When I was shooting my D2H at JPG basic, and delivering to Facebook, no one said it was "bad". It wasn't. But it pales in comparison to shooting my D800 in RAW. This is the equivalent argument.
Yes, the D800 (and other DSLRs) shoot video. It looks great on the internet. But the challenge to get it to look good in a more demanding environment is pretty tough. Can it be done? Sure.
>Are there some challenges involved with DSLR video shooting >that other solutions don't have? Sure. But life is nothing but >challenges and if I do nothing but avoid them, I'd never >accomplish anything.
My question is, why pay more for less? $1k more for the camera, then another $1k for a Atomos, plus HDMI cabling and associated hardware, just to make it harder to shoot. And you are STILL only getting an HD (1920x1080) frame, REC709 video space, etc. For $2k+ less, you'd get to shoot in LOG space, at a 2.5k frame, get your choice of RAW, ProRes, or DNxHD, and be able to shoot untethered.