Shirozina

No such thing as a cheap fluid head as most budget designs are not true fluid heads and just friction devices. Best entry level fluid head today is probably the EImage range esp the GH06 which some have found to be better than the Sachtler FSB range. Kick-back at the end of a pan is not caused by the head but the tripod which will twist under torsional load and then spring back when the load is removed. Again the only solution to this is a better ( twin tube not mono tube) and generally more expensive tripod. The main reason video tripods are twin tube and photo tripods are mono tube is for this very reason. The bottom line is that to guarantee repeatable smooth and precise movements you need to spend a lot of money AND the longer the lens you use the better the quality has to be to ensure smoothness. Not forgetting that smooth camera movements with even the best kit also require user skill from lots of practice.

Why not just put an ND filter on your 800 iso camera to get that 'back in the day' look?

The XPS 9570 still suffers from CPU and GPU throttling when run hard (like my 9560) but as it has Thunderbolt it can use an external GPU. These slim laptops are just not designed to deal with the thermal stress of sustained high CPU and GPU rates but if you can offload this work to an external box it may solve it. I have a 4 disk RAID0 on my 9560 via Thunderbolt which gives me 500 mbps data rates but the Thunderbolt chip side of the laptop gets very hot. If you have a big raid storage box and eGPU + laptop you have to ask yourself why are you not using a small desktop ( micro ATX form factor) PC and a Screen......

Yes but you will be throwing away image data in the process and there is no need when you have proxy workflows available.

There is a Canon EF-S 17-55 2.8 (but you will need another speedbooster but the Viltrox EF-M2 is pretty good and a lot cheaper than the Metabones)

It’s still a highly compressed codec and hard work to decode.

Depends on what codec and how complex their timelines are. Gaming laptops are good in some ways as they have powerful GPU's and are designed for hard continual use but often lack good quality screens for any grading capability.

Basically I'd say you need a totally new PC if you are editing a feature on a 4k highly compressed codec as you will need a lot of CPU power as well as GPU + fast storage.

The standard XP’s 9570 is a better spec - do you really need the 2 in1 feature. Laptops are pretty poor choices for 4K video editing as they just don’t have the cooling capacity so for real-time playback and rendering and they will shudder to a stuttering mess very quickly. Good for reviewing footage but for editing I’d stick to a good desktop machine.

Cache, proxies etc -anything that needs fast read and write but isn't too big. Still no idea what res and codec you are going to be working on so any advice here on what hardware you need is pretty useless without that info.....

What is your timeline and delivery resolution and what size and codec camera files are you going to be editing in your feature as without knowing this it's difficult to advise on what hardware will do the job

I'd be interested to see if this could do good fluid head moves when mounted on a tripod ?

Another issue to be aware of when adding lots of ND ( either fixed or variable) is IR filtering.

The OP is doing multiple exposures so the images have to be in perfect registration so IS has to be off for this use. Other scenarios may well differ. When I mount my Canon IS lenses on my GH5 I get the choice of using the lens IS or body IS and it's clear that the body IS is doing a much better job for video than the lens IS. I don't shoot stills with my GH5 so it may be different in that situation. Most tripods suffer from 'jitters' when you are using a long lens and there is any breeze around so it's often advantageous to keep IS on in these situations for a locked off shot.The GH5's IS system is pretty amazing esp the dual IS and even more especially the 'IS lock' setting which has in a lot of situations made my tripod redundant.

OK...... 28-135 would be the obvious choice for the Sony. If it's too heavy then ditch some of your other kit/clothes etc. If you job is getting the footage then you have to decide what's important and what's not.

What real world situation would create this?

Good luck with getting better IBS as the physical limitations of a smaller body size and 4x sensor size mean it will always be inferior.

Not everyone wants or needs 4k60p but 10bit with a less compressed codec like the GH5's 400mbps would be my hope and likley Sony's baseline for staying competitive in this sector.

or put another way - would you buy a C200 instead of the BMPCC 4k if it was 1/2 the price.........

+1 4k is not even a capture tech - it's just a sampling rate. '4k' can be HD 8bit 4.2.0 in a 25mbps badly compressed codec up sampled or it can be derived from 8k RAW 4.4.4 16bit. It's not a standard of image quality at all unless you start referencing broadcast standards where resolution, chroma sub sampling, bit depth and data rate are objectified and testable criteria. Thus a client who requests '4k' in image terms is like a client who requests 'hi-fi' sound in audio terms.......

Shooting 4k is one thing - delivering the finished product in 4k is quite another. The majority of '4k capable' cameras are very good at producing very good HD final imagery but are not capable in broadcast standard terms of creating a true 4k end product.

96khz sample rate recording

Theoretically the XC10's high data rate should mean good image quality but I just saw high levels of detail destroying NR and appalling banding in skies so I can only assume Canon did not use a very sophisticated image processing and compression system.

On my XC10 the HDMI out was no better than the internal - i.e it had identical banding in the skies so maybe Canon are sending a highly compressed signal to their HDMI port?

The codec for the HDMI out on my Sony A7s and A7r2 is way better than the internal one. It's not the 4.2.0 vs 4.2.2 but the compression is way less destructive on ProRes than Sony's internal codec. You can shoot Slog and not worry about banding artefacts in skies. Also for editing in your NLE a codec like ProRes is way easier on your CPU and GPU than a cameras highly compressed codec.