Initially responded to why HD over SD. Not as science but as a way of getting budgets. Not from other DP's but from agencies. If now into theory... what about recording at 125-140 megabits on HDCAM as opposed to 50 mbs on the SDX 900? Also SDX 900 640 ASA? I've shot w/it numerous times. Did not notice it being twice as fast as F/900. My silly LCD/Plasma in the home reference refers to what I see when I watch television. Lower mbs more squares (digital info) I see. Thus when I'm messin w/ black gamma's, y gamma, knee, color, etc., my recording rate is handling that information. It's there before the downconvert. Lines of resolution no longer a factor but the look I manipulated is getting there. Yes downconverted. Again I don't have a film projector in my house. Why shoot film?
I do agree they're are amazing SD cameras out there. I still have to use them. I think panasonic has totally kicked butt in that department. And although the SDX is a sweet camera, it's time to trade it in for the HDX 900. I shot recently 2 weeks at the Daytona 500. Think I saw a hand full of SD cameras. HD cameras everywhere.