I believe metadata exists to avoid problems, improve our decisions in post and probably a million other reasons I haven't thought of. Why is it near impossible to retain video metadata all the way through to editing?
Pretend we are in a shoot. One of the cameras is the Sony A7S, another the FS700. Importing through FCP X 10.2 most metadata is thrown away. Metadata such as s-log tags, focal length, etc... In fact, no software other than Sony Catalyst Browse will see this metadata and even this software won't export this data in any way attached to the video clips or otherwise.
So many workflow enhancements can come from having metadata. From custom clip renaming to faster and more accurate color grading. And this is just having the same brand/format cameras in a shoot. Imagine bringing different brands into the mix - which is the case most if all of the time.
Raise your hand if you really need a simple yet powerful metadata management app that you don't need a 500€ subscription to it like SilverStack - which doesn't really work with many formats in any case!
We are only at the beginning of metadata-based video editing, and FCP X is at the forefront of this movement. ARRI and RED metadata are already fully available in FCP X without the need for any external application. I'm sure other camera manufacturers will have to follow their steps.
Thing is that Sony cameras being the example, they do record a lot of this metadata. Using exiftool one can see it. Apple, Adobe and Avid software doesn't. Lack of a standard wrapper format could be an issue here, but there seems to be no tool to even work around this in a semi-automatic manner. Yes the metadata age is in its infancy, but the technology is all here and every camera manufacturer is embedding it in their own way. This is not an issue with photography these days fortunately and that is a great example of good metadata usage.
Apple, Adobe and Avid software are very capable of displaying detailed camera metadata. Wether the metadata get carried over from the camera to the software is not related to how the file is wrapped, it is related to proper formatting. As shown in the example RED and ARRI can do this properly, so Sony could do this as well. But standards have always been the opposite of Sony's philosophy because they like to sell proprietary applications and hardware. I guess that's why they seem to "invent" new proprietary codecs every four months. So I think Sony is (and probably always will be) a bad example of how metadata can be used in standard production workflows.
Nick raises a very valid point, there are 3 serious players in the game of non linear, and a raft of minor support players, the 3 big names, the 3 A's, Avid, Adobe and Apple all have propitiatory code for the software they created.
It is so frustrating to drive a car with the indicator switch on the left, get into a rental and it is on the right..Bloody wipers on and off on a 40C day...Why not have 1 standard for all cars, whether you drive on the left or the wrong side, the pedals are the same, left for clutch [not common on the wrong side of the road] middle is brake and right is the go faster pedal...
If all cars around the world follow this, why not the same with wipers and indicators?
The same for code, why not have 1 standard, yes the GUI can be different, but the data should respect a standard, maybe a pipe dream..