The AG-AF101 has an excellent feature set and is definitely equipped for pro use; however, Panasonic's puzzling decision to go with the smaller micro-4/3rds format results in a whopping 2x crop-factor (as opposed to the 1.5x crop for the D7000) when using Nikkor lenses. Now, what I'm really looking forward to is Nikon's next FX-body with 1080p24 capability (although, I'll still be buying a D7000 when one becomes available).
The 24fps would mean something to the video-to-film transfer crowd, something that I suspect affects a very rarefied portion of the crowd reading this; I don't know that anyone here has transferred their video to film. OTOH, broadcasting frame rates would be far more interesting at 60fps or 30fps progressive or even 60 interlaced for more smoother action footage for NTSC or 25P or 50P or 50i for PAL, something many would really be able to sink their collective teeth into. I have had several shows on several different networks, and nary a one has cared a twit about 24P, but all have cared dearly about broadcast specifications. I know that NTSC is going the way of the dodo, in favor of ATSC, and that 24P is one of 18 specifications (of which standard definition is one), but more frames will yield smoother results, as will interlaced frames, too. The only reason I would really 'urge' someone to shoot 24P is for film transfer.
The Panasonic camera has multiple rates plus some variable rates many more options, too, plus professional audio and much more.
The Micro 4/3rds is still larger than standard 35mm projection film gauge, and would easily mimic the look if transferred. Naturally, one would have to use lenses at the focal length to the gauge sensor, but that's where the 4/3rds makes a lot of sense. There are dozens of lens choices available right now, and of course, adapters for Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Panasonic, Contax, Lecia, Zeiss, and Arri, the PL mounts, and "C" mounts, and more that I'm likely leaving out.
Getting great control is a matter of matching the lens to that smaller sensor. It may not be that terrific 50mm f1.2 that you have, but it could be just at a slightly different distance, and greater f-stop.
Interestingly enough, I think the real choices for DOF control need to be in normal and beyond. DOF isolation becomes particularly nice there; most wide choices are less demanding in routine film making.
Don't get me wrong, I would like to see all this and more on a DSLR, and that to have a Nikon label, but it doesn't seem to be happening. I'm not advocating that we don't, as a market, let up on Nikon, we should demand more from them, but I am suggesting that at some point film makers get realistic that there are much more economical good choices available to them that will do a better job than cobbling up a product that, at the end of the day, will likely cost much more and do much less.
My best to you all,