Probably a map of China.

Sennheiser HD280 Pro's. These are $99 or less. They are the best noise canceling headphones, and sound amazing. They are designed for field recording engineers and are used by news crews and films crews. You've also probably seen a few intelligent people with them connected to their MP3 players. I am a headphone junkie, and have different headphones for different uses. Anyway, if you want superb sound, and serious noise canceling, these are the best. There is no gimmick, no batteries, nothing to ruin the sound. They hug your head, and kill external sound. You will not be able to have a conversation with them on. They are no joke, and they are awesome. Again, Sennheider HD 280 Pro's. With 32 decibels of attenuation, they make every so-called "noise-cancelling" headphone weep. For the third time:

Sennheiser HD280 Pro. $99 or less. Buy, rejoice.

Matt, you may not be aware that Sony makes the sensors for Nikon's DSLR's (as well as their point-and-shoots...Canon's point-and-shoots too, and other brands).

Canon, Sony, and Panasonic are the only companies making sensors for digicams, in the consumer realm. Nikon lagged behind Canon in image quality for so many years, because they were relying on Sony to produce chips in an area sony had little interest in, while Canon invested billions in R&D and fab plants to build their own. With Nikon's last couple high-end cams, the D3, D300, and D700, Sony for the first time delivered chips with superior noise characteristics to Canon sensors. Don't be fooled by "co-developed by Nikon and Sony" non-sense in brochures, it's all Sony. That's just a Japanese technique for Nikon to save face. The issue for Nikon is that they are a very small company compared to Canon. Canon's primary business is office printers, and they have loads of cash in the bank to pursue breakthroughs in camera tech for the still and video department. Sony does as well, of course, and that is an issue now for Nikon. Why? Because Sony now makes their own DSLR's. Sony mentioned they were going to release a 24MP+ full-frame body in the not-too-distant future. Luckily Nikon and Sony have a good relationship currently, and Nikon should be fine for the next few years. The best part about Nikon being too poor to build their own chips, is that since they were stuck with crap sensors (compares to Canon's), they went over-board trying to make fantastic bodies. The D300 is a superb example of that. For the money, that is one fantastic cam. But, really, it's more for gearheads. Silly stuff like HDMI out and dozens of focus points.

As a photographer, my primary interest is image quality. My first camera was a Pentax K1000, and that had all the features I needed, and most of what I need today. Every DSLR has a manual mode, as well as shutter and aperture priority modes. I picked up a 40D shortly before coming to Japan, because I knew Canon was going to release a cam with higher image quality than the D300 for much less money shortly. Well, that was officially announced yesterday, the Canon 50D. Costco's 90-day return policy is going to work out great for me, and I feel bad for the poor saps not sharp enough to figure out Canon was about to release a 40D replacement (they did this because of pressure from the D300...Nikon having a camera with better image quality, even it it was $600 more, was just not kosher).

In the bigger picture, both Sony and Canon (and Nikon inadvertently), are milking to market with Bayer sensors. You probably also aren't aware that the sensors in current cameras only record in black-and-white (except for Foveon's chip in Sigmas). Canon has several patents on color camera sensors, so we will eventually see "the real deal". But, for now, we're stuck with this bayer-pattern nonsense (with it's moire/AA-filter crud). A 10MP full-color sensor would knock the socks off of the current crop of bayers, and avoid the issues with diffraction we face now, with ever increasing densities. For example, my 40D, with it's 10MP APS sized chip already hits diffraction issue past F8, and that limits my depth of field control. I would like to be able to shoot at F11 or even F16 from time to time, but I know I'll pay a real price in sharpness. But, at 15MP, that limit is going to be even lower. F7? We'll see.

The 50D will be the last cropped-sensor camera I buy. Next will be a good 25MP or so full-frame camera, and then a full-color camera(which I suspect will be common and affordable in about 10 years, so that's a ways off...much more milking to be done). The 4MP Foveon in Sigma's camera's has its merits, but Foveon is a tiny company, and we're not going to see great leaps in full-color sensors until some serious cash is put into it.

Wow, I have gone off on a tangent. Anyway, I assure you, the movie mode in the D90 will be next-to-useless, and just a marketing gimmick (like most tag-line features on DSLRS). Sony is not going to let Nikon hurt it's video market with it's own sensors. On the other hand, since Nikon has put it on the D90, you can bet this feature will show up on other DSLR's. If their is a demand for the feature, that may lead to competition in the quality and utility of it. But, I won't be holding my breath for a DSLR that shoots in HDV, let alone something like AVC-Intra--Panasonic is the only camera maker utilizing that currently, and only on their broadcast gear--(that is intra-frame compression, not AVCHD crap).

The D90 will likely shoot a few minutes of severely compressed 720P footage, that wouldn't hold a candle to the HV30. Sony and Canon have nothing to be concerned about, and again, if there was an issue, Sony would just say, "yeah, not so much" and Nikon would put it's tail between it's legs, and bow down to it's master.

If you enjoy history, and Japanese corporate history in particular, you should read about Canon and Nikon's history. Canon was founded to produce a Japanese Leica, and Nikon was brought on the produce it's lens. Nikon had never made a camera lens, but Canon and Nikon worked close together, and the rest is history. A lot of American's don't understand the relationships Japanese companies have with each other, and think of business around the world as some American-style rivalry. I pissed myself laughing at the HD-DVD/Blu-Ray stuff on these forums. Sony, Toshiba, and IBM developed the CELL chip, the key component of the PS3. Toshiba used Microsoft (Microsoft was the HD-DVD/Blu-ray loser, they were the sucker). Microsoft is run by knuckleheads, and Toshiba easily swindled them. Days after Toshiba announced the HD-DVD nonsense was done, Sony announced they sold Toshiba their Cell factory for a fraction of it's price. So, Toshiba manufactures Sony's chips, as well as those used in Toshiba's laptops (high-end Toshiba laptops now have cell chips in them). Would Sony entrust their arch-rival to produce the most critical component of their PS3? Of course not, because Sony and Toshiba are not arch rivals. They co-developed the Cell, remember?

The story is a bit different with Nikon and Canon, because they are rivals. Sony is gracious intermidiary, supplying both canon and nikon with their point-and-shoot chips. Image Stabilization was co-developed by Canon and Sony. In video cameras, it was first seen in Sony's, of course, and in still cameras in Canon's. In the late 80's, Canon debuted the EOS mount, forever changing still cameras. With this new, huge, electronic mount, Canon was easliy able to develop silent focusing lenses, add image stabilization, etc, as all the tech was in the lens itself, interfacing with the camera electronically. Nikon stuck with their 50's mount, and had a heck of a time figuring out how to make a queit lens, let alone add image stabilization. They eventually added electronic contacts to the mount of course, like canon, but are currently in the messed up state of having a majority of their lenses still requiring a mechanical link. Nikon's cheaper DSLR's no longer have the mechanical link, so most Nikon lenses can not autofocus. If you go to digital photography review, you'll see in reviwing Nikon's D60, for example, they had to manually focus Nikon's 50mm, as they don't even make electronic version. If you want access to Nikon's full range of lenses, you need to spend more money on a higher-end cam. With Canon, the cheapest camera you can get is fully-compatible with every EOS lens ever made. The benefit of Nikon's system is you can use crap lenses from the 50's, if you buy their more expensive cameras. The benefit of Canon's is that all camera buyers can enjoy all their lenses. The other big advantage to Canon's huge EOS mount, is that you can put lenses from any manufacturer on it, including those same crap Nikon lenses from the 50's, or Leica's finest.

Anyway, most consumers can't take a picture, and wouldn't know a good image from a bad one, so it's all pretty irrelevant. They'll buy a cam like the D90, with the kit lens, and never even touch the manual mode, let alone buy a decent lens. It's gear heads that fuel the market, which is great, because it allows the few of us that actually take great pictures to enjoy the benefits.

Yeah, I got horny when I read "176-degree viewing angles". Is it 8-bit, is the question. Well, I would have splooged if it said 178 degree viewing angles. It's so lame SIPS screens are so pricey now. The cheapest you can get are Apple's Cinema Displays, and those are too pricey for me.