Absolutely. I was thinking about a Pocket 4K (which is IMO much more versatile than the 6K) as well but also needed to use the camera as a still backup and have a good AF and IBIS for various reasons. Hybrid problems...

For narratives I still go with my F5/R5-combination which I love. The a7s3 is the addition for occasional gimbal shots or tiny places and small/light rigged setups.

I totally missed that one. A cine-cam without DCI res support.... Thanks for pointing that out. Sony will argue, that the HDMI RAW output is 4.2k and surpasses DCI requirements though.

LUTs and waveform are things everybody needs for preview and customizing a matching look in multiple cams maybe even with burnt-in look into the footage.
Not only cine but also documentaries, indies, corporate films etc.

But nobody is complaining. Everything is about nerdy tech spec dick comparison. Seems like nobody is actually using those cameras properly or they would recognize those missing features.

As am F-Series user since 2014 I'm still pretty frustrated about the fact that Sony doesn't support S35 anymore.
Anyway, since I use the A7 series for stills, I went with the A7sIII. I probably would go with the FX3 if I hadn't.
Veryery happy with the quality and features but still sadly glimpsing at my unusable and btw much lighter S35-lenses (especially zooms for run&gun).

Regarding dislikes:
I totally agree with Oakley regarding the missing viewfinder. Small monitors are nice but I want an old school peep hole. @Justin: It's not for long periods, just to have a reliable control feature if needed.

NDs would have been a major distinguishing feature between the Alpha and Cine line and one reason for buying a motion picture oriented camera. I know, ND is for video, real cinema... bladibla... it's 2021.

Speaking of distinguishing cine features:
Nobody talks about about the fact that the FX3 uses the same still photo-oriented software? This already made me furious when reading the specs (and price!!) for the "video-oriented" a7sIII.
And now, six month later, the FX3 Cine-Wannabe at 4000 bucks still has no LUT-support, waveform or vectorscope!!! W.T.F.? Panasonic understood that seven years (!) ago when they released the GH4.

Since camera manufacturers are tending to produce more and more cameras with a full frame sensor in a low to mid price range (e.g. FX9, a7sIII, R5, R6), I would love to see a good budget lens like this with the respective coverage and focal length.

Or even better: less FF-cameras and more S35-cameras again!!! Small cameras needing heavy FF-glasses is ridiculous regarding modern uses like gimbal-setups.

I know, there is a use for FF in cinema. but it seems like everybody is going FF and then not being able to afford a good lens for the camera.

Fujinon MKs have E-Mount but can't be used on the FX9 or a7s.
DZO produced a nice MFT zoom-set. So basically, only BMD-Pocket and GH5 users in mind.
The Laowa includes EF- and E-mounts but most professional cameras with those mount haves FF-sensors. Who would use a 5k-lens on a Sony a6600.

Are they talking to each other? Feels like lenses and cameras are drifting more and more apart in terms of compatibility. Or is it just my confused mind?

That's funny. I wrote a paper on Erwin Panofsky's Dynamization of Space using Day of the Fight and Kubricks photo essay in my bachelor time.

It's in German only, but if anyone is interested, here' a link to download:
https://www.academia.edu/21450935/Stanley_Kubrick_-_Prizefighter_vs._Day...äumliche_Entwicklung_von_der_Einzelbildfotografie_zum_Film_unter_Berücksichtigung_von_Erwin_Panofskys_Dynamisierung_des_Raumes