Lee Saxon
Well-known member
Mike you are comparing Aluminum Epic Dragon to Carbon Epic Dragon. The Weapon is Magnesium vs Carbon. The price difference is not in the materials. The majority of the difference in price is in the electronics between the MG and Carbon bodies. 8K works just fine in the magnesium bodies, I have one at NAB that I have been shooting with. If you hate CF for whatever reason, I can build you a 8K MG Weapon but the cost is going to be about the same.
Magnesium costing about the same as Carbon makes sense to me, but the model differentiation strategy behind that choice doesn't.
The only difference in Aluminum Epic and Carbon Epic was the body. It was a choice between "cheap but heavy" and "light but expensive." That made sense to me.
Now we've got two different sets of internals (ie two different cameras) AND two different body options...but both are "light but expensive" choices.
So why not both MG or both CF? In what situations would one or the other be preferable? And if those situations are compelling enough to offer the choice, and the cost of either choice is about the same, why tie one to the lower-end Weapon and one to the higher-end rather than offering the "pick your body" approach of Epic?
And why break module compatibility between the DSMC lines? You've mentioned a credit to ease the pain of that change for upgraders, which I think is very nice, but you haven't addressed (that I've seen) why you made the change? I bet there are a ton of Epic and even Scarlet owners (maybe even a majority of them) who would love to have the Base Expander, just to name one example.