So the Canon 5d mkII, iirc, can shoot video that looks like 35mm film, due to its huge sensor and ability to use all of the Canon still lenses. The Canon XH-A1 can't do that. The Casio Exilim ex-f1 can shoot up to 1200 fps looking... ok well not so hot but seems to look good at slightly less fast framerates, letting moms and dads shoot slo-mo video in their backyards. The Canon XH-A1 can't do that. Of course folks have to go through a big rigamarole to get sound synched with the 5d and it has trouble panning quickly because of some CMOS science I don't quite get but still, why would I pay $4k plus for a prosumer HDV camera when there are cameras that shoot better looking video, slo-mo video, to memory cards, for less money, that also happen to be amazing still cameras. What am I missing here?