I am skeptical that the new Red Scarlet or the higher end Red Epic are of much interest to still photography, except perhaps for frame grabbing for high speed action photography.

For a rumored $3,000, the Scarlet offers a 2/3" format sensor: about 6.6x8.8mm and 11mm diagonal. This is at the upper end of compact digicam sensor format sizes, one fourth the sensor area of the smallest DSLR format.

By the way, do not get confused by the talk of the "full frame 35mm format sensor" in the higher end Red Epic: that refers to 35mm movie format, 24.4×13.7mm, roughly like most mainstream DSLR sensors, but the Epic is far more expensive and bulky than such DSLRs.

I wonder how long it will be until RED releases a 24x36mm "Epic++" camera. There are even cameras with larger sensors than "full frame" 35mm film (in this case, 65mm).

Back on topic, I agree that these cameras won't put DSLRs out of business in the near future. But with things changing as quickly as they do in this field, who knows about several years from now?

It will never happen. Not even the existing higher end digital movie systems have gone beyond the 35mm movie film format of about 13x24mm, for good reasons. That format is entrenched through vast collections of very expensive motion picture camera lenses, and a move against the dominant technological trend of size and weight reduction is particularly unlikely with movie cameras, with the movie world's interest in constant maximum f-stop lenses with big telephoto zoom ranges and long reach. These would become far heavier and more expensive if the focal lengths and aperture diameters were increased by a factor of about 1.5. Larger apertures sizes would be needed, because using a larger format with longer lenses of the same aperture size is rather pointless for movies: it simply forces the use of higher f-stops and higher ISO speeds, more or less neutralizing any advantage at the relatively low resolutions needed for moving pictures compared to still pictures.

For movies on film, there does exist a far tinier market for larger formats like 70mm (does any movie maker use that any more?) and IMAX, but I confidently predict that for digital, such prints will be made from high resolution 35mm format (13x24mm) sensors. In fact, some probably already are; surely the recent trend of IMAX versions of some blockbusters uses prints made from the standard "footage" ("gigabyteage"?) recorded on 35mm movie gear (film or digital), rather than having massive IMAX cameras working in parallel on the set.

im currently at the NAB show in Las Vegas and have visited the RED booth several times and played with the RED One quite a bit. Its a big piece of kit once its fully rigged for use. Similar to a motion picture film camera like an ARRI 235 or 416 etc.

I also went to a private demo of Scratch ( http://www.studiodaily.com/main/news/9324.html ) software that processes the red raw files. I played around with that too. The files are superb. They look quite similar to Canon DSLR files in the way of color depth and leeway in processing. Noise performance is OK, the Canon mark 3's and 5D do beat it, specially when the Canons are used in low iso. The Red shoots native at iso 320. Can the stills be used for large prints? Absolutely!! IF your subject stays still, otherwise you do have motion blur. Just like any video or motion picture camera. BUT I saw a camera by P+S thats called the weisscam, o man, high speed digital at 2k resolution. http://www.weisscam.com/ UNBELIVABLE footage, does make some killer frames. VERY expensive.

Isn't the Weisscam a rejigged version based on the Silicon Imaging Digital Cinema camera that hails out of Costa Mesa, CaliFORNia? http://www.siliconimaging.com

Probably is. I also saw quite a bit of SI 2K's around too although few wisscams however.