would you like Panasonic abandon the 4096 x 2160 cine recording to allow a bigger ultra hd size in the sensor? if there is no 4096 x 2160 the 3840 x 2160 can be 21,633 diagonal with a 2x crop instead of 2,1x in previous draw. So it will be better to keep the cine4k or not?

If there is no cine4k, the sensor would be like this draw, and the total pixel count would be a little smaller, considering the green box is the ultra hd 3840 x 2160:

Open the two draws in a new tab in browser and alternate between them to perceive the differences.

this allows a little bit better low light in ultra hd and 1080p, a little bit more shallow dof in ultra hd and 1080p, a little bit less crop in ultra hd and 1080p, but there is no way to do the 4096 x 2160.

So which one do you prefer?

Do you think 4096 is useful? Or do you prefer the Ultra Hd 3840 with bigger area, bigger diagonal, less crop, bigger pixels, better low light?

Does it exist a 4096 x 2160 PC monitor? Or it would be more easy to buy a 3840 x 2160 PC monitor? Same question for TV set, most tv sets are 1920 x 1080 or 3840 x 2160...

Would it be more easy and simple to put two black bars at sides to make 3840 to be 4096 for DCP output for cinema theater presentation, instead of film and edit the 4096? The difference in theaters would be almost unnoticeable in the image width...

Feel free to share the images.

I agree. I think Panasonic will not remove the 4096x2160 because it can help selling cameras, but I also think very few people will use it.