Well, I agree with everybody... I would keep both. I bought the T2i a couple of weeks ago with the kit lens and a Canon 50mm 1.4 and it's really turning my world upside down. But the thing is, in my particular case, it would be nice to sell my EX1 and get money back. Insurance is expensive, and being on the streets here with that bazooka is not so nice... sometimes it feels like I have too much for the stuff I do, specially considering there are good alternatives like the T2i. Back then when I got the EX1, the alternative was a Z1...

What I meant with "2. Market moving towards DSLR-like cameras..." was cameras with big chips and interchangeable lens function. Number 3 (lenses) is of importance then, because we will be able to use those lenses with future cameras.

Sony VG10 and Panasonic AF100 are the upcoming... do we know of another one?

The Sony at 2,000 seems nice for the guys like I, that would like to lay low... the Panasonic has more features... but it is supposed to cost 3 times more. And without thinking too much I believe I would only benefit from having XLR. Actually I wanted to do a side-by-side comparison with those two cameras to see where the extra 4,000 are, but my laptop is weird, sometimes it "blocks" itself and I can't open new tabs on Chrome or programs, not even task manager (???)...

Sure glad I stumbled on this thread. Both the Sony and Panasonic cameras are news to me. This sure gives clarity about what is up over the next year, not just with these "salvos" as has been mentioned but the other up market offerings that will follow.

The industrial design of the Sony camera is to be commended. Sound and DOF are very good...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Npy-aVIVjE

I think those are very realistic calculations. They certainly parallel my own recent thoughts.
The improvement in performance and image quality of the smaller AVCHD cams has been quite striking since the time that the EX1 was released.
I bought the EX for the 1/2 inch chips and tapeless workflow. All of the extensive features were, and still are,enchanting, but I have come to discover that I don't really use most of them in the type of shooting I do.
And, like you, I find the camera rather cumbersome and a magnet for all sorts of unwanted attention.
I hope that the direction that the VG10 is pointing is maybe a pro version APC cam with EX1 features, but around the size of the good old Sony PD 170.
That's where I want to go...

Then you, my friend, might want to look at the soon to be released Panansonic AF-100. It'll be bigger than a PD 170, but not overtly so, certainly smaller than a shoulder mount cam. It will have variable frame rates, XLR inputs, all the professional features you'd want, at about the cost of the EX1R.

DSLR vs Regular cam
 

I own both and they each have their own uses. The DSLR is ideal for close spaces, ideal for interviews and provides beautiful color. The EX1 is better at slo-motion work, I like the fact the sound and video are there with no separate mixing and the long run time without heating up. If you can keep your camera and invest in the DSLR. It is not an either or.
Just my experience.

Phil

Like the others I would suggest both. A DSLR will be useful for confined spaces, or as Anson Fogel did, used a 5D Mk2 as a very expensive GoPro camera on the front of a kayak!

DSLR's are nice, but...
 

Now that I have my T2i I've actually decided to get a second EX1.
With the rage leaning away from this fine workhorse of a camera, you can pick one up at fire sale prices with few hours on them.

Hey guys, I'm kind of in doubt... the specifications of these new Sony and Panasonic cameras do say they will accept "a wide array of lenses" and so on, but I'm not 100% sure...

I have a Canon 50mm 1.4 and I was planning to buy some EF-S lenses, the well-known 17-55 2.8, the Tokina 11-16 and a Sigma 30... I was wondering... is it 100% certain I will be able to use them with any of these new cameras?

Shooting video with DSLR is plain clumsy.

Compared to what? I actually rather like it!

Be honest - look at the gadgets people are having to buy to be able to use DSLRs as 'proper' video cameras - they're a bodge, pure and simple. They take cracking good images. They are not good at everything else. Control, ergonomics, sound - all the things proper video cameras are built around.

All the hacks and fiddling, all the limitations in running time and they overheat? Great professional attributes aren't they.

I'm not knocking the images - I've seen some outstanding stuff. My issue is purely with the product not being properly designed for the purpose.

If you have an EX1 or 3 - why would you want to swap all the great features for something that's worse in almost every department.

Rather like swapping a range rover for a fiat because you like the fiat colours better!

People don't HAVE to buy squat. I've shot my 550D for the past month right next to my EX1 with nothing more than the kit lens and a tripod plate attached. What people CHOOSE to buy is a vastly different story.

I didn't buy my HDSLR to replace my video camera. I bought it because I wanted to shoot film and couldn't afford it. So when I compare the ergonomics of my camera to the Aaton or Arri that I wanted to buy, it's not that much different. Same limitations, same issues. My unit has yet to overheat. And I've shot with it here in Florida since the day I bought it.

It's designed for it's primary purpose. And that is to take photographs. It is a compromise for video. So is my EX1. So are most of the cameras we own on this forum. Try the ergonomics of a Viper or F23 some time. Or are those not designed for purpose either? Tell me what you have to attach to a Genesis or a RED to shoot a movie, and let's compare that to one of the HDSLRs, both in convenience and cost.

Because at the end of the day, the image is what pays the bills. If I could get the image out of my EX1 that I could out of this $800 camera, I wouldn't have bought it. But I can't. The people I shoot for don't give a darn what I shoot on, just what I come back with. And rightly so.

Well, I have a Range Rover. And yet I drive my Subaru every day. So maybe I'm not the best example.

Actually, now that I've been using my T2i... picking up handheld my EX1 is kind of a pain, really. It's heavy. And it's not well designed at all... the EX1 is not the handheld ergonomics jewel and we know it.

Paul, it's not about downgrading, it's about getting the same (or even better) results and at the same time planning for the future, when the next generation of big-chip cameras come out.

I shoot all my live events now with an Ex1r and a 7D. They match pretty well in post after desaturating the 7D and saturating the Ex1r images just a tad.

It depends on what kind of work you do, but I wouldn't trade my Ex1r in to go 100% DSLR... that would be insane. Try shooting a series of hour-long lectures with DSLRs and you're in for a world of hurt. Or try to do some decent ENG coverage when you only have one camera and need a servo zoom.

I don't care for the color of the 7D. The 5D is better but they both are lacking when looking at a color chart in the YUV colorspace using a broadcast monitor. They are great when shooting RAW for stills, but in the video space the accuracy has not been there in my tests.

They can be bent in post but only a bit as the compression is kind of heavy.

My biggest problem is the monitoring or lack thereof. I don't have any exposure confidence as the LCD does not have a lot of image control for calibration.

I agree with Craig, the winds of change are on the way and once the video models start to appear the DSLRs will lose their charm outside of price.