Repair or replace? If replace, HD now or not yet?

Question

I have been happily doing semi-pro-level video for a variety of applications (nature scenes for a series of commercial "sorta music video" DVDs, documentary-like stuff, weddings, and anything else that comes my way) for seven years with my primary and beloved camera being a Canon XV2 (Japanese model #, but same as GL2 in the U.S.).  Since I live in Japan and have no car, that camera is the right compromise between pro features and small size, and I was able to afford it - most stuff I do for free, so my budget is limited.  I've had two intermittent problems with it (dirty heads symptoms when heads are not dirty, even just after repair, and an occasional "Eject the tape" demand), and have had a few repairs on it, but was not planning on getting new equipment for another couple years at least.  But last week, five minutes before the beginning of a wedding, the zoom on it flaked out - probably an electronic problem.  I swapped it with my second camera that was planned as unmanned and survived the wedding, but now I have a dilemma.  First of all, I'm asking myself if I should  put more money into repair of this camera (especially when I haven't been impressed with Canon's ability to solve my other problems!), or buy a new one.  And if I buy a new one, should I just get another GL2/XV2, since it is what I am familiar with?  (I was surprised to see that it is not only still being made, but it appears to be the #1 prosumer camera out there, even after over seven years on the market.)  Or since I don't replace cameras often, would I be crazy in 2009 to buy a new camera that cannot do HD?
I have not studied the new HD phenomenom in depth, but my impression is that so far the manufacturers have not come up with a way to store HD that works well for prosumer-level editing in Premiere Pro.  I assume the real pro cameras do something different, but as far as I can tell, in my price range I have to choose between HDV (compress like I would for a DVD before I even start editing? that doesn't sound right!) or AVCDV (even worse).  I see some buzz about HDMI output direct to some external device, but not only are such devices pricey, but I haven't found any explanation of how I'm supposed to do that on a hike, for example (carry the storage device and a car battery in a backpack or something?).  Diving with my camera would be even trickier (what all would I have to put in that underwater housing??).  Also, it seems that there is not just one HD, but many different resolutions that are all called HD.  Finally, when I look for HD cameras in the prosumer range, I just don't see anything - it's either consumer toys or $5000 monsters.  So I had decided that HD isn't mature yet, and that DVDs will still be around for awhile before they are consumed by Blu-Ray, so I'll just keep shooting SD with my old cameras until the industry figures out what they're doing.  But then my XV2 breaks...
Another issue of purchasing a different camera is the ripple effect.  I use my XV2 on a tripod that balances just right (it doesn't have a sliding mount, so it needs to balance) and on a Steadicam JR sometimes.  If I get an HD camera that has 3 CCDs of a decent size (I don't want to lose the good low lux ability of the XV2) and a good zoom lens (I use all 20X of the XV2's zoom on a regular basis), I'll probably need to buy a bigger tripod for starters.  Then I don't know if the camera will be too heavy for my little Steadicam... or for my arm trying to hold the Steadicam with the camera and counterweight - I'm not a bodybuilder, but a 130 lb., 48-year-old woman.  I suspect HD would also demand about 5 times as much computer as I have now... the list of potential dominos goes on.
I've never written to the Lounge before, but this seems like the right place to solicit opinions about the life expectancy of SD and DVD vs. the incoming HD and Blu-Ray generation, the wisdom of repairing vs. replacing (if I give the camera to Canon, they will probably charge me to look at it, even before they know what it would cost to get it fixed, and the other intermittent problems would still exist), and any other topics you feel are relevent.  I have "champagne tastes on a beer budget", so I would love to get thoughts both from those of you doing pro work (my champagne tastes) and amateur (beer budget).  Let's chat!

Answer 1

Thanks for your thoughts, Curt.  By the way, kudos for the tutorial videos you made a few years back - they were a great help to me when I was learning PPro and related stuff (or was that back in the days before they put the word "Pro" on it - I can't remember).  Anyway, they were well done.
Yesterday I did more internet research and discovered great news - my camera's failure is quite common (discussion here), and caused by only a failed zoom rocker switch (the rocker overrides the buttons on the handle and the LANC port, so it seems like a more fundamental problem).  Someone also posted careful instructions and photos for disassembling the camera and replacing the zoom rocker unit (which is rumored to cost only $13 plus shipping in the U.S.).  I don't yet know how I'll get the part here in Japan (where companies seem to try to prevent DIY), but I disconnected my rocker's cable for now, which enables me to use either the buttons or my Varizoom in the LANC port.  What a relief!  I was worried that the problem was the main circuit board of the camera, which, along with Canon's labor costs, might have been a painful bill for an old camera.  But your vote of confidence in a seven-year-old camera's continued usefulness was encouraging enough that even if it hadn't been as simple as it turned out to be, I probably still would have sent it in for repair.
Thanks for your comments on HD as well.  Just yesterday I ran across a great review of the XH-A1 and then read the specs - it does seem to be the closest thing to a "HD version of the GL2".  But you gave me new information that wasn't obvious: that it can shoot in SD also.  When I read the specs, I could see choices of different HD resolutions and frame speeds, but 720x480 29.97fps was not mentioned (I guess it's just not that interesting to people).  So I thought I'd have to shoot in HDV and convert the video later to SD, which would surely been messier than native SD.  I am currently working on a series of DVD products for which I will continue to shoot SD for a couple more years, so even if I had bought an HD camera, SD capability would be important to me.
So, are you happy with the quality of HDV?  After having it pounded into me that it's a no-no to compress (very much, anyway) anything that will get edited later (whether it's photos, audio, or video), I couldn't believe my ears a few months ago when I first heard what HDV is - that the video is getting compressed to the same degree that it would be compressed for putting on a DVD (MPEG-2), before it even gets out of the camera!  I ran the other way and decided that the manufacturers were simply desperate to please clueless consumers.  But now I am seeing that even pros are using that format (imagine a puzzled look on my face).  Do you think HDV is here to stay, or is it an interim measure until higher density tapes are invented or flash memory gets cheap enough to hold uncompressed or only lightly compressed (like DV-AVI level) video in the camera?