But inadequacy for 'client work' is a generality that, I don't believe, is accurate. I've made the statement before; when major studios are using DSLRs for high budget productions they can't be all that bad.
Ok. I should have said 'mid level client' work. DSLR work well for 'ducks in the park' and also 'high budget' when you have cine lenses and a puller working from marks, and an external sound guy.
A 'mid level' solo op doing his own focus and sound trying to work with a DSLR can often fall over. Thas is not about image quality, just practicality, monitoring etc.
Also the 'high budget' pick them from a stable of cameras when appropriate to certain shots, for example (prescient in this case?) I believe Shane Halibut used mainly 5ds on his recent film, but switched to (chemical) film for the air to air work?
There are shooting situations where the 1dx probably beasts the alexa - (the dark) so it would be an appropriate choice whatever the budget but the 'mid level client' jobs the operator is generally not choosing from a stable of cameras..
I feel a DSLR is not the best all round tool for video. Is that balanced and fair?