helium

How about we just cut to the bone?  Let's see the terrible color science of the BMPPC 4k/6K, versus the sterling results you're getting from the S1H.  And, maybe post your best grade of the S1H material -- something for BMPCC 4K/6k loyalists here, if any, to try to equal,
All that's needed is two identical log shots, both exposed more or less equivalently, at their nominal native ISOs.  It sounds like you've got access to both cameras, and it can't be any more time consuming than contributing to this forum.  And might actually lead to something useful.

Dude, you're talking about everything and anything.  Working backwards:  700 lines is about all you'll get in a movie theater, from a 35mm print  There's a white paper online you can search for, if you're interested, among other sources.  It's not a controversial observation.  "LOL".
There is no ACES transform for the BMPCC 4K in Resolve, so it's not surprising you don't like the results.  Again, your "color science is weak", etc. is typical internet-speak, where unsubstantiated claims vie for attention.  One week it's the BMPCC 4K which is plastic and over-smoothing, then it's the S1H which blurring detail.  Next month, it's the BMPCC 4K which is too sharp, unless you prescription for downsampling is followed.  Or Premiere is 8 bit and Resolve is 32.  Until not.
This stuff never stops, I guess it keeps the forums going.

The great news is, there are now cameras, including these two, which produce a theatrical-quality cinema image for maybe 5% of the price of one year of film school.  And for the cost of another credit or two, you get a grading suite which used to run $800/hr.
The bad news is, great DPs, lighting, production design and actors haven't gotten any cheaper.  And let's not even get started on the writing.

If anyone's LOL, it's BMD.  They're selling thousands of "cinema" cameras, with no run and gun conveniences, to people who'll be shooting nothing but crowds, skylines, receding tail-lights and slomo gimbal reviews.  
 
And all ETTR.  Sounds great, from the marketing point of view.

Take it for what it's worth, but I find the performance of the two cameras nearly identical in the highlights, after grading -- meaning the same amount of data is preserved in both cases.   At least, this is the case with limited testing. 
The shots above are not actually "blown out", so there's nothing to recover.  It's just that the highlights are mapped into the super-white regions in the debayered .dng.  But the data is intact, it just has to be brought down.  You'll see the same thing on the original Pocket.

It's interesting that you're able to perform DR comparisons by mentally comparing unrelated and differently graded shots seen on youtube, and are confident enough in the results to announce them.
The usual complaint about youtube "reviews" of BMD cameras is that the tuber has no idea how to grade the material, so the tests are meaningless.  But it's gone one better now:  comparisons of unrelated shots (from youtube?) done by memory.

No, that's not normal.  Pressure on the grip has no effect on mine.    I'd say exchange the camera, but of course you can't at this point.

This thread is aggravating enough to revive the dead....  You do realize you're grading a grade, not camera original?  There's no way to know how much original highlight detail was in the shots, because current levels are baked in.  It's like trying to grade a bluray and concluding that 35mm stinks, because you can't push the highlights without clipping.
 

I suggest you repair to the BMD cinematography forum, and read the discussions initiated by Sareesh, where he betrays astonishing ignorance -- even venturing to lecture BMD staff (Captain Hook), among many others who patiently tried to explain to him the basics, to no effect.
Only BMD and your deity of choice know why Sareesh and other bloggers were chosen for advance units.  With the exception of the Proav UK footage, from a dealer, which didn't try to do much other than set levels, the grading was pretty terrible, even by amateur standards.  Maybe their skill level was deemed to reflect the average Pocket buyer.  Alas.

It's worse that that; Wolfcrow is woefully misinformed on basics like log shooting, LUTs, normalization and dual circuit gain.  He has no grasp of what the camera requires in post.  His reviews should be limited to point and shoots.

I suggest you repair to the BMD cinematography forum, and read the discussions initiated by Sareesh, where he betrays astonishing ignorance -- even venturing to lecture BMD staff (Captain Hook), among many others who patiently tried to explain to him the basics, to no effect.
Only BMD and your deity of choice know why Sareesh and other bloggers were chosen for advance units.  With the exception of the Proav UK footage, from a dealer, which didn't try to do much other than set levels, the grading was pretty terrible, even by amateur standards.  Maybe their skill level was deemed to reflect the average Pocket buyer.  Alas.

It's worse that that; Wolfcrow is woefully misinformed on basics like log shooting, LUTs, normalization and dual circuit gain.  He has no grasp of what the camera requires in post.  His reviews should be limited to point and shoots.

Whatever the cameras may be capable of in professional hands,  the company is marketing them to amateurs.  That's the basis of its volume sales,  which in turn makes the low price possible.
No offense to the shooter above, but I think BMD is offering footage which many people will look at and think, "I could do that".   Even the Brawley stuff was shot under highly restricted conditions.  It's not how he would light or block a dramatic or fashion shoot.
Give 'em credit:  this approach is more honest than usual.  A demo with production value far beyond the resources of likely buyers doesn't reveal an awful lot.

With apologies to John Brawley,

With apologies to John Brawley,

With apologies to John Brawley,

With apologies to John Brawley,

With apologies to John Brawley,

With apologies to John Brawley,

With apologies to John Brawley,

With apologies to John Brawley,