EduPortas

Because some dead French men of the XIX century and his pals made a bunch of experiments proyecting 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23 FPS.
Then they arrived at 24 FPS and went "yeah, that looks about right and there's no perceivable difference between 24,25,26,27,28,29 FPS and 24 is cheaper to roll".
That's the legacy.
Like the wheel, why try to change what is already damn near perfect?

Nikon is not a video company. Their forte is and will always be photo gear.
They make very good products in that respect.  A bit more expensive than the usual players, no doubt. But the quality is there.
Let's be honest here guys: Nikon = Japanese ethos. Failing for them means being bought by another Japanese company.
Since they are a part of the umbrella of the massive Mitsubishi group, I HIGHLY doubt we'll ever see a dramatic shift.
At least not as dramatic as Pentax, which by the way still make a very good photo cameras.

Nikon is not a video company. Their forte is and will always be photo gear.
They make very good products in that respect.  A bit more expensive than the usual players, no doubt. But the quality is there.
Let's be honest here guys: Nikon = Japanese ethos. Failing for them means being bought by another Japanese company.
Since they are a part of the umbrella of the massive Mitsubishi group, I HIGHLY doubt we'll ever see a dramatic shift.
At least not as dramatic as Pentax, which by the way still make a very good photo cameras.

I'm actually excited about the cam.
I think it's the least expensive FF interchangeable pro videocamera ever, not counting the Z cam FF model?
The latter does not include a monitor or XLR handle, so the price difference is actually not that much between the two once you add those expenses.
As of of right now you can purchase the FX6 for USD$7K with a 24-105 Sony lens. 
That's a huge price difference from older FF pro videocamera models from less than 5-10 years ago where Arri and Red were practically the only players in town. 
I'm not a Sony fanboy, quite the contrary, but this thing opens a new market for prosumers and videographers who are not cine buffs and don't want/need to spend 10K on extra accesories to start shooting.

After all the drama about the R5 I've surmised some things:
The "R" line is more of a toy for video than anything else. Time and time again we've seen the company push users to dedicated (and expensive) video solutions. Beggining with Canon's 5DM2 we lived through different models with some kind of video crippling: lower resolution, noisy mic inputs, and a hard recording limit. Despite all this, people bought a Canon DSLR for reliabilty and lens selection. Lens selection was adressed quickly for RF users with good and expensive glass. However, they are losing their "trustworthyness". The R5 wil NEVER replace the tank-like 5D. Never, not 5 or 10 years from now. The damage is done. Was it Canon's true intention to replace the 5D with the R5 by way of an "umbrella effect"? I'm having doubts. No manager worth his salt would have released this fiasco product. Especially not a Japanese one working at Canon. Not one that damn well knows the brand represents (boring) reliabilty. Maybe the "R" line is more of a "moonshot product". Aim high. Fail fast. Ride the mirroless wave, but always differenciate between the photo and cinema lines.

It's just that Canon knew they couldn't get away with overheating bullshit on the 1D X M3 which is sold on the premise of cast iron reliability to news organisations, sports photographers, agencies and journalists.

As someone said in another thread, as of this moment the 1DXM3 is the company's flaghship photo camera for video, not some MILC feature-happy product. That's logical: 1DXM3 is worth $6,500!

After all the drama about the R5 I've surmised some things:
The "R" line is more of a toy for video than anything else. Time and time again we've seen the company push users to dedicated (and expensive) video solutions. Beggining with Canon's 5DM2 we lived through different models with some kind of video crippling: lower resolution, noisy mic inputs, and a hard recording limit. Despite all this, people bought a Canon DSLR for reliabilty and lens selection. Lens selection was adressed quickly for RF users with good and expensive glass. However, they are losing their "trustworthyness". The R5 wil NEVER replace the tank-like 5D. Never, not 5 or 10 years from now. The damage is done. Was it Canon's true intention to replace the 5D with the R5 by way of an "umbrella effect"? I'm having doubts. No manager worth his salt would have released this fiasco product. Especially not a Japanese one working at Canon. Not one that damn well knows the brand represents (boring) reliabilty. Maybe the "R" line is more of a "moonshot product". Aim high. Fail fast. Ride the mirroless wave, but always differenciate between the photo and cinema lines.

As ludicrous as it sound to the West, that's the way things are run in Japan since the XIX century, at least.
The collective beats the individual. Not so in the West, where it's exactly the opposite.

For the life of me I can't find his comments on YT.
However, if you watch the film on MUBI, you'll get to see an interview with Herzog and Roc Martin, the producer of the film, AFTER the movie ends. It's about 10 minutes long and I suspect is only available on that streaming platform. That's where he mentions he used a "tiny 4K camera with many profesional audio inputs". 
Being a nerd I immediately scoured the internet in search of some additional data on the subject, since Herzog generally talks a lot about cameras and lenses.
I could only find a production photo of the movie. You can clearly see it's a very small Canon 4K cam, most probably an XA50 or XF400 in the second photo starting from the top:
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/werner-herzog-family-romance-llc-working-baby-yoda-1301774

For the love of God anything but Mini DV again!!!! 😆
On a more serious note, the "old" camera the OP mentions is 100% digital.
It's only only old by short term technology standards, not by any artist's standards (except maybe if your last name is Nolan or Abrams).
It's YOUR vision. YOU decide if you film it with S16 or a stupid iPhone.
If you're a creator that decision should be liberating, not gut-wrenching.  If it's the latter, you're more of a technician. Nothing wrong with that, just different from the first group.
I recently watched Herzog's latest film/documentary called "Family Romance, LLC".  It's good. Not Grizzly Man good, but on point.
The man shot the entire thing in the middle of Tokyo as a one-man-band with a "crappy" Canon XA50/XF400. He was fascinated by the lowly camcorder because it gave him what he wanted: good AF, XLR inputs, 4K and portability. Check his comments on YouTube. He does not name the brand, but you can see it's a Canon in the production photos. A Canon consumer camcorder in 2020!
 

@EduPortas yeah, on the internet if you find something then you have to bookmark it, or even archive it to your own storage.  If you don't do it at that time then you'll never find it again!
It certainly does look like a very compact setup:

It makes sense as Herzog is on a mission to get the most X content he can, where X is in the realm of crazy / entertaining / ridiculous / cutting / insightful / shocking / etc.  Considering that people are intimidated by equipment and basically stop acting naturally given the slightest reason, you'd want a setup that was so fast that you could always keep up and small enough that the people can forget that they're being filmed.  
Sacha Baron Cohen went to some extreme lengths to get people to feel comfortable while being filmed during Who Is America? and I think what is remarkable in that show is that he managed to get such open responses while people were obviously on set and being interviewed with lights and cameras and the whole setup.

Yes, not old by artist standards, but old digitally.  I guess in the context of the DSLR revolution, and perhaps now the mirrorless cinema camera revolution?, we can 'go back' in some regards but stay modern in others.  I'm not really talking about anyone going back to a huge ENG camera with belt-mounted battery pack and Betamax to get their 240p fix.
Do you have links to Herzog's comments?  I searched youtube a bit and couldn't find an account or which videos he might have been commenting on.  It would be interesting to read them - he's not short of an opinion that's for sure, but they're often piercing and highly relevant.

For the love of God anything but Mini DV again!!!! 😆
On a more serious note, the "old" camera the OP mentions is 100% digital.
It's only only old by short term technology standards, not by any artist's standards (except maybe if your last name is Nolan or Abrams).
It's YOUR vision. YOU decide if you film it with S16 or a stupid iPhone.
If you're a creator that decision should be liberating, not gut-wrenching.  If it's the latter, you're more of a technician. Nothing wrong with that, just different from the first group.
I recently watched Herzog's latest film/documentary called "Family Romance, LLC".  It's good. Not Grizzly Man good, but on point.
The man shot the entire thing in the middle of Tokyo as a one-man-band with a "crappy" Canon XA50/XF400. He was fascinated by the lowly camcorder because it gave him what he wanted: good AF, XLR inputs, 4K and portability. Check his comments on YouTube. He does not name the brand, but you can see it's a Canon in the production photos. A Canon consumer camcorder in 2020!
 

As an actual Spanish speaker that video is doubly hilarious.

So much controversy around a MILC that never promised earth-shattering video AF performance.
We've become lazy. Either move your wrist around the barrel of the lens and make the enormous effort of +focusing+
like pros have done for DECADES or buy a good videocamera and see your AF problems melt away thanks to its inherent design nature.
This coming from an owner of a 7Dm2 which has, arguably, one of the better video AF systems in the industry (DPAF).
Even them, I rarely trust the camera to do the focusing for me. I can't afford even a single AF hunting second.
So I go full manual. You know, like a paid professional!
 

Of course there are times when you would use AF: when using a dedicated videocamera, not a MILC or a DSLR!
That's the way I roll, my friend. Not condescending at all, just stating that pros don't let their gear get in their way.
And by that I mean not trusting AF systems on MILCs or DSLRs. Have we become that lazy?

Of course there are times when you would use AF: when using a dedicated videocamera, not a MILC or a DSLR!
That's the way I roll, my friend. Not condescending at all, just stating that pros don't let their gear get in their way.
And by that I mean not trusting AF systems on MILCs or DSLRs. Have we become that lazy?

So much controversy around a MILC that never promised earth-shattering video AF performance.
We've become lazy. Either move your wrist around the barrel of the lens and make the enormous effort of +focusing+
like pros have done for DECADES or buy a good videocamera and see your AF problems melt away thanks to its inherent design nature.
This coming from an owner of a 7Dm2 which has, arguably, one of the better video AF systems in the industry (DPAF).
Even them, I rarely trust the camera to do the focusing for me. I can't afford even a single AF hunting second.
So I go full manual. You know, like a paid professional!
 

I agree. I prefer the dual-pixel focusing system on my 7D MII,
but the 6D is no slouch. Definetly a different "look".
If you can jump for C100, go for it. Seems like a much better deal
now that the newer version is available. Maybe even the XC10, as other users have said.
Big increase in overall quality.
 
 

Hello, happy owner of a Canon 7D Mark II here. Also, buyer of Andrew's picture profiles.
Tried them the other day in the woods and got a very nice image after 1-click grading with FilmConvert.
Easy as pie.
I shot at 60p with my F2.8 17-55mm. Most of the shots were at 17mm and F5.6. My ISOs were pretty high.
I specifically decided to record some clips in the Mexican woods because of the
complex detail of the leaves, sticks, etc., and the strong contrast between shadows and well-lit spaces.
In years past, I've visited the same woods with my former 6D and my Fuji X100. 
The Canon 7D Mark II takes considerable better video than both. 
Hope this helps.