Thanks for the video! I saw two things that concern me on that video.

- Frame rate dropping (All over the place, you can really see it when you pan the camera down to the grass)
- Lack of Video Stabilization

What I'm suggesting is that the hardware should be able to properly cope with this level of video recording. The N95's OMAP2 SoC had none of these problems recording at 640x480@30fps. Just the idea that OMAP3 is the next logical upwards step in hardware makes me thing that 848x480@24fps should be no problem.

In fact, look at this. You are hardly pushing that much more pixels when recording compared to a Nokia N95.

640x480x30fps = 9,216,000 pixels per second

while the N900

848x480x24fps = 9,768,960 pixels per second

Given a difference of about 500,000 pixels, you would think newer hardware (OMAP2 -> OMAP3) would be able would be able to easily cope with such a small relative increase of bandwidth. Also, not to mention that the N95 can pull this off while performing Video Stabilization algorithms at the same time.

For comparison sake, the i8910 can push
1280x720x24 = 22,118,400 pixels per second, almost 2 times what the n900 can push

I'd hate to think but is all of the recording being pushed through the CPU instead of being assisted by other hardware?