No great surprise I'd imagine, Arri are developing a 4K camera.

Arri's Managing Director: HD Is 'Dumbed Down' to Make 4K Look Good (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/behind-screen/arris-managing-director-hd-is-578724)

Yeah, it was only a matter of time.

I kinda like how he is like "We're working on a 4K camera, but honestly, 4K isn't that big of a deal by itself."

And I personally have to agree with him. I saw Hugo on the large screen & it was shot in 1080p. If you didn't tell me it was shot in 1080p I wouldn't of known. If you said it was 3k or 4k, I probably would've believed you.

Resolution isn't everything.

First I totally agree that resolution is only one part of the whole image quality equation. For many productions it is probably not the most important factor. I would put noise and dynamic range ahead of resolution.

But, I've seen many examples of well shot 4K projected on large screens in 4K and it can be breathtaking. The best I've seen so far was the Premiere night screening of "After Earth" in 4K at the Paramount Theatre during Cinegear. This was amazing to watch. In the wide panoramas and rain forest shots you could look way into the distance and still see individual leaves on the trees. Many scenes felt more 3D than many 3D films. In the last couple of years, many of the times I've been to the cinema to watch a movie I've come away disappointed with the movie experience, it's often no better than the quality i watch at home. But After Earth was an eyeopener. If all movies looked like this I'd be happy to pay to go and many watch movies in the cinema.The look of After Earth was interesting. It didn't look like film, but it didn't look like video either, it was a new look that I have to say I really liked. Clean, high contrast, amazing clarity and great dynamic range, it did remind me to some degree of Super Panavision, but with less noise and grain.

So while resolution is only a part of the equation, all else being equal, I'd much rather watch a 4K movie than a 2K one.

I kinda like how he is like "We're working on a 4K camera, but honestly, 4K isn't that big of a deal by itself."
Well, he's right of course - but it's a bit of silly argument. Nobody's saying "all that matters is 4K, to hell with everything else". For the top end productions then of course frame rate is important, of course dynamic range is important, of course good skin tones are important - but really, so is resolution as well.

It doesn't have to be an either/or choice, as he seems to imply. I tend to read it as though Arri have been caught napping by the growth of interest in 4k, and PR has a lot to do with what he says.