oh well , let's hope the Russians can come up with a fix ! Instead of the 1080 , Canon should have implemented a very good 720/30/24/25p ......and put on the articulating lcd!

I agree - it's perfect if you are talking about the still capabilities of the Rebel - it's a market leader for DSLR still photos.

The video however, is no Mustang. Plenty of P&S digicams at 50% or less of the cost have better video now than the Rebel including slow motion, various frame rates, more controls etc. I mean Canon's own PowerShot SX1 does 1080 30fps.

What I would like to point out is Canon has now brought out a DSLR at both the highend (5D2) and lowend (T1i) with FF 35mm and APS-C sensors and some very nice video capability. In addition we have seen another Japanese company (Panasonic) add some very nice video capability to their u4/3rds product line. How much longer can they keep these big fat sensors with their magnificent low light sensitivity and DOF characteristics so many of you have been drooling over out of the professional video market?

I would say not a whole lot longer.

Looking forward to NAB 2009 announcements.

"Better video" doesn't mean slowmo and variable frame rates, those are just features. I'd consider an APS-C sensor capable of clean high ISO video at 720p better than a small 1/2.3" sensor that can shoot 1080 30fps. Big sensor + interchangable lenses = win. Otherwise, people would buy the SX1 instead of the 5D markII, right?

I definitely see the photojournalist angle about the 5D2, but even those guys would likely want some basic control over the image...if only for consistency and predictability from shot to shot. Those guys understand shutter, ISO and aperture. Why wouldn't that matter to them in video mode?

I guess when I say "pro video" I don't really mean feature rich or true pro video ergonomics...just basic, predictable, manual image control. When I said "HD video...but not pro", it might be better phrased as "HD video...no control".

I'm not outraged like others are because I've always been one of those folks who tries to exploit the strengths of a product and not gripe about its shortcomings too much. I take what's given and run with it.

The 5D2 is simply incredible video, (horrible rolling shutter, one frame rate and aliasing/moire' notwithstanding) but just not easy to get consistent results. And I'm sure that was Canon's intent, in order to tip-toe around various internal and external issues.

I understand Canon and all the other manufacturer's product stratification model; it's rational and sound business strategy, but misleading marketing (particularly with the 5D2) is another story.

But come on...1080/20p? The mind boggles.

If you care about video image quality (large sensor, interchangeble lenses etc,) then 20fps is nearly a deal killer and 24p is probably more appealing than 30p for true shallow DOF film look, so D90 wins. All Canon has really is a better codec.

I'm a Pentax K10d user right now, so I still waiting before pulling the DSLR upgrade trigger, but the GH1 looks like the smart choice right now. But Nikon, Pentax etc. might surprise as well.

Noooooo... that's not what I'm saying at all.

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I'm not saying 20fps is acceptable for us under any circumstance (it isn't). I'm proposing that the majority of folks out there who buy this thing will be happy to have 1080 video at any frame rate. For a significant percentage of them, this will be their first way to record 1080 video. A big chunk of the Rebel's market probably does not own an HD camcorder and has no plans to buy one.

What I'm objecting to, though, is this ludicrous notion that 1080 at 20fps is somehow a "fiasco" or "suicide" or "not worth offering." How utterly over the top can you get? From the standpoint of the average consumer, sure it's worth offering; one look at the sample clips bears that out. No it's not perfect, and no it's not something you or I would use. But geez... there should be shades of gray here instead of black and white. There will be thousands of customers who are going to be thrilled with this camera's HD video feature, even in 1080 at 20fps, and there will be thousands of customers who probably won't even care about it. But of course it's worth offering.

I've seen just as ugly handheld from the 5D2 though.

As far as I'm concerned, this whole "video on a D-SLR" concept would benefit from having some kind of lock-out mode where you can't toggle video unless the camera is mounted on sticks. In my opinion that would do everybody a favor.

Thrilled? That's pretty strong. Maybe "excited" when they see the specs but unlikely when they see it on their TV. First, most people don't have setups and viewing distances that resolved 720p vs 1080p but only the most nearly blind people cannot tell 30fps from 20fps. So they may get all excited about 1080p - until they shoot it and decide 720p at 30fps results in much more pleasing video. 90% of that market will shoot handheld and the 1080p handheld clip I watched on fullscreen 17" laptop was really unpleasant with the jerks and stutters with the rolling shutter to boot.

So that means the 20fps 1080p is primarily for Canon to market that feature, not because people will be "thrilled" with it's quality.

I replied before your edit. Now that is very valid point. I've yet to see D-SLR video that works well handheld because of rolling shutter. The GH1 might do it but I've not seen any real native clips yet for us to tell.

From my IMAX work on my project, screen size greatly amplifies screen and motion artifacts. To pull off handheld without making people physically ill (which happened to a filmmaker in Austin who projected his handheld doc onto an IMAX screen) is very difficult and you are best served on sticks, dolly etc. I think this first company that pulls off either very fast rolling shutter or global shutter on CMOS DSLR or video-only camera has a major advantage.

For a number of years, the video mode in the little PowerShot Elph gave you two choices, 320/30p and 480/15p. Everyone I knew who owned a PowerShot -- and these were all video people -- chose to shoot video in VGA at 15fps rather than QVGA at 30fps. I'm not saying that justifies putting 20fps on an HD frame size, but knowing that history might provide some insight as to why they went that way.

Screen size - what we tolerate on an a small laptop window is very different from a 60" Plasma.

You seem to keep ignoring the 720-30p mode... The D90 is 720p as well. So basically, this Rebel is the same as the D90, except it's 30fps, but ALSO has a 1080 mode (albeit weird) AND it's cheaper?

ANd for me, 20fps isn't a personal deal killer, I shot my last short film on a Canon 1D mkII at 8fps.

I'm not, I'm just saying 720/30p is old news now and it's good it's cheaper than D90 as 24p is a big deal. Converting 30p to 24p can be done in Compressor or AE but it's a pain.

I think the bottom line is that the video in this model is disappointing to most compared to what other cameras offer given this is Canon's second model with video. I think Nikon et. al. response will show this and the GH1 already does.

This model is only disappointing to those with unrealistic expectations and an unfamilliarity with consumer wants/needs. Everyone on these video forums is biased against it because they want/expect pro features on an entry level DSLR... At this early stage in the game, that's ridiculous. It's a soccer mom SLR made with soccer mom features... no one besides our tiny sliver of the market even knows or cares what 24p is... plus, 30p is a better format for your average shooter anyway. This is a home use camera, not a digital cinematography machine.

Canon is going to sell a billion of these regardless of what haters on internet forums think.

Canon Rebels always sell well, nobody's arguing that. I'm not arguing that it won't sell well - the 1080p 20fps is actually very smart marketing and why I argue it was included and will sell well. My point is about who will be happy with it or thrilled with it or love it after using it - some may tolerate but hardly anyone is going to love it.

Especially if Nikon's etc. new models offer better. The success of the HV20/30/40 points to a camera that serves the consumer and prosumer well - those models have done so well despite some quirks for pro use - I have a pimped HV30. But the T1i is no HV series yet.