@brianluce you meant GH13 body + legacy lenses + adapters under $1K total?

@setfanos where does the GH13 or GH17 fit in to your list? i think this is the crux of the OP's question. GH13 / GH17 > GH2 i think is the consensus. defo > tm700. I can't comment on the EX1.

> No, I mean $10,000. Ten thousand

This one is easy - right now it is Sony FS100.

Here is a qualification of that statement. I would quantify video IQ in certain ways.

1. Dynamic Range - The Canon DSLRs have terrible real resolution but are artistically brilliant. I am also finding out now that they hold up better under grading - due to the 10 or 12-bit color processing.

2. Resolution - After the 100mbps hack and the native progressive modes, GH13, GH17 kill the AF100, GH2, EX1 and EX3 in resolution.

3. Low Light - Try using a 25mm f0.95 lens. Just try it at ISO 1600. The fastest equivalent for the 5D is a 50mm 1.2 lens. Then process the footage with Neat Video - we preferred the GH1 footage to the 5D/7D in such a situation. Use the setting to reduce the edge artifacts. Use this first in your filter chain for max effectiveness.

4. DOF - I have put this at no. 4 - for a reason. There is nothing wrong or right about a 35mm film/ sensor look. Look at many movies from the danish cinema. All digital small sensor cameras - the story and acting is so strong that you wont care. Many of the people on this forum come from an anglo world - where hollywood is the standard for quality and something to look up to. Try see some Japanese and Italian, and some French, German, Russian, Indian (Indian arthouse, not Bollywood or Tollywood crap), Swedish etc... films. There is much less of a focus on tricks/grading/CGI and more on stories than the Hollywood machine. However, the separation of the background from the foreground is am important part of telling a story. And here, the 21mm sensor of the GH13/17 and the 35mm of the 5D/7D offers more artistic freedom than the 1/2-inch sensor of the EX1/3

5. Artifacts/moire/rolling shutter - the GH13/17 is better than the 5D/7D in this respect. Not sure about the FS100 artifacts. I have heard that the superflat Technicolor profile reduces moire and artifacts tremendously - but I have not tested it myself.

I have seen some reviews of the FS100 and some footage from the camera. It does seem impressive.

Perhaps I can qualify this statement to say that the best value (bang/buck) would be the GH13/17 body (Made in Japan 2010 or 2011) with c-mount lenses for under 1K

Or the T2i with the magic lantern hack. It can increase the bitrate and offer peaking, histograms etc. Basically CHDK for DSLRs. And it offers something very interesting - a programmable rack focus setting. Its worth buying (700USD w/ kit lens) just for the rack focus feature.

When the FS100 has been reviewed and tested more, we can review this statement again.
The FS100 does not have f0.95 lenses - neither does it have the latitude of a 100mbps compression to avoid artifacts. The FS100 has the same sensor size as the APS-C - but less photosites, and the fastest lens under 1K is a 50/55/58mm f1.2 The fastest "normal" lens is a Sigma 30mm f1.4 That means it has to be (1.4/0.94)^2 ~ 2.25 better in low light to match the GH13/17 with the f0.95 lens. (Remember f-stops work on a square scale)

At this time, I feel that I do not need the 5D and can replace this with Standard 2,2,-2,-2 or 2,2,0,-2 (Emory) settings and the 100 mbps hack with Auto ISO and the f0.95 lens in low light.

Its mainly the edges. Lets say you are going from white to black in infinite shades of grey. The GH1 with its 8-bit all the way processing will have 255 values.
The Canon will have 2^8*2^6 value sampled (14-bit processing). Then these are processed and applied to a 2^8 colorspace. So it can capture the subtle shades of color much better. As a comparison, film has theoretically infinite range of color and substantially higher dynamic range.

The dynamic range is basically the range of light intensity that can be caught on the sensor. The range from direct sunlight to pitch black. Due to a better sensor and the 14-bit processing, the Canons do a better job.

To the eye, the GH1 image will look sharper out of the camera, compared to the Canons. However, this sharpness breaks down when you try to do some color grading. The Canons hold up much better.

You can apply a very small edge gaussian blur to soften the GH1 image without losing too much detail though.

So the Canons only make sense if you want to color grade the final image, and want to use the auto rack focus feature of the t2i (and possibly 60d).

If this is your first camera, buy the GH1 with the kit lens 14-140mm. Sell the kit lens on ebay, and for the same price buy the Olympus 14-54mm f2.8 lens with the Panasonic 4/3 adapter. Use the 100mbps hack for low light and the stable lpowell settings for well lit or brightly lit surroundings. Use Nostalgic -2,-2,-2,-2 for all shots. For extreme low light where you will see banding or fpn use Auto ISO Fixed shutter (1/25 1/50 or 1/30 1/60 as needed) Standard 2,2,-2,-2 (my settings) or Creative Movie Mode Standard 2,2,0,-2 (Emory's settings)

Never EVER use NR settings at anything different from -2

Try to get a 2010,2011 Made in Japan body. There is a greater chance of a body with lower fpn. Key word is chance! Thats all you really need.

Oly 14-54 has relative fast AF but slower than m43 lenses. Noisy AF and MF. No OIS. I tried Panasonic 14-50mm f/2.8-3.5 on GH2. Extremely slow AF. Noisy AF. Very good OIS. I heard Oly 50mm/2.0 is slow and noisy AF.

43 lenses... I don't know. I'd rather get a set of fast legacy lenses and convenient m43 lenses.

Speaking of dynamic range on under-$10K video cameras, Zacuto recently released Part One of its "2011 Great Camera Shootout". I found the dynamic range and latitude charts of the AF100 and Canon 7D quite interesting:

http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/250/the-great-camera-shootout-2011-part-1