Industry holds Arri color science above all others. Even when Red and others were shooting higher than 2k images, people preferred to shoot Arri for the color.

Arri was quite proud of their RAW format. I was told that on top of the price of the camera body, it was $20k to license the RAW format for the camera. Their RAW format was a sequence of frames that used the frame number derived from timecode appended to the filename. Had a strange situation with a client's Arri RAW footage. Typically, the camera's timecode is set to time of day. However, this particular day the camera op failed to do this. During one of the shots, the timecode rolled over "midnight" so the 23:59:59:23 timecode had a frame number of 2073599, but the very next frame 00:00:00:00 has a frame number of 0000000. Importing the footage broke this shot into 2 pieces. The last half of the shot showed up as the very first file in the imports, and the first half showed up as the last. RAW formats that are saved into a container format avoids this.

TR;DR camera peeps love Arri, post peeps have other opinions

All that color science just for some lazy editor to drop a blue LUT over it and make everything nice and drab and samey.

An editor isn't the one who picks the direction of the color grading. A--wait for it--director is.

The idea that an editor is "lazy" for doing what they're told to do by the director and DP is pretty offensive.

Some editors are chosen for their creative input. Sometimes it is the editor that convices a director, but it's often a collaboration. Editors are part of the creative team of a production compared to just a grunt level worker. The director, DP, and editor can all collaborate so that the image is conevying the desired feel to match the story and vision. Or so the theory goes.

Absolutely. But within epsilon of zero editors on a real production are just having it dumped in their lap without direction. It's a collaborative thing at best and the post to which I replied is the same sort of sneer-at-the-grunts attitude that makes people lecture the Starbucks worker for company policy.

Definitely not unique to video.

People are happy to take a Leica camera and then apply the same Kodak Portra colour filter that every influencer seems to use.

At the directors approval

The really interesting part is that ARRI Alexa was pretty much the #1 camera in Hollywood but Netflix won't accept it because it's not 4K.

Alexa is a camera line/category, not a specific camera.

The original Alexa, yes, but that's from 2010.

The last generation Alexa Mini too.

To OP’s point it’s shortsighted they’d accept a Mark I FS7 vs. nearly any image any Alexa has ever produced. The extra .8k it lacks on paper is more than made up in overall image quality.

I guess this list is not exhaustive or they are more flexible with their major films, because of the Netflix films that I've heard of from 2021 some were shot with the Alexa Mini, which isn't on the list. One was shot partly on Betamax, partly on super 8 film.