Canon recommends that a video camcorder is better. HDDSLR video can be amazing, but the basic camera does not come video ready as a camcorder does, rather, its just a small piece of a system needed to produce movies for the big screen or television programs and commercials.
I'm quite the noob when it comes to this, so all help will be appreciated
EDIT: I also want to keep in mind the quality in "low light" environments.
I'd figure spending at least 3-5X times the cost of the body to add all the other needed equipment that will make the video live up to its potential. You will get better video with a good camcorder for less money at the low end.
One other reason for HDDSLR video is when you have only one camera and want to take a quick video on the spur of the moment. It might not be pro quality, but having the capability to capture something is nice.
Not exactly sure what you're trying to imply, but I have my mind set on a 60D. I'm going to use it to make short films (like the one in my above post) for YouTube. At this point I just need to figure out my lenses (also mentioned in my above post).
Of course "Canon recommends" you buy their 6000-10000 dollar video cameras, which don't do as well in low light, have no depth of field control, and generally look like a reality show no matter how you use them. The DSLR's aren't perfect, but this idea that you need to build a huge rig around one for it to be usable is simply false. You see a lot more DSLR's in production than you'll ever see Canon camcorders.