It sounds like general diffusion is what you are looking for. It can take the edge off a super sharp lens while still leaving a good amount of details.
The Black Pro-Mist is a popular one. Depending on the need 1/8-1/4 can be plenty.
A quick search shows a test posted to youtube For Pro-Misthttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DobrWpXW6HA
Link to b&h herehttps://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/55643-REG/Tiffen_72BPM14_72mm_Bla...
It seems like they are targeting a different market than you are in.
There is a growing and strong market segment in the Sony E-mount cameras.
A6500, A7SII,FS5 and the FS7.
Unfortunately there isn't a whole lot of cinema glass for those cameras at the right price. There are adapters for Canon lenses, but many people prefer to have native mounts. You can get the interchangeable mount Zeiss zooms, but they start at 10k. The Sony G-master lenses are less expensive and nice, but not great for cinema. This Fuji fills a niche nicely, It should rent for about $100 a day. The specs on the lens are great at the price. That isn't that much more than an Canon L zoom with an EF to E adapter.
Fuji has an amazing track record in professional broadcast with high end lenses. The creation of a cinema targeted e-mount lens shows that Sony has made an impact. This lens should make some people very happy.
you can get the same performance from the pre 1.0.3 as the after. The noise correction and chroma noise reduction was turned off by default. Turning it on makes a big difference in performance.
Clog2 seems hold more dynamic range than clog3 but as you said, it is easier to grade. It's close enough to ARRILog C you can put an arri lut on Clog3 material and tune in a hue adjust, saturation adjustment and pretty much rock and roll.
It's really great to see another reference monitor at this price point. Having it calibrated as it leaves the factory puts it the the same league as top end manufacturers.
In general P3 is not really usable onset, or even on a desktop. P3 has a reference white level of 48 nits, and is meant to be viewed in a totally dark room. If you try and view it at the proper level on set, it is to dark to be truly useful. If you raise the brightness to see an image you are now not in P3 but in an non-standard display calibration. As well it is difficult to have a completely dark room to view the content in. Onset bt1886, bt2020, or REC2100 is are more appropriate solutions.
So a few comments on the write up.
" Delta LogE is a method of measuring accuracy, and anything lower than 2 is considered acceptable for motion picture work and unnoticeably different from perfect to to the human eye."
That is incorrect. The measurement is abbreviated as DeltaE. The definition of DeltaE is so that anything greater than 1.0 is visible, anything less then 1.0 is not visible. There are many types of DeltaE measurements, but they all strive to define 1.0 DeltaE as the smallest just noticeable difference.
Calibration will not hold up critically over year. Starting calibrated is better than not being calibrated. Calibrations need to be performed to keep color accuracy. Many factors affect how long a calibration 'sticks', number of hours on the display, number of times the display was moved, change in humidity, change in temperature, and type of display technology.
Yes I did mean
"there is little effect between shooting at 3.2k vs 4, 6 or 8k for a 4k presentation."
That is not very helpful. There are very few resources available for people to understand imaging pipeline and camera design.
If someone in the community heard from trusted there are flaws in a camera test it's not helpful to call them "butthurt RED fanboys" Especially since they stayed in the realm of respectability and didn't disparage the DP's involved.