Since we're on the subject, I've a question for Chris.
Going into auto-writing, and journalism in general, what sort of D-SLR should I be looking at? Are there certain qualities that I should look out for? And what sort of lenses should I be considering if I am not aiming to do spy-shots?
I use a Pentax 'istd L2,' but I'm eying the Rebel T3 as it's a fairly light camera. I had to cover a demonstration yesterday, and having something that's easy to run with, while juggling a bag and recorder, would have made the day a little less stressful.
Well the short answer is really just whatever you're most comfortable with and understand the best. That will give you the best chance to make the strongest images.
A lot of people get hung up on the idea of the gear making the photographer, but that's not it at all. You probably hear people say "wow, your camera takes great photos." Well, no, the photographer using it takes great photos.
My background is actually in photojournalism. Hahah, none of my equipment is really geared towards spy photography. Well, OK, the 100-400 sort of is since it was a great range to shoot with at some of the tracks.
Anyway, on the technical end, any pro or semi-pro dSLR you buy these days will have more than enough megapixels. I would probably stick to Canon or Nikon. Bit of a different story on lenses. If you have the money, then don't buy anything with an aperture lower than f/2.8. That is not to say f/4 or f/5.6 lenses won't be sharp, but those extra two stops can be a huge help in lower-light situations. On the flip side, high ISO is getting pretty good now, so there would be times f/4 or f/5.6 might be OK. Still, you want to shoot a lower ISO when possible to produce a higher quality image.
If you're doing photojournalism, frame rate, and the overall speed the camera can process images, is something to consider. If you're trying to catch that decisive moment, it might not hurt to be able to rip off 8-10 frames in 1 second. The overall ruggedness of your gear is also something to think about. While a camera like the Mark IV is weather sealed and built on a metal chassis, a camera like the Rebel is not. Photojournalism is VERY rough on gear.
During my days as a newspaper photographer, I always shot with 2 cameras (one on each shoulder) and some gear in a hip pack. One camera usually had a 70-200 on it and the other a 16-35. If I were you, I would not use a camera bag simply because photojournalism can be too "run and gun." You don't want a big bag swinging around or possibly falling and bumping into stuff/people when you're trying to work. I usually took the "fly on the wall" approach in photoj and tried to blend into the background and let life unfold before me. Keeping the smallest physical profile helped me do that. A heavy camera bag will also eventually kill your shoulders/back/neck.
Going back to the speed of the camera, there were times when I was on some sort of breaking news scene, or covering a sporting event, where I would need to be able to lay into the shutter for several seconds and rip off 40-50 photos. If the camera buffer starts choking half-way through, or you're only shooting with a camera capable of 3-4 frames a second, you might miss something.
However, on the flip-side, some guys would use this argument to justify buying $5000 cameras when, frankly, they just didn't have the skill to warrant it. A $5000 camera in the hands of crap photographer will still produce crap images. You sort of need to develop the ability to see a moment coming. I don't really know how you teach that, it's just something that comes to you as you watch people.
I would probably have a little more to say, but first, what is it exactly that you are wanting to do? Auto-writing specifically, or something more broad?