoots? I mean the P6000 really has nothing on the G11.

And besides Sony, who else makes sensors? Fuji? Ricoh? Kodak? I remember Kodak might make medium format sensors for Hasselblad. How come Kodak doesn't make anything nice besides point and shoots?

willis - agree with You on the canon thing, I was once playing with 5dMkII and for me this camera is like windows, so non-intuitive; as for the "...plenty of people doing it...", actually there's not so many sensor manufactures around the world.
as for Your second post, indeed Japanese business culture is much different than the US or European one, and I think it's good, moreover I wouldn't regret if this two companies will join forces one day with developing the cameras, or too see a900 equivalent in Nikons line up (with a900 price tag of course)

Niko -> Sony can't just cut off Nikon wt their leisure. Nikon makes a lot of the equipment that Sony uses to make the sensors. Japan has a very different business culture than the US. They are all kind of in bed with eachother on various different levels.

Adamz - I respectfully disagree. Sensor manufacture is a complicated process, but there are plenty of people doing it. Making great software is just one of those things that have eluded people. That's why companies that do it well make so much money (Take Apple for instance).

I settled on Nikon because they it was the only camera that felt natural in my hands. Go pick up a 5D and tell me that its design is superior... Even if this wasn't a Nikon forum, I'd still call BS on a claim like that. I don't really care who makes the sensors... as long as they produce great pictures.

I'll pay extra for ergonomics and firmware that gets out of my way. (Nikon only gets average marks on their firmware... but that's a whole different post... they get an A+ for design).

But that leaves Nikon and others at Sony's mercy. Even if Nikon tweaks a particular sensor to make it their own they can only rummage through the sensor bins Sony tells them to.

IMHO - sony has a great long-term strategy, it's much easier to learn how to produce better software, than to learn how to manufacture a sensor, not to mention costs

Makes "sense" to me. It would explain why the G11 has no HD video. I guess if you can't beat'em, join'em :^) I'd really hate to be a G10 owner now because canon has basically said the 14megpix sensor was a mistake and total crap.

This original post makes sense to me...what do you think?
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&message=32726998

Sony must be raking in the dough selling digital sensors to everybody. This profit fuels their desire to become a DSLR powerhouse. Imagine if one day they stop selling them. What's Nikon going to do then? Bring back LBCAST? Hmmm...interesting.

Yes Gentoo, I can hear you shouting...."Sony cams suck!" And you too NSXType-R, "Another canon thread??!!" :^)