Id like to offer a little perspective here.
HD is better then SD - EVERYTHING ELSE EQUAL (same skilled person, same lighting etc, same size chip)
2/3 chip is better then 1/3 chip - EVERYTHING ELSE EQUAL (both in sd or both in hd etc)
real 16x9 is better then letterbox - EVERYTHING ELSE EQUAL.
cheaper camera is better - EVERYTHING ELSE EQUAL
the list can go on. . .
of course no camera makes a filmmaker - but better, stronger tools improve a filmmakers toolbox and therefore give them the ability to make choices they couldnt before.
Its splitting hairs here really - more resolution is worse (ALL THINGS EQUAL) - of course not -
What format will you end up in SD, HD - when will HD take over - who cares really - pick the tool that suits your art, budget, technique for making money, techniques for pulling more money, gratifies you, makes you feel better then the next filmmaker - whatever goals you have -
Just go out and shoot.
And stop complaining that HD and cameras are all marketing drivel - that is how the world operates - why are there so many certification programs for programmers - do you really think answering a 6 hour test prooves someone is a better programmer - of course not ( I know from experience) - but the powers that be have marketed their stuff that way.
HD now has a cool factor with it - if you dont take advantage of that "cool factor" you have your head in the sand. - Of course on the other hand you shouldnt be ripping a filmmaker off shooting and charging for HD when they dont need or cant afford - A little common sense goes a long way.