currensheldon

The Panasonic S1 does have all of that now.
It's sort of weird how much people have been ripping on the S1 - No, it's not a full-frame GH5, but with the upcoming V-Log/10-bit update, it's pretty darn close. Every other manufacturer gives us internal 8-bit 420 (Sony, Nikon, Canon), big crops (Canon), no 60 fps (everyone), etc.
Add on that Panasonic has the best ergonomics for video by far (in my opinion) and a great XLR adapter, and you have a very capable camera. 
 

I'd definitely hold on to my MFT glass and cameras if the GH6 had 10 - 12 bit internal recording (BM Raw or ProRes Raw), 120fps in 4K, and internal NDs (the last one being the most important). As well as the IBIS of the GH5 and the low light capabilities of the GH5s.
Throw on the 10-25mm f1.7 and I could use that camera for almost everything. Some f0.95 autofocus primes would also be great. 

I'd definitely hold on to my MFT glass and cameras if the GH6 had 10 - 12 bit internal recording (BM Raw or ProRes Raw), 120fps in 4K, and internal NDs (the last one being the most important). As well as the IBIS of the GH5 and the low light capabilities of the GH5s.
Throw on the 10-25mm f1.7 and I could use that camera for almost everything. Some f0.95 autofocus primes would also be great. 

I'd definitely hold on to my MFT glass and cameras if the GH6 had 10 - 12 bit internal recording (BM Raw or ProRes Raw), 120fps in 4K, and internal NDs (the last one being the most important). As well as the IBIS of the GH5 and the low light capabilities of the GH5s.
Throw on the 10-25mm f1.7 and I could use that camera for almost everything. Some f0.95 autofocus primes would also be great. 

I agree.  Having the tech just work and get out of the way is the ultimate situation.  We're making art after all, the last thing we need is to be trying to also deal with the technical stuff at the same time.
I really think that BM are playing the long game and have set their vision to be really high and are making bold steps to get there.
Some fun facts (via wikipedia?
DaVinci had been making colour correction systems since 1985 Resolve was released in 2004 BM bought DaVinci in 2009, at which time Resolve was selling with dedicated hardware solutions for $200k-800k 2010 they released a software-only version for $995 and the hardware version dropped to $30k 2011 they introduced a free version 2013 version 10 introduced video editing 2014 version 11 introduced audio mixing to complete it as a stand-alone NLE 2016 BM buys Fairlight and version 14 includes an integrated version of it 2018 version 15 includes a version of Fusion That is a pretty spectacular timeline.  In a decade it went from being $200-800K with hardware and colour only to having free, software-only versions available, and integrating world-leading colour with editing, audio, and VFX functionality.
Hardware is obviously more difficult to make those kinds of advances on, but the original BMPCC and now P4K kind of fit that description.  I remember Elon Musk talking about reducing the cost of things by 90% and that idea of radical change seems to also be occurring here.  Other vendors don't seem to really be dancing to the same tune.

And I think it's a pretty good one. I still prefer other manufacturers' cameras, but the Ursa G2 + Pocket 4K is pretty close. For me, most of my headaches come in the form of workflow now, with different codecs, resolutions, bit-rates, etc being all over the map on other manufacturer's lineups. Black Magic is really streamlining things - I'd love to have those two cameras, shoot 8:1 or 12:1 BM Raw, which has amazingly smooth playback in Da Vinci on my Macbook Pro (tested it yesterday), and then hand off to a colorist or do a quick grade myself. Brilliant. And all in 12-bit raw capture and native editing. 
Despite neither camera being my favorite form factor, it's almost worth it for the streamlined workflow alone. 

Still lookin for a cinema camera A-Cam and a mirrorless-sized B-Cam that has the same codec, resolutions, color, etc. Black Magic seems to be pretty darn close with BM Raw and the Ursa Mini Pro G2 + Pocket 4K. Neither are my favorite form factor, but BM Raw, in my opinion, is the most modern and robust codec out there right now. Amazing you can get 12-bit raw files in file sizes way smaller than useful ProRes files. Black Magic's color is also great and both cameras can create a really nice image. 
Would also love if both cameras had the same mount, but adapters work pretty well. 
Interested to see what comes at NAB, as a Canon RF mount cinema camera (XC-20 or C100 III) would be great. 

go big or go home i say ?
actually bought it for a tractor but hey whatever works right ?

THIS is what is needed. I don't want a monitor, I just need the HDMI recording. And I definitely don't need a recorder that emits sound and draws 20 watts of power in an HOUR. Makes it more of a battery problem than the Pocket 4K.
For my current EOS R setup, I'd love a Ninja Star. I use my old one for 10-bit HD, but would really like it for 4K. Atomos needs to get on it, as there are plenty of affordable monitor-only products out there, but ZERO 4K recorders without a massive monitor and power draw. 
Hoping for NAB 2019.
Or maybe Black Magic can deliver and give us BM Raw!

It should also be noted that many of these documentaries took 2-3 years to produce, shoot, edit, and release - and then another year or so to be nominated for an Oscar. So, this is not a reflection on what cameras documentaries are shot on in 2019, but rather what people wanted to shoot on in 2014 to 2016. That doesn't mean that three years from now, all docs will be shot on Sonys, but just a point that it's not really about what is released now.
With that said, even in 2019, Canon has the nicest looking image and the most reliable products in the doc-budget space. I wouldn't be surprised if the next few years many doc films are still shot on Canon cameras.
However, they need to be careful because many people in the doc space want to shoot on Netflix-approved cameras just in case Netflix wants their film - low budget or not. So crippling cameras to not have 10-bit 422 could cost them in a few years in the awards space. On my last 3-4 shoots, the client requested 422 10-bit 4K - which I use an EVA-1 for. All Canon has is the C300II and it's an amazingly lovely image, but the design is terrible and the general specifications are starting to get a bit old.
Canon just needs to understand that the C300II should die, release a souped-up C300 III and charge as much as they want for it, while also simultaneously releasing a compact C100 III with the 4K 10-bit 24-30fps that documentaries want and sometimes are required to have - anywhere under $7k.
I WANT to use Canon but have been using the EVA-1 and FS7 more on shoots because it's required. As a filmmaker/DP, it is frustrating to like a specific image (like Canon) and not be able to use it because it doesn't have the required specs. 
--
Canon's Lineup Should Be:
C300 Mark III (THE BEAST) - 8K upgradeable sensor, 60-96fps in 4K, internal raw, 10-12 bit at all resolutions - $15,000
For: Anyone who wants the highest quality Canon image. 
C200 (THE RAW CAMERA) - An affordable internal raw camera. Great B-Cam to C300 productions that need a camera on gimbal at all times - $7500
For: short docs, music videos, commercial producers. 
C100 Mark III (THE DOC/BROADCAST CAMERA) - 4K 10-bit 422 in HD and 4K. 120fps 10-bit in HD. 30-60fps in 4K. - $5499
For: One-man band crews, documentary filmmakers, owner-operators. 
--
Seems fairly obvious to me. Yes, the C300II will die, but if they don't let it die than I think they're going to lose out once Panasonic, Black Magic, and Sony release their next generation EVA, Ursa Mini, FS5, and FS7. ANY cinema/video camera released without 10-bit 4K from this point forward is a complete oversight. 
 

It should also be noted that many of these documentaries took 2-3 years to produce, shoot, edit, and release - and then another year or so to be nominated for an Oscar. So, this is not a reflection on what cameras documentaries are shot on in 2019, but rather what people wanted to shoot on in 2014 to 2016. That doesn't mean that three years from now, all docs will be shot on Sonys, but just a point that it's not really about what is released now.
With that said, even in 2019, Canon has the nicest looking image and the most reliable products in the doc-budget space. I wouldn't be surprised if the next few years many doc films are still shot on Canon cameras.
However, they need to be careful because many people in the doc space want to shoot on Netflix-approved cameras just in case Netflix wants their film - low budget or not. So crippling cameras to not have 10-bit 422 could cost them in a few years in the awards space. On my last 3-4 shoots, the client requested 422 10-bit 4K - which I use an EVA-1 for. All Canon has is the C300II and it's an amazingly lovely image, but the design is terrible and the general specifications are starting to get a bit old.
Canon just needs to understand that the C300II should die, release a souped-up C300 III and charge as much as they want for it, while also simultaneously releasing a compact C100 III with the 4K 10-bit 24-30fps that documentaries want and sometimes are required to have - anywhere under $7k.
I WANT to use Canon but have been using the EVA-1 and FS7 more on shoots because it's required. As a filmmaker/DP, it is frustrating to like a specific image (like Canon) and not be able to use it because it doesn't have the required specs. 
--
Canon's Lineup Should Be:
C300 Mark III (THE BEAST) - 8K upgradeable sensor, 60-96fps in 4K, internal raw, 10-12 bit at all resolutions - $15,000
For: Anyone who wants the highest quality Canon image. 
C200 (THE RAW CAMERA) - An affordable internal raw camera. Great B-Cam to C300 productions that need a camera on gimbal at all times - $7500
For: short docs, music videos, commercial producers. 
C100 Mark III (THE DOC/BROADCAST CAMERA) - 4K 10-bit 422 in HD and 4K. 120fps 10-bit in HD. 30-60fps in 4K. - $5499
For: One-man band crews, documentary filmmakers, owner-operators. 
--
Seems fairly obvious to me. Yes, the C300II will die, but if they don't let it die than I think they're going to lose out once Panasonic, Black Magic, and Sony release their next generation EVA, Ursa Mini, FS5, and FS7. ANY cinema/video camera released without 10-bit 4K from this point forward is a complete oversight. 
 

You might be right, but we haven't really had a major sub $20k video camera announcement since C200/EVA-1, so it's definitely been awhile.
It seems like so much progress has been made in codecs (BM Raw, ProRes Raw, H265) and mirrorless tech (X-T3, S1) that it would be prime time to release some great sub $10k video cameras. 
 
 
 

You might be right, but we haven't really had a major sub $20k video camera announcement since C200/EVA-1, so it's definitely been awhile.
It seems like so much progress has been made in codecs (BM Raw, ProRes Raw, H265) and mirrorless tech (X-T3, S1) that it would be prime time to release some great sub $10k video cameras. 
 
 
 

You might be right, but we haven't really had a major sub $20k video camera announcement since C200/EVA-1, so it's definitely been awhile.
It seems like so much progress has been made in codecs (BM Raw, ProRes Raw, H265) and mirrorless tech (X-T3, S1) that it would be prime time to release some great sub $10k video cameras. 
 
 
 

Yea the DVX200 has always been appealing - and one with interchangeable lenses would be great. 
As for Canon C100, I think you're probably right. 10-bit 422 in 4K is me just being hopeful. More likely it will have the same specs as the 4-year old FS5 (10-bit in HD, 8-bit in 4K) but without the SDI raw support. Granted, I'd take 8-bit Canon image over any 10-bit Sony image, but many clients or potential projects want to make sure they're filming in Netflix approved standards - just in case. 
The only way that the C100 would get 10-bit 422 would be if the C300 Mark III came out soon with a massive spec jump, such as 6K-8k, 60-120fps in 4K, internal raw, etc - as of now, the C300 only sells because people love the Canon image (as I do) and it's the ONLY affordable-ish Canon camera that has the required 10-bit 422. If they want to keep selling that camera, a $6k 10-bit 4K C100 Mark III would eat all of its sales. 
 
 
 

If Panasonic is going to keep using the MFT mount for the foreseeable future, I think it would be crazy to not release an MFT mini cinema camera. I can't believe someone hasn't yet. 
Basically stick the GH5s sensor (with G9 IBIS) and specs into a body the size of the FS5 with the MFT mount. With the forthcoming 10-25mm f1.7, that automatically becomes one of the most useable doc cameras. I like the idea of putting a Super35mm sensor in there as well (like the LS300) and then speedboosters would give you a full frame equivalent FOV/DoF.  But as long as they release some more f1.7 - f2 fast zooms, 4/3 sensor is fine too. 
No matter how good they get, until mirrorless cameras have internal NDs and quality audio, they do not replace dedicated video cameras - no matter if the image is just as good or not better. 
The hole in the $3-7k video camera market is huge. It's been 4 years (FS5) since anyone has released a new camera in this space (the II was basically a firmware update, so not sure that counts). Hoping Panasonic, Canon, or Fuji fill it soon.

I feel like Canon has made it clear that the C200 is a raw camera that also has other shooting options, so I wouldn't be too, too surprised (this is Canon after all) if they released a non-raw camera that does have a 4K 10-bit codec. It's definitely not a "better" codec than the C200's raw, but it is way more useful for most of my applications (and I would think most shooters in the sub $10k camera range). And yes, I guess they do have the C300II for 10-bit 4K, but it is 4 year old camera that is terribly designed. 
The only hope for Canon is if they go all out on the C300 Mark III and stop worrying about Mark II sales. The existence of the C300 Mark II at $10k is a main reason the C200 doesn't have a good middle-ground codec and that no C100 Mark III exists. 
My two main needs for a cinema camera are:
- 10-bit 4K Codec and
- Small, lightweight design (FS5-sized or smaller).

How the main 4-5 manufacturers haven't released a camera like that by 2019 is a mystery to me. 

If Panasonic is going to keep using the MFT mount for the foreseeable future, I think it would be crazy to not release an MFT mini cinema camera. I can't believe someone hasn't yet. 
Basically stick the GH5s sensor (with G9 IBIS) and specs into a body the size of the FS5 with the MFT mount. With the forthcoming 10-25mm f1.7, that automatically becomes one of the most useable doc cameras. I like the idea of putting a Super35mm sensor in there as well (like the LS300) and then speedboosters would give you a full frame equivalent FOV/DoF.  But as long as they release some more f1.7 - f2 fast zooms, 4/3 sensor is fine too. 
No matter how good they get, until mirrorless cameras have internal NDs and quality audio, they do not replace dedicated video cameras - no matter if the image is just as good or not better. 
The hole in the $3-7k video camera market is huge. It's been 4 years (FS5) since anyone has released a new camera in this space (the II was basically a firmware update, so not sure that counts). Hoping Panasonic, Canon, or Fuji fill it soon.

If Panasonic is going to keep using the MFT mount for the foreseeable future, I think it would be crazy to not release an MFT mini cinema camera. I can't believe someone hasn't yet. 
Basically stick the GH5s sensor (with G9 IBIS) and specs into a body the size of the FS5 with the MFT mount. With the forthcoming 10-25mm f1.7, that automatically becomes one of the most useable doc cameras. I like the idea of putting a Super35mm sensor in there as well (like the LS300) and then speedboosters would give you a full frame equivalent FOV/DoF.  But as long as they release some more f1.7 - f2 fast zooms, 4/3 sensor is fine too. 
No matter how good they get, until mirrorless cameras have internal NDs and quality audio, they do not replace dedicated video cameras - no matter if the image is just as good or not better. 
The hole in the $3-7k video camera market is huge. It's been 4 years (FS5) since anyone has released a new camera in this space (the II was basically a firmware update, so not sure that counts). Hoping Panasonic, Canon, or Fuji fill it soon.

If Panasonic is going to keep using the MFT mount for the foreseeable future, I think it would be crazy to not release an MFT mini cinema camera. I can't believe someone hasn't yet. 
Basically stick the GH5s sensor (with G9 IBIS) and specs into a body the size of the FS5 with the MFT mount. With the forthcoming 10-25mm f1.7, that automatically becomes one of the most useable doc cameras. I like the idea of putting a Super35mm sensor in there as well (like the LS300) and then speedboosters would give you a full frame equivalent FOV/DoF.  But as long as they release some more f1.7 - f2 fast zooms, 4/3 sensor is fine too. 
No matter how good they get, until mirrorless cameras have internal NDs and quality audio, they do not replace dedicated video cameras - no matter if the image is just as good or not better. 
The hole in the $3-7k video camera market is huge. It's been 4 years (FS5) since anyone has released a new camera in this space (the II was basically a firmware update, so not sure that counts). Hoping Panasonic, Canon, or Fuji fill it soon.

I used the FS5 for a couple of years and loved the form factor, variable ND, E-Mount, and pretty much everything about the camera other than the image (which of course is most important) - and the internal 4K isn't great at all. Hoping Canon, Fuji, or Black Magic challenge Sony in this mini video camera space. 
A Black Magic pocket 4K with a more video-camera style, internal NDs, Sony NPF batteries, and XLRs would be great: a mini Ursa Pro (actually mini). Even the same sensor, Dual ISO, image quality, etc - the Pocket 4K is pretty far ahead of the FS5 in 4K image quality, and at $1295.  So a video camera version in the $3-5k would be great and also doesn't seem too much like a stretch. 
BM Raw is definitely my current favorite codec, so would love to see it implemented in more cameras as well. 

Yep that's the GH5. I'd say he's got the Olympus 7-14mm on there for a lot of those shots. 

The EF to RF mount adapters (Canon has three different ones) are all excellent. I use all EF glass on my EOS R right now and the adapter stays on the camera and honestly feels as solid as a native EF mount. Autofocus seems just as snappy as a native EF mount as well. Very much looking forward to the adapter that has the variable ND in it that's supposed to be shipping in the next couple of weeks.
Canon has a done a great job with adapters for the RF Mount so I don't see any problem putting the RF Mount on new cinema or video cameras at all. Could even ship with an adapter to start (like the RP and R do now) - but it's a much better long-term solution to go with the RF Mount. I doubt I'll buy another EF video camera with a Super35 sensor due to the lack of solid lenses for that format. At least with the RF you have the potential for speedboosters and many more true Super35 lenses. 

Or an adapter of some kind to get the X5 and X7 on to the Ronin-S handle.

Yea I think we'll see a C300 Mark III before we see anything in the C100/XC-RF range. But I do feel like Canon would do really well to put out a documentary/journalism camera in the $5-$6k range, but to do that it would HAVE to have what many outlets require now (10-bit 422 4K), even just at 24-30fps. Their lineup should be C300 for 6-8k raw plus higher frame rates for cinema and high-end jobs, C200 for low cost raw but not an every day workhorse, and a C100 for the solo-shooter documentary and journalism camera. 
I would say these are two that I'm most excited about (since I'm assuming Canon will let me down). Fuji could do really well since they have no high-end to protect and that amazing lens lineup, film color profiles, and cinema history. 
I would have made the EVA-1 my main camera if it would have had an MFT mount. That camera with a Super35mm sensor + a speedbooster would have been amazing. Add MFT lens support with the JVC LS300's sensor punch-in for small and light options and it would have been great.
--
Maybe it's just me or there are true technical limitations that don't seem like they should be limitations (10-bit 4K, Canon), but it seems like manufacturers have been making some good, but not great cameras for awhile now. A lot of them are close (EVA-1, C200) but are just hindered by a few stupid mistakes or decisions... Just wanting someone to really throw all their muscle behind a small-ish cinema camera and try to go all out - like Fuji did with the X-T3. Surely for another $4,000 they could make a killer mini cinema camera.