kye

I hope they enable using the 6K Pocket EVF with the USB-C EVF port. From what I've seen it connects to the Pockets with USB anyways. Would be a nice affordable alternative to the new EVF.
A side screen for menus/settings is fine, but having it be 4" seems unnecessary, at least if the body is bigger than it has to be to accommodate it. Hopefully there is a way to easily switch it on/off so it's not sucking battery all the time.
I'd much prefer the camera be cheaper and smaller, with maybe a 2" screen for menus, and then they sell a separate 4" monitor with some buttons on it (like a C200 or FS/FX screen), with some 1/4-20's for mounting hardware, that connects to that USB-C EVF port. Or maybe leave the buttons off so it can be cheaper, then refresh the Video Assists and let them have the controls.
The new Micro Panel looks nice.

Exactly.  10gE is only 1.2 gigabytes per second.  The CF Express card in a reader can do more than 2 gigabytes per second.  If you run 25gE (about 3 gigabytes/second), you'll probably be able to keep up with a single CF Express card.  With 100gE, you can do 12.5 gigabytes/second, optimally, but I'm willing to bet you'll find that there are weird limitations in the software stack that prevent you from getting close to that - at least over SMB or similar.

You could also do multiple interfaces in the server and make sure that SMB multichannel is enabled on the client and the server.  I haven't tested it, but in theory, newer versions of Windows (and Samba) support it.  At this moment, I don't feel any need to optimize beyond having 10gE for my stuff.  I guess if I cared that much about getting the fastest possible offload, I could just carry the card/reader into the basement and direct connect them to my server.
Even on shoots where we're running two cameras and shooting raw, I don't think I've ever generated more than about 1.5T in a day.  Offloading it over 10gE takes about half an hour when I get home.  That's about as long as it takes me to carry all the gear from my car into the house.  So my perspective is clearly not that of a high-budget production.  😛

That's what I'm talking about too.
My post compared the speed of CFExpress over USB with the speeds of 10G Ethernet.

10G ethernet is only 10Gbit / 1.2GB/s but CFExpress cards can exceed this.
This test from Petapixel shows speeds up to 2.8GB/s and most of the models tested exceeded 1.2GB/s.

If BM put dual CFExpress cards in the camera then in theory this could double that throughput too.
The ethernet standard is designed for maximum throughput with cables up to 100 meters/yards long and the 10G standard for copper was announced in 2006 so it's hardly a new standard, and stuffing data through long cables is an entirely different challenge to transmitting it an inch or two!

I believe it only offers a S35 crop. Due to the compression methods from the 6K sensor, some say that the S35 crop is superior... but I didn't buy a FF camera to shoot in S35. And the difference is probably minimal and I don't care about minimal.
But as usual, I'm probably the weirdo here, because I still prefer good 1080p over run of the mill 4K.
For instance, I mentioned earlier that I think some lenses shine with certain cameras. After thorough testing, most lenses look pretty good in 4K. By that I mean, most vintage lenses have a certain level of sharpness that is good enough due to the 4K. In fact, I think vintage lenses help to tame the sharpness... resolution of 4K.
Now with my 5D3/ML Raw, some of those same lenses just don't work. But with a more modern lens, the image looks really good, in my opinion better than the FP.
Here's a shot from the 5D3 with the older non-Art Sigma 50mm 1.4...

 
And here are a couple shots of the Takumar on the 5D3...

Obviously, they're different shots so in some ways they're incomparable...
And here's a B&W shot with the Tak on the 5D3 that's a lot more interesting...

So what's my point...
I have way more options than I need and B&W makes everything look cooler.
That is all. 

In my experience, the internet has a very skewed view of which brands offer the best colour science.
Millions of folks on the internet will tell you that Canon has the best colour, and recently Fuji is in the game with their film emulation presets, but I think this is just confirmation bias in action.
All manufacturers have very high quality colour.
Even Sony, who used to have the most "accurate" colour and looked very unappealing, have turned it around and now have pretty nice colour.
The other great myth is that great colour comes from the camera, it doesn't.
Great colour comes from production design, lighting, and colour grading.
Here is a thread where I show that it's the work in post that makes the images pop.
After reading your recent posts and threads about one aspect of cameras or other, I have some bad news for you...  you can't buy good images.
Good images come from skill, not equipment.  Great images come from skill and large amounts of hard work.

In my experience, the internet has a very skewed view of which brands offer the best colour science.
Millions of folks on the internet will tell you that Canon has the best colour, and recently Fuji is in the game with their film emulation presets, but I think this is just confirmation bias in action.
All manufacturers have very high quality colour.
Even Sony, who used to have the most "accurate" colour and looked very unappealing, have turned it around and now have pretty nice colour.
The other great myth is that great colour comes from the camera, it doesn't.
Great colour comes from production design, lighting, and colour grading.
Here is a thread where I show that it's the work in post that makes the images pop.
After reading your recent posts and threads about one aspect of cameras or other, I have some bad news for you...  you can't buy good images.
Good images come from skill, not equipment.  Great images come from skill and large amounts of hard work.

10gE is plenty fast for a lot of things and as you said, on many productions, the camera ultimately spends more time stopped than it does rolling.  Though also for a lot of productions that I'm on, at least, it would be far from ideal to need to keep the camera tethered to a network switch so that somebody could continuously offload footage.  Though for the sort of productions that take 30+ minutes to move the camera, etc, I'm sure it would be great...  though for productions with that sort of time/budget, $1600 is a no-brainer for a second module for the DIT to swap back and forth.
Anyway, it's cool storage and I hope it becomes some sort of standard, even if for the sorts of stuff I do, CF Express will continue to be more than fast enough for a while to come.

I like the idea of Auto-WB and have done it many times. The only issue I have with the idea is when the camera decides to alter the WB mid shot; then I need to go through the footage and try to correct. It always seems to look strange. Panasonic, in general, isn't so bad at this, but my camcorder (VX980/81) is more agressive with this.
If I shoot in daylight WB and just make sure I don't turn on any lights (or add daylight lighting), the shots will look generally great. If I'm off a little, I can correct the whole thing at once.

Well I guess Sony is already doing that with Sony RX10, RX100 and even the RX0 have slog!!
So yes, it would be good if Nikon does this too, make it very easy to mix and match together the full range of cameras in a professional workflow. 
 

I absolutely agree.
You buy and close a competitor company but this is not the case with Red.
The whole deal only makes sense if they keep the Red brand which is their gateway to cinema. 

Maybe.
It would be a bit silly though - the brand recognition was part of the value of the company.  BM is having a difficult time breaking into the cinema ecosystem despite having brand recognition for Resolve, so Nikon buying one of the "big three" brands that was being actively used by Hollywood, and then putting it in a drawer seems a bit counter productive.

Hmm..  10G ethernet isn't that fast I guess, but it's all relative.
For example if you're shooting the highest quality setting "12K - 12,288 x 8040 Blackmagic RAW 3:1 - 1,194 MB/s" then you'll only be able to pull it off the camera in real-time, but that's not likely to be a situation that most people would be in.
If you were shooting in 8K (Blackmagic RAW 3:1 - 533 MB/s) then you can copy it off in double-speed, or 8K 12:1 and 4K 3:1 (~133MB/s) then you're copying at 9x realtime.  Of course, most productions are going to be rolling for a lot less time than they're stopped in-between takes, so the DIT can keep pace with offloading the files off the camera throughout the shoot without having to stop the production to swap out media.  
It is a pretty low-cost way to protect yourself against camera/media failures where you'd lose the contents of the media.  
It's like that old backup saying..  Two is One and One is NONE!

Thinking about this more, I think there are three different approaches.
The first is to shoot manually and get it perfect every time.  Not even the pros do this with completely controlled sets.  Colourists say that they're always making small changes to WB on a shot-by-shot basis, even on big budget productions, so this is only mentioned to make sure we understand that we will be dealing with small changes in post.
The second is to shoot on a manual WB.
This will mean that you're going to get errors in the WB, potentially being quite noticeable, but they're likely to mostly be in the warm/cool Temp direction.
The third is to shoot on auto-WB.
I've found that, on my Panasonic cameras at least, the WB errors are pretty minor, and the WB is pretty close - even if the lighting is quite variable and I'm taking shots from different angles and in different locations etc.  
This means that you'll be making only very small corrections, but they could be in the magenta/green Tint axis as well as the warm/cool Temp direction.  We're quite sensitive to Tint errors, so this means that adjusting these is a bit more fiddly, and can take some practice, but is perfectly possible.
I know that when I shoot I am very likely to completely forget a manually set WB, and will end up shooting a whole evening at 6500K and it'll be so warm it'll look like I shot it through a jar of honey, so I shoot auto-WB and therefore inevitably have to make minor corrections in post but never have to make large ones.
Going back to the minor curves that are part of the Look, and how we can't un-do in post because we don't have a complete profile of that camera/look combination, shooting on auto-WB will mean that these get applied to the footage in a place that will likely only be a very small distance from where they should have been if the shot had perfect WB.  
Obviously this still depends on your camera, the profile, your colour management pipeline, the tools in your software, your skill in applying them, and the weather and position of the stars etc...  so this is also something that you would be best testing for yourself too.

Maybe.
It would be a bit silly though - the brand recognition was part of the value of the company.  BM is having a difficult time breaking into the cinema ecosystem despite having brand recognition for Resolve, so Nikon buying one of the "big three" brands that was being actively used by Hollywood, and then putting it in a drawer seems a bit counter productive.

Good question.
I think the fundamental challenge of making corrections in post is having the tool operate in a colour space that matches the footage as closely as possible.  
For example, if your footage is in Linear, and you have a node in Linear, and you adjust the Gain wheel (which literally applies gain by doing a simple multiplication) then they match exactly and the result will be a perfect exposure or WB change, just like it was done in camera.  If you get your colour management pipeline correct then you can get this practically perfect adjustment for LOG footage too.
The challenge comes when the camera records in 709.  This is mostly because cameras don't just do a CST from Linear to 709, they apply all sorts of "make it look lovely" sort of small tweaks.  When we record in the wrong exposure or WB then these tweaks get applied wrongly.  For example, the profile might compress the skintones, and do so by expanding the reds and yellows on either side.  If you shoot a clip where the skintones are too yellow then your skintones might get expanded rather than compressed.  No CST will un-do all these small tweaks, so you're left with an image that's curved in all the wrong places rather than all the right ones.
So, what happens in practice is it comes down to the individual profile you choose (which will have its own unique set of tiny curves that make that look) and your own ability to manipulate it using the right combination of tools to get the most pleasing result.  My results vary mostly based on the luck that I had when correcting each individual test image - your results will likely suffer the same variance unless you're a far better colourist than I am.
I'd suggest you do your own tests.  Either find a spot in the shade on a sunny day, or even better is to do it on a cloudy day.  Do a manual WB against a grey card (or piece of white copy paper if you don't have a grey card), then just shoot a clip of yourself (or a volunteer model if you can get one 🙂 ).  Then shoot a range of test clips setting the Colour Temp manually.  Then just pull them all into post and see which tools seem to work the best for you, and which gives you the more pleasing looks.
One thing I did notice was that I had trouble getting the blacks and shadows to be right when the skintones were dialled in, with them tending to be the opposite of the original tint on the image (ie, if the image was warm then the correction ended up with cooler shadows) so with everything else being equal that might be a reason to go warmer so you get a bit of colour separation in the final images.

Yeah that's my understanding too, with the ethernet connection.  Why else do a 10G on the camera I guess?  

As you were the one that asked for skin tones, was there a specific situation you were thinking of when you asked?
I thought your question might be related to your adventures with the GX850 and shooting out in the real-world?

Well I’m assuming a DIT on a three camera shoot will appreciate it.  
 
pretty sure they are doing a CFe dual card magazine too. 

What a crazy presentation with so many new and big features, but what I took away from it is this:
1) Resolve 19 is awesome.
2) When it comes to cameras, Grant knows what's up:

Improbable predictions:
BMD will announce that they have been acquired by Ricoh/Pentax Resolve will be fully dropping support for BRAW and adopting ProRes RAW New DaVinci Resolve Nano Panel with only a single trackball and no sliders/knobs/buttons New DaVinci Resolve Pico Panel with just a single small button that can only order pizza from Dominos.  What flavor of pizza?  It'll be a surprise every time. Black Magic Cloud is merging with frame.io so that customers will only have to pay one subscription fee to share with people on either system Based on strong sales of the UM12K, there will now be a UM36K which uses a beam splitter and 3 copies of the UM12K sensor for each of the R, G, and B channels similar to 3-chip camcorders of the past New AI assist camera module that detects if you aren't recording in BM raw - and if not, a small robot version of Grant Petty jumps out and punches the user in the groin until the camera settings are updated

Thank you so much for this hard work. I'm going to look further into this during my holiday.
Yes, some of the images with wrong WB and underexposed would be expected to be trash, but it's nice to know there are some editing techniques that save it a little. In all honesty, I'd probably just go for monochrome or tint if this were to happen to me.

At least not new features for the stuff that's baked into the ASIC.  At least in the case of Z Cam, the E2 got so many features through firmware updates that it's basically a different camera now than when it was released.  🙂

Firstly, it's awesome that you're actually shooting something!  and the fact that you're on-screen is next level above that even, so in my books you're already successful 🙂 
I'm not sure what you're shooting, and therefore what making it good / interesting really means in your context, but here's a few random thoughts..
I normally screw things up the first (few/many) times I do something, so just chalk it up to a practice shoot and keep going If you're able to get a technically competent capture then you can really change the look in post, so I'd suggest just covering the fundamentals The success or failure of a film depends 97% on what is in the frame (with the remaining 2% being sound, and 1% image) so that's where your attention should be going Is there a way you can separate the various tasks in your mind while you're shooting?  For example, maybe you put in a full battery, an empty memory card, and then completely forget the camera exists and just roll as you do 20 takes of the scene from that angle, focusing on your performance and emotional aspects while you're doing this? If there are small errors in continuity or performance there is always the option to just include them and make it a more stylised final film.  For example, if things cut funny or jump around a bit etc, and you lean into it in the edit, then the impression might be that the character might not quite be in control of all their faculties, or might be drunk or on drugs, etc.  Obviously I have no idea what the context is, so this might not fit your vision, but it might give you options where previously you didn't see a way forward or just couldn't get excited about the material If you haven't storyboarded or done detailed planning, one thing you could do is to pre-shoot the whole thing without lighting or performances etc, and then just edit it together in the NLE, and treat that as a moving storyboard.  This would have the advantage of being able to anticipate any issues with any camera angles, and also to get a feel for the pacing and even things like if you decide to cut an angle or part of the film then you can skip filming it altogether. Best of luck and keep us updated - we are definitely interested in hearing how you get on!

As we always say, the camera, especially these days, is the least important part of the equation.
Big camera has always equalled big production, but that is more about perceived industry ‘standards’.
It all gets rigged out anyway so the size of these tiny cameras gets hidden.