Saturday Night Live uses Canon DSLRs and the XF305 for many of the out of studio skits. Those cameras all work for broadcast. If it's good enough for them, I think it's good enough for most other users with either systems.
I think a lot of this depends on what is a raw file?
Will a flat motion jpeg color grade and crush and color as well as a raw file from a RED even if the Canon goes from 4:2:0 to 4:2:2?
And the biggest question is why can't Canon, or anyone other than Arri, Phantom and RED make a raw file in video/cinema cameras?
Don't get me wrong, I think the 5d2 is pretty amazing, when the light gets low, I find it less intriguing as a main A camera good light quantity scene.
Two weeks ago we had two scenes that just could not be shot with our REDs and even the Sony FS100. The RED's were just too obvious noisy at the iso needed and the FS100 with the DB bumped to it's limit blows the highlights.
The 5d2 remarkably held the highlights and got the shot, actually two very low light shots, that in review would have taken hours to craft the light for the same effect, but instead just took a laptop screen for a key, small turned down lcds for fill and accents. It's still kind of mind blowing when I look at those images and think how good they look.
I look forward to the 5d3, will obviously buy one or two, but would be much more impressed if it shot raw and had better sound controls.
Speaking of the FS100 to me it's almost the perfect form function and weight, and has a series of user defined presets, some which mimic the technicolor cinetone, though don't really add that much once we start grading as you have to decide which way you want to go, holding highlights, crushing blacks, but not open shadows and highlight recovery.
Also as much as I like the idea of presets you always know it's cooked into the file. Under the pressure of production where time is limited, light is changing, color and tone is very scene dependent, it kind of puts some sweat in the palms knowing that once shot, the image is cooked.
Regardless of the form factor and sound issues of the 5d2, it's still an amazing camera given the fact it never was designed for high quality video.
Anyway I find it a little strange that Canon came out with the first full frame still camera that shot raw and jpeg and dominated the still market, but in video just stumbled on a camera with the live view of the 5d2 that could be the same dominate motion camera given just a few additions.
Nikon is even more puzzling as they just seem to do the head in the sand thing, thinking video might not be that important.