Yep. All photographers everywhere will have to shoot raw video and will have to shoot it with the same camera as they shoot their macro product photography, location high-sync-speed fashion, nighttime architectural shots, and studio portraits.
...snip...
No, not everyone shoots the same thing.
That's obvious, though this response reminds me of the comments I heard when I moved from film to digital. Lab's said, "our photographers only shoot film", or digital has a place, "but it's really not there for high end advertising".
In other words digital capture was something they just didn't want to talk about, much like camera makers that only make still cameras do not want to talk about motion.
There is no holy grail when it comes to imagery for commerce. 8x10 film is no more pure than a dx digital image, as long as the image is compelling and serves a purpose. The same can be said for still to motion. Neither one is more relevant, more traditional or more important.
Only two groups decide that . . . the artist and the people that pay the artist.
As far as the one camera fits all, no I don't think that's necessarily true or even the plan, but it's nice to have the option.
I wouldn't think about shooting stills or motion without the appropriate backups on set (for both) but then again I would much rather own (and pay for) a third camera that could back up both.
That's just good business.
But speaking of business and the Pentax if I was in the buyer's market for a 40 million pixel still camera I'd have to take a hard look at a 1 million yen camera with a high def screen, shoots raw and jpeg, is weather sealed and has dust removal vs. a traditional 2 million yen camera.
That's also good business.
IMO
BC
