Emanuel

Scarlet? What Scarlet?
3K for 3K aside, now converted as 4K4all (the only point is that's a bit late actually...) Scarlet doesn't exist. There is Mini-Epic or, better put, RED. Once Epic Dragon, whatever is, will be converted soon in Weapon. That's the actual truth.
BTW, RED One was a prototype. Sold to thousands of developers or beta testers who rather than to be paid for, paid the R&D. A couple of big names (v.g. Peter Jackson, Steven Soderbergh) as forfait of their own name and reputation, but probono. The deal comprehended to inscribe their lettering in the history of 4K acquisition.
People always forget RED is more than a camera company, they are simply the best dream sellers the industry has ever met. With a little bit but significant difference, they sell real IQ + QC based on supply and demand.
PS: Last but not least, ...with success as usual.
 
 

LOL On target. The point in behalf of 4K adoption. Anyway. Bitrate is much important than apparently seems. Especially if your target is a bigger screen. And for certain 8-bit hassles for sure. No one here is in love with low bit depth. It is much more to try to survive with.
There's something some of you tend to neglect. High-end is done with well-fed crews, lots of resources, etc. Which means to make poorer the scope of your communication because your audience becomes wider and you'll need to reach a much larger group of people to pay the bill of your investors. Most part of these viewers with no much more than basic visual literacy. I will only give you an example though. Who from here knows José Padilha, the guy who made the last Robocop and the most recent Netflix series Narcos*? Have you ever seen his Bus 174 masterpiece? (the guy weren't born inside the mainstream)
- E :-)
 
* as producer, the first two episodes as director

For some reason, Ursa Mini is 3x the weight of the other... (and so on)

Reason why the external 4:2:2 recording route is the best option available to avoid 8-bit banding. No matter the allergy of a bunch towards low bit depth. This will never happen without new hardware which depends on other variables. Go figure, when the new 4K in-camera from Sony overheats... Packaged in their mirrorless full frame form factor, versus the much smaller BMPCC's sensor size. Apart the fact, Samsung is the only one to enable H.265 acquisition for the simple reason they have no high-end to protect. That is, if we want a solution for real, get that one your hands can reach. If we want a realistic approach, of course, other than wishful thinking on forums.

Of course, variables count. We can't live without them. The same way there'll always be higher bitrate if we change from 4:2:0 to 4:2:2, obviously. On that test, can the difference between codecs, bitrate, etc bring the "whole" difference there? As sunyata wrote three times, maybe. No trouble to second it. Why shouldn't we? What do we have here? Two different teams pretending to themselves their shirt is prettier than the other side? Your loved doll (higher bit depth) is not less mine. Who can say differently? Who would go from Alexa to 8-bit? C'mon.
My beef is with the misconception only 10-bit is the miracle to save your footage from 8-bit banding. This is inaccurate. Countless examples going to the big screen since film has been replaced there (no one is saying it beats film or you said someone said). Dogma falling down? Is that the problem? Something different to believe? And that test fits the case. Beyond 4:2:2 vs 10-bit (a less careful reading has brought your light approach and carefree misinterpretation on the topic of the discussion), with higher bitrate, yeah, better codec and so on. Beware, the devil is in the details.
In behalf of the topic here, ML hack proves these capture devices can top other than the crippled 4:2:0 offer. For some reason, they don't implement it in their more affordable line. OP and article's point. Very accurate BTW.

I am glad Olympus keeps improving video. If the next upgrade improves the resolution then it would be a very nice package for handheld shots. Sony cannot match the "god-mode" ibis that Olympus provides.

Since I'm a hybrid shooter, this is very interesting to me. The EM5ii, is starting to look like a viable option for me now. I just wish they could add at least some time limited 4K, maybe like Panasonic did with LX100. Obviously this would be very useful for filming in certain scenarios, but also a 4K photo mode would be very welcome.

Of course, variables count. We can't live without them. The same way there'll always be higher bitrate if we change from 4:2:0 to 4:2:2, obviously. On that test, can the difference between codecs, bitrate, etc bring the "whole" difference there? As sunyata wrote three times, maybe. No trouble to second it. Why shouldn't we? What do we have here? Two different teams pretending to themselves their shirt is prettier than the other side? Your loved doll (higher bit depth) is not less mine. Who can say differently? Who would go from Alexa to 8-bit? C'mon.
My beef is with the misconception only 10-bit is the miracle to save your footage from 8-bit banding. This is inaccurate. Countless examples going to the big screen since film has been replaced there (no one is saying it beats film or you said someone said). Dogma falling down? Is that the problem? Something different to believe? And that test fits the case. Beyond 4:2:2 vs 10-bit (a less careful reading has brought your light approach and carefree misinterpretation on the topic of the discussion), with higher bitrate, yeah, better codec and so on. Beware, the devil is in the details.
In behalf of the topic here, ML hack proves these capture devices can top other than the crippled 4:2:0 offer. For some reason, they don't implement it in their more affordable line. OP and article's point. Very accurate BTW.

Who said 4:2:2 is more important than 10-bit? The difference between 8-bit 4:2:2 and 8-bit 4:2:0, it is more significant for your grading. Much different statement. Of course, for certain type of grading. No mention of raw or alike where even 10-bit is short by default. People too much focused on the 10-bit holy grail tend to forget ; ) But, banding was the topic (hence my "the-real-difference" of my post; numbers help but like machines need i-n-t-e-r-p-r-e-t-a-t-i-o-n :-D) :
http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/9390-sony-a7s-ii-is-out/?do=findComment&comment=106562
Speaking of math, let's see with a very simple case: 1) 100,000; 2) 1,000,000; 3) 10,000,000. Where's the bigger difference? Now, take these figures as bucks and your single expense as any number between 100,000 and 1,000,000. Which step will make the whole difference?
Here goes your single example on pictures, posted and reposted more than once:
http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/9355-canon-announces-development-of-8k-cinema-eos-camera-and-120mp-dslr/?do=findComment&comment=105935

So, we have here a very demanding viewer... LOL : )
You are right. This or that camera can give you less than what you're looking for.
But.
There's no 'pictures' without post. This doesn't exist. And if exists, you can't complain. Much effort on post is mandatory. And that is the territory where you can provide the deterritorialization for reterritorialization* of your material, as you wish (e.g. that Japanese sample/video). For a simple reason, flat is higher because comprehends the wider. Hence the fashionable logs nowadays. Straight out of the box means nothing. What are we expecting for? Godard said motion picture is the truth 24 frames a second. He was right but only in a half. The other half is that actually is a big lie whatever frames you decide to tell.
How can't they give you what you're looking for? Trust me, you're just looking for a decent capture device and post. It is useless to say I like this or that camera in a way or another. The best you can say to yourself is if that camera is decent for your purpose/proposal or not. Believe me that you'll find a lot of decent cameras in the track. The trouble is when we blame technology when this one is already available. It only requires much work to find out the best balance and know-how from all of it. No teal + orange stamp (others would call it look of their own which makes them happy with) will affect the countless options on your choices of and for your set(up).
BTW, Ed is very good & versatile.
E :-)
 
*
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deterritorialization
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reterritorialization

Have you followed the basic example I posted up there? (I mean, the A-B-C case). That's the whole point.
In any case, I bet the new BMD cameras will stop the usual whining on 10-bit like a savior mantra.
HDCAM was 8-bit 3:1:1 and all that began the replacement of film for digital. Anything higher is better, yes, but the difference can be pointless or of lower importance when you're able to rid off banding when necessary. No need for an Uzi to hunting birds.
PS: IIRC, it was ProRes and not uncompressed. The comparison is still worthy.

PS: In any case, if you want to "blame" the codec or bitrate for the bigger difference, be my guest. I don't see where this doesn't match the discussion. Your 10-bit request is far away to be mandatory to kill banding. You just need the right balance of some variables. If you read what I'm used to post in these boards, that fits perfectly the equation. Let's not stuck up in our own likings and pay attention to facts with an open mind instead. 10-bit is just a number as any other.

You said it is "not as conclusive as I would like to" based on apparent conclusive stuff. Actually, it is not (as my previous post allegations can detail).
At least, we can agree on the sum up, very well. But please don't tell me I don't much like sunyata's test. Even though, his failed introduction as me and other two posters were able to point out. When finally served for something worthy (you call it better, I would say complementary entry), it is welcome and taken as valid. Except it doesn't touch the other one nor the points observed. The only remark in your behalf is exactly the complementary nature of those other variables beyond the basics 8-bit vs 10-bit dichotomy. And when I see people to still pop up to underestimate 8-bit, I just see the need to reiterate it.
And your point now is? :-)

Mate, so you decide to be my tutor and correct my nonstandard English? LOL C'mon, give a break to your own sanity for your own sake. Yes, it happens people to have some other mother tongue. Your point is? I guess I've just started to repeat myself. We had crossed each other in some other thread earlier today, isn't it? Let me see, the discussion let you move it to here?! ;-) For the sake of your spontaneous invectives, who wrote "the single credible authority on cinematography"?? You : P And don't be disrespectful with EOSHD or you are with every single member used to post here. Go figure if someone would dare to subjectively criticize your own. Ad hominem atacks are a very dirty sport to begin with. They tell a lot about the quality of the man behind an alias. My name and background is in my signature. Yours? Who is the man I have now the commission to chat with? Be a gentleman to this community and reach me on my PM box. You can try to send your message in my native language in order to clear up the things a little bit to me... haha

No. That statement is inaccurate. You've disagreed, true. But, far away to be me to be emotional on that. You've just started to discredit that test (not even mine) because didn't serve your higher bit depth claim. "Baseless assertions" were not mine, pal. My "holier-than-thou" expression as you say now is written in some other (figurative speech) context and in some other thread where here you kept going your crusade over the messenger. We, me and other posters of your side, were even capable to conclude it there. Not exactly agreeing to disagree. Go there and take a second glance on topic. There's much to read.

Mate, so you decide to be my tutor and correct my nonstandard English? LOL C'mon, give a break to your own sanity for your own sake. Yes, it happens people to have some other mother tongue. Your point is? I guess I've just started to repeat myself. We had crossed each other in some other thread earlier today, isn't it? Let me see, the discussion let you move it to here?! ;-) For the sake of your spontaneous invectives, who wrote "the single credible authority on cinematography"?? You : P And don't be disrespectful with EOSHD or you are with every single member used to post here. Go figure if someone would dare to subjectively criticize your own. Ad hominem atacks are a very dirty sport to begin with. They tell a lot about the quality of the man behind an alias. My name and background is in my signature. Yours? Who is the man I have now the commission to chat with? Be a gentleman to this community and reach me on my PM box. You can try to send your message in my native language in order to clear up the things a little bit to me... haha

OUCH. What a bunch of losers we all are.

?

I'd rather get the camera in the hands of more people which inevitably means more creative content that will show off the technology rather than the community be a bunch of stuck-up entitled assholes who think they're better than everyone else.
PS.  I drive a 911 and I think Caymans and Boxsters are great cars and they don't "dilute" the Porsche brand.  
High-and-mighty people ruin it for owner communities.  

don't talk about gh4 nor A7S 2 , same stuff, just enjoy this simple video recorded in Full HD prores HQ on the 4K mini Ursa (not the 4,6K 15 stops version, so let's imagine)...RED and Alexa or not so far this time...
 

Blackmagic ursa mini 4K starts at only 2800€, this time we play in the big guys yard.

I want a camera that renders like that kodak scan.

the reason there is no difference is because you are using a grayscale image so there is only luma information in your image so nothing gets subsampled.
It is the foundation of how chroma subsampling works:
"Chroma subsampling is the practice of encoding images by implementing less resolution for chroma information than for luma information, taking advantage of the human visual system's lower acuity for color differences than for luminance"
only color information gets discarded when using chroma subsampling, in your images there is none.
4:2:0 4:2:2 4:4:4
^ first number is the luma component, as you can see there is no reduction no matter the chroma subsampling.

http://admiringlight.com/blog/the-sliding-scale-of-camera-capabilities/
That applies 100% to video. 

Interesting to see how Canon was a killer, democratizing the industry for stills and then for video (5D2) by releasing affordable devices with pro features. 
Such a shame it is not the case anymore. What changed at Canon? 
All of this because of their Cine line   I hate it, and hate all of you who are buying C100, C300, C500 that make money to Canon and make them cripple the 7Ds/5Ds bodies for us non professional ... 
Without this Cine line, we would get a 5D4 with 4K with great bitrate and Canon Log - DPAF and so on.......
I still think 5D4 will have 4K unlike many of you (don't imagine how a body can come in 2016 without 4K, that would be non imaginable) when even iPhones get 4K. 
But it will probably a 5D3 like video, which means not clean, poor bitrate, no HFR, ...
Anyway. 

I wonder how they will call it. Red-uzi, pistol, knife, bonebreaker, baseballbat, shrepnell...