Originally posted by userage Is Avengers not big-budget enough for you?
It is interesting that they've been used for POV shots in that movie, but then again, they were used for their compactness - same trend going on for video cams today. They're getting smaller too. Soon enough even small video cameras will have better video quality.
What I can't get across is the feeling that it seems people are wanting the secondary function to be a primary function. If improving video would affect, at any point, the camera's operation or performance as a tools for stills, I'm all against it. If it won't affect the camera at all (including ergonomics and weight), then why not. Sorry but I find it weird when people complain about DSLR video not being good enough for cinema (or some other requirement) but seemingly very few care if video cameras don't make brilliant stills....
Personally, I like video, but I didn't buy a DSLR for that.