KnightsFan

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Rec.2020 only specifies 4k and 8k resolutions, using standard dynamic range, not HDR. Perusing Wikipedia, I'm finding:
Rec.709: standard dynamic range, standard color gamut, 1080p, 8 or 10 bit
Rec.2020: standard dynamic range, wide color gamut, 2160p/4320p, 10 or 12 bit
Rec.2100: high dynamic range, wide color gamut, 1080p/2160p/4320p, 10 or 12 bit
So perhaps Alistair Chapman was referring to Rec.2100? (Not trying to be pedantic, just making sure I understand the alphabet soup here!)
 
Back on topic, I think 4k is easier to market for whatever reason, so we will see mass adoption of 4k before HDR. The public seems to "understand" 4k better than they do HDR. Moreover, we're all agreed on what 4K is, whereas HDR is still in a kind of format war from what I can see, between HLG and PQ.

There is no rule mandating a 1:1 correlation between dynamic range captured and dynamic range displayed.
Measuring the "stops of DR" of Rec.709 is based on an 8 bit image with a standard gamma curve. This means that on a Rec709 screen, the light emitted by a white pixel is 5 stops brighter than the light emitted by a black pixel. It doesn't matter what the pixels refer to--an "untouched" video from your camera, CGI, some text, a webpage, etc.
The amount of compression (or expansion) of dynamic range that you apply to an image is just an artistic choice. It's just like a CGI render: your image doesn't HAVE to look like the real world, but it will end up on a screen that emits 5 stops of DR. So, to make a "natural" looking image, you should display about 5 stops of real world DR on that screen. However, we've universally agreed that we like a little bit of compression at least, so we put maybe 8 stops of the real world onto our 5 stop display. But if you show straight up log footage with 12 or 14 stops, it looks really unnatural.

If it were me, I'd probably use a variety of programs to use the strongest tools of each. I'd animate the text in Blender (or the 3D package of your choice), as well as some of the other solid, static "hero" elements the camera mainly just circles around. For example, the room and chain at 0:16 in the embedded youtube video. I'd prefer to do objects like this in a legit 3D package, because they can be modelled easily, have few moving parts, and I don't want to fight a software layout designed primarily for compositing.
After rendering out the 3D parts--possible in a few layers or maybe a separate Z-depth render, I'd bring those into After Effects or another compositor.
There are some 2D elements which I'd do the compositor, on top of the 3D renders. Elements that either don't require much perspective change, or are particle based (fireworks, smoke) are usually easier to fake in 2D than to simulate fully. The asteroid field from the dailymotion link, and the planet in the background would also be in AE.
Some of the foreground elements, such as the trees at 0:30 in the YouTube video, can be sourced from real photos of trees and then composited in.
If I was feeling adventurous, I'd use Fusion instead of After Effects. I've never used Fusion on anything complex, but AE is an unintuitive mess, so I'd love to give Fusion a spin.
Remember that little things, such as proper motion blur, will help sell it. Depending on how well you want it to match camera footage, you could compress it in H.264, add noise, or something like that before use.

Minolta lenses also need a corrective glass adapter to work with the EF mount.
Do you already own a lot of Minolta glass?

Yes, but you aren’t going to find the convenience that a 1” sensor compact or bridge camera offers. If an equivalent lens from the RX10ii was available in FF, it would be a $2000-$3000 lens and the size of an artillery canon.
In my opinion Sony peaked with the RX10 line with the Mark II. After that model they dumped the built in NDs and the constant aperture for the sake of reach. In my opinion there is a gap in the market now. The XC10, RX10ii, FZ2500 are point and shoot cinema cameras and the 1” sensors only help with that convenience.
This is one of the reasons I’m thinking about getting a camcorder. If you look at the features and quality from the Z90 or DVX200 or XF405, they rival what you would get with a cinema camera that’s twice the price. At $3-4 thousand dollars for a new FF camera, I’d rather spend the extra money for a cinema camera for the extra features. But for the money, bridge cameras and camcorders are giving you those features and adding a small form factor and convenience.
Full Frame is awesome, I love shooting full frame, but everything is bigger and heavier. Focus is more difficult, IBIS doesn’t work as well, lenses are bigger and heavier and more expensive (for the most part)
But from a business stance, FF is great, the manufacturers aren’t spending that much more in R&D and production but they can charge nearly twice as much.
If you can make a good film with a FF, there’s no reason why you can’t make a good film with a 1” sensor camera. You just have to think differently.
Hell, The Walking Dead is shot on S16 and I never once thought while I watched that show that I wished there was just more shallow depth of field.

I knew this would eventually come up. Perspective distortion is only due to distance between camera and subject. Focal length has nothing to do with it.

I knew this would eventually come up. Perspective distortion is only due to distance between camera and subject. Focal length has nothing to do with it.

I knew this would eventually come up. Perspective distortion is only due to distance between camera and subject. Focal length has nothing to do with it.

I knew this would eventually come up. Perspective distortion is only due to distance between camera and subject. Focal length has nothing to do with it.

And.... This! 
https://www.l-rumors.com/kazuto-yamaki-confirms-sigma-is-going-to-make-a-full-frame-l-mount-camera-with-foveon-sensor/ 

Of course! I suppose I was getting a bit off topic as I wasn't directing that part of my post towards the OP.

This is something I've always wondered about, but to me it seems like manufacturers pretty much lie with ISO ratings. If you have to "overexpose" by two stops, doesn't that mean the ISO rating is off by two stops?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flange_focal_distance
look at this list. Any lens with a flange distance LONGER than a camera can be adapted with a simple mechanical adapter, but not vice versa. So you can put an ef lens on an l mount, but you can't put an l lens on an Ef mount
so you can adapt f, ef, m42, pl, and many others to l.
whether or not you can electronically control the adapted lens depends on whether the lens protocol is open, or if someone has reverse engineered it.

Pixel shift would be amazing! I occasionally need 5000x5000 square photos, which I use to make seamlessly tiling 4k textures. If the lower resolution model can get that 5000 line height via pixel shift, it would be the only system so far that would solve my occasional need for high resolution stills, while providing good video.

Of course Blackmagic are profitable but at the same time, compared to what the rest of the industry are doing, they are 'pretty much' giving away their products. 
Pocket4k with Resolve = US$1299
Adobe Premiere/After Effects/Audition subscription for 2 years = USD$1248
So after 2 years....yes, BMD have given you a free camera. ?
 
 

What we really need is for a universal system of plug and play parts, like we have with PCs. Imagine if every camera were as modular as a PC! Naturally, building a camera would be a lot of research and some compatibility headaches. But just like with PCs, you could buy an off the shelf, pre-built one with software already installed.
What we need is for the Axiom project to work, not just within its own world of open hardware and software, but for their standards to become universal enough that big companies manufacture parts that work with that standard.

Got my DJI Ronin S a few weeks ago and while digging through the app realized that I could program tilt and pan moves and repeat them. I paired the Ronin S with a motorized slider creating a small motion control system. This allowed for some interesting VFX in a music video I just shot. I was able to created several versions of the singer interacting with himself while the camera moved around following the action. Check it out:
 
 

I'm sure you guys can grade better, but I loved the footage
https://vimeo.com/290295765
 

Back in June I reported on the joint sensor development between Fuji and Samsung. You can read all about that ISO Cell project here. This was 100% not a rumour.
Now you may look at the X-T3 and wonder where the new 26MP sensor comes from.
Read the full article

Yes the codec's great, but nobody seems to be considering the whole package here, because there's no IBIS, no EVF, autofocus performance is yet to be proven, the battery life is miserable and the files will be VERY large at their highest quality.
You have to measure the EXACT difference in the final graded image between BRAW on this, and something like 10bit LOG on the X-T3.
I think for all the codec niceness the difference will be smaller than people think. Now ask yourself if it is worth the hassle of the strange form factor, no articulated screen, need to rig it up with EVF, external bits and a stabiliser...
It is also sensor-limited. We're not talking about a sensor as good as the X-T3 or A7 III. And the slow-mo is an even bigger crop.
Sure, I liked what ProRes and RAW brought to the image with the last Pocket camera, certainly in the creamy shadows and in low light.
But it was as good in 10bit ProRes as it was in Cinema DNG RAW.
So 10bit H.265 at the same bitrate as ProRes with Fuji F-LOG from a larger BSI 6K sensor with full pixel readout (possibly Samsung) has the potential to be just as good if not better.
Not to mention the fact it is much easier to go full frame on the S35 sensor with a Speed Booster than to turn the Pocket 4K sensor into no-crop.

If I got the xt3, I could sell my nx1, whereas with the p4k I'd need a stills camera as well. All my lenses are Nikon and canon, so I just need some adapters for the Fuji, whereas I'd need a speed booster for the p4k. So in my case, the xt3 is actually considerably cheaper!

Totally agree! If the p4k cane out a few months ago it would have been a no brainer. Now it's hard to justify the cost of a dedicated video camera when the hybrids have improved so much.

That's true, but since its their own codec, it doesn't make sense to hold it back from their own customers. Especially since it's open for other manufacturers to use. I'd say its 100% going to be implemented, and 99.9% it'll be free.

Nice. I mean, we could all sell stuff to offset the cost of any camera. Just like we all have our own lenses and accessories that only work with one system so it makes sense to stick to that system. I was just thinking about it myself and the only this the Fuji really has for me that the BM doesn't is the photo mode, which to me doesn't warrant the extra price, especially considering lenses etc. even if I did sell off all my current gear. It's much more stress too, I hate selling on the 2nd hand market, people here are cheapos.

Who the hell is this guy?! 
I am feeling @Andrew Reid 100% but let's be the wiser forum and move on!
I was considering keeping my hybrid NX system and buying this one for specific projects and what not (incredible deal coupled with the editing license), but after all the new releases throwing 10bit on bigger sensors and 10bit H265 (X-T3) I am sceptical if it really worths the 2000+euros (accessories, batteries, media e.t.c) investment for a project or two per year. 6 months ago was the deal of the century, right now, not so much, especially if someone (Panasonic? Sony A7s? Nikon?) give some kind of external raw. 
I do not want to sound blasphemous, but a lower price may be more appropriate for 2019.

I used standalone fusion for a few projects over the last few years. This week I used the resolve-integrated version for a very simple effect. I love how well it works with resolve, it's a truly remarkable piece of software. Many years ago, when I used blender for everything, I remember talking about how I wished you could put compositions from the node graph into the sequence editor. With resolve, that is finally possible!