It sounds exciting and my group needs 4k solution but I will not be paying the *Canon premium. I get the feeling a lot of the pros feel the same. What is the target audience for this?
How is it a rip off / likely to be a rip off? because the C 300 is rumored to be $16k? and that's a rip off because the Red Scarlet package is $14k and offers 4K for 24/25fps? And I assume Alexa is a rip off because it is $60k and only offers 1080p, yes? same with F3, as with SLOG it sits closer to $18k (just for the body) and still only offers 1080p.
And yet, all of this aside, Cameras for film-making have never been cheaper than they are now. Not long ago were these tools well into the 6 figure range, and you're going to compare the cost of a Red Scarlet with Canon, claiming a ridiculous price point when Canon and Nikon revolutionized the film-making market by giving DSLRs fantastic video functionality, and keeping them under $6 grand. Why is a scarlet not considered a rip off when a 5dmkII is $2k? Well, because the scarlet is considered a better camera for quality and functionality. Well, why is a Nikon D3s twice as much as the 5dmkII? It's certainly not a better camera... but, its just another camera for another price. why is the Alexa not widely recognized as a rip off since scarlet offers so much more and is 1/4th as much? well, because Alexa is a brand name people value and trust more, and associate with being a better camera in terms of performance. However, is Alexa actually a better camera than Red? Or are you more willing to complain about the 2000 dollar up charge on a less impressive Canon product?
In the mist of this, through all tests and battles, the Alexa - the most expensive of the bunch - still comes out on top, heralded as the best camera for film / cinematic use. Furthermore, movies aren't even being projected in 4k publicly yet, so I find it difficult to understand how someone "needs" 4k to make a movie, when ultimately it will be scaled down for 1080p. Sure, it'll look great, but so far i haven't seen the public complain too much about the clarity in the movies they've been watching for the past 20 years. Buy what works for you from a company you trust and value. Enough people have complained about the functionality issues of the EPICs, but what can you expect with a new company making efforts to jump into advanced technological territory? Can you blame them? Afterall, if the Scarlet malfunctions on you during a scene, you can remind yourself and your crew that it was cheaper than the c300 and f3.
I'm not defending the power of the c300. As it stands, i'm not terribly interested in owning one. The Scarlet is a fantastic option too, but i'm not really interested in owning one either. Personally, I'd rather spend more and get the F3, because I know I'll have a sufficient product that will function well and produce a beautiful image. I'll also know that, should it have issues, I have multiple outlets to go to for repair or consultation.
Either way, at the end of the day, we have technology at our fingertips that are producing ground-breaking imagery for a fraction of the cost.. and believe it or not, they're all priced in a relatively similar gamut.
I personally doubt this DSLR, while offering 4k, will be more expensive than the c300 - as it still stands to be in the DSLR form factor and not it's own body type. but even if it is, let's say $10k, would that still be a rip off? It's cheaper than Scarlet.. but, will it produce a better image than scarlet?
Red certainly raised the stakes, and I absolutely respect the company for it. I applaud them. But do i think they set the bar for price standards and should-be's? Not at all. As a company, while they offer some serious product, they haven't earned the trust and value that consumers share in Canon or Nikon or Arri or Panavision or Sony as a whole. As a new freelance designer, photographer, or cinematographer.. even if you are capable of providing a more promising and impressive product than the renowned individuals in your field, do you deserve to set the bar for their rates? If you charge $20 an hour, while they charge $200 an hour for a less advanced or interesting result, are they now a widely recognized rip off? You'll certainly be the reason their prices come down as you grow in popularity.. but you'll have to earn that trust and respect of the many before you can stand at their competitive height. Your price often reflects your portfolio, client list, affiliations, and reputation. In time we'll see even more competitive pricing for similar product, but until then - gripe not with the cost of a product, but rather marvel at what we have access to for the general price points they exist.. and be happy you can be competitively creative like those you admire for a fraction of what it used to cost them.