Once the punters are sitting in the theatre/loungeroom, none of this stuff matters at all. Is the story compelling? Do the images tell the story? I've done a number of edits recently shot on both 5Ds and RED Ones, and whilst they all "looked cool", none of them really did a very good job of conveying the narrative, because the DP had pretty much made himself a kick ass showreel instead of empowering the director to tell the story. If it suited the story, you could use a VHS-C camera. Not sure how many stops they have..........
This is becoming just like the AVID v FCP arguments, when people are watching the stuff we all make, they just don't care, what they care about is the story, the photography is there to serve the story, it isn't the story in and of itself.
I am hating dealing with 5D footage though. H264 is a great delivery format, not so much on the production side.
To me, the 2/3 Scarlett is kinda like a digital 16mm cam, not suited for everything, but very versatile, smaller than a 35 and produces images that can tell a story in an aesthetically pleasing way. Different to 35, or full frame, but does that make it worse? I think that would be an opinion surely.
I love the shallow DOF look, but I have to say (as have a few clients) I'm getting over it at the moment, especially the 5D stuff, that seems it's only trick.