Originally posted by thazooo I Don't
I'm a still photographer only. The reason I even have a camcorder was to chase the grandson at House of Mouse
That's absolutely fine. I just hope that people here do understand that camcorders are usually pretty crappy, and those who care about video quality either use DSLRs, mirrorless cameras or have big pockets, as video cameras with similarly sized sensors and good image quality tend to carry 5 digit price tags.
If you're watching German TV, and you see them shoot with multiple cameras, there's usually a couple of videographers shooting with DSLRs. Even for big budget productions. Sometimes you might see a Canon C series camera, but those are just DSLRs without the mirror and with unlocked video capabilities (Canon tends to artificially limit their stills cameras in order to be able to sell much more expensive cameras).
This one is quite nice:
In any case, there are plenty of commercial photographers that also shoot video for their clients and that need the right tool. Will they be buying a $2.000 camera, a couple of lenses for it and then another $10.000 camera plus lenses, or will they buy a camera that does it all for $2.000?
And don't forget that the 35mm film format originated in video, not in stills. Video and stills are closely related and the hardware is capable of doing both anyway.