I'd get one if I could. The Nikon D90 is so shiny, I'd even break from the Olympus brand to get one. It's been in magazines lately, pressing on the fact that it's the first DSLR capable of shooting 790p HD movie clips. Fairly impressive, even as a fun feature I'm not likely to use nearly as much as the standard photography. For the $1,300.00 price tag, though, I wasn't able to justify the price tag to a co-worker. In the first place, he's obviously not a photographer. He isn't likely to buy any DSLR, let alone one for so much. His argument, though, is that there's nobody out there that would care to make use of the video capture feature. He argues that if someone is into film, they'll buy a nice video camera. If they're into photography, they'll buy a DSLR at a better price minus the unneeded feature. To him, there's no crossover. I tried explaining that the lens factor reaches between the two art forms. Focus, angle and lighting can be equally important in both mediums. The D90 might serve as a decent in-between tool for those who are serious about photography, but interested in taking up film. What do you all think?