# Canon, Canon Canon….. Please help the video stars



## Canon Rumors Guy (Feb 16, 2019)

> I’m not a video guy (though that is changing), and I usually err on the side of Canon when it comes to the video features that they put into cameras. I realize a lot of what they may omit from a camera can sometimes come down to reliability and usability, as they want to make a creative tool that you don’t really have to worry about. I think anyone can admit Canon is probably at the top of the heap when it comes to these sorts things, even if the spec list doesn’t set the world on fire.
> 
> I also realize Canon seems to want to protect camera models that are up the food chain. Though I’ve always liked Steve Jobs’ philosophy on this; “If you don’t cannibalize yourself, someone else will”. But that’s a conversation for another day.
> Now we have the Canon EOS RP, a small full-frame camera that looks fantastic for stills shooters. Video shooters were pretty much expecting an EOS M50 with a full frame sensor and an RF mount, which I think was a completely justified expectation. No one was...



Continue reading...


----------



## kaptainkatsu (Feb 16, 2019)

Yeah pretty much not going to buy the RP now to replace my M50. The video specs are so nerfed that its unbelievable.


----------



## TMHKR (Feb 16, 2019)

When (read: if ever) DIGIC 8 gets hacked, most of these could be, eh... "Fixed by force".


----------



## Tom W (Feb 16, 2019)

I can see the 23/24 fps issue being easy to resolve, but I think possibly that with the APS-C lens, the image circle is too small to cover enough pixels for 1080P. Maybe.

I'm not a video guy so it doesn't mean a lot to me, but a lot of people do like to dabble into video in a pretty big way.


----------



## ketsang (Feb 16, 2019)

The person who made these decisions in Canon must be paid by Sony!!!

It could have been so so so so much better.


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 16, 2019)

Tom W said:


> I can see the 23/24 fps issue being easy to resolve, but I think possibly that with the APS-C lens, the image circle is too small to cover enough pixels for 1080P. Maybe.
> 
> I'm not a video guy so it doesn't mean a lot to me, but a lot of people do like to dabble into video in a pretty big way.



1080P would be half the resolution (linear) on the same sensor area hence there is no image circle issue. It's just a non-existing setting.


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 16, 2019)

<140dB>
_*CANON:*_ _*PLEASE*__* ADD *__*THESE *__*STANDARD *__*VIDEO *__*MODES*_
</140dB>

or I am more satisfied with a 2nd M50 body ...


----------



## RayValdez360 (Feb 16, 2019)

This is why we criticize Canon. too many fanboys always find a way to defend them even when they pull crap like this. Then you got the "I dont do video" guys. No one cares about you guys. You are relics. Video is important in 2019.


----------



## frankos72 (Feb 16, 2019)

basically the exact same sensor as the 6dii, I don't recall hearing about this as a problem with the 6dii. What it comes down to is they have to have a different sensor readout for the crop frame vs full frame. They already know how though, so it's not like they have to rewrite the software. Common cannon, get your act together! If this thing had 1080p 24fps AND IBIS it would be the new vlogger camera of choice. So close.


----------



## tmroper (Feb 16, 2019)

If Canon is going to do this kind of thing with video in 2019, they'd be better off selling it with no video capabilities at all. Leica does just that with certain models, and it's at least honest and clear: this camera is for stills, not video--please buy a different model if you want moving picture.


----------



## Pape (Feb 16, 2019)

canon must feel really sure about its position, to able downgrade cameras . They must know something we dont know


----------



## preppyak (Feb 16, 2019)

Tom W said:


> I can see the 23/24 fps issue being easy to resolve, but I think possibly that with the APS-C lens, the image circle is too small to cover enough pixels for 1080P. Maybe.
> 
> I'm not a video guy so it doesn't mean a lot to me, but a lot of people do like to dabble into video in a pretty big way.


Nah. Sony does this with all of their cameras with no problem. In fact, the 1.5x crop mode is considered the better mode on the Sony a7rII and a7rIII because of how it bins the pixels.

The R and the RP automatically recognize when an EF-S lens is attached and crop the image to the sensor. For the EOS R, it automatically crops 1.8x for EF-S lenses in video (though you can only shoot 1080/30 and 1080/24...not 1080/60 for some inane reason). Unless the Digic processors are signficantly weaker than Sony, there's really no excuse to not be able to do it when 1080 video only needs 2mp of sensor.

Thats a huge flaw, because the way a lot of people have worked around the 1.7x crop on Canon 4k is to use EF-S lenses to get wider. If you lock that off, you completely kill an RF camera for any wide angle filming. Native mount you cant get wider than 43mm equivalent. With EF you can get to 24mm equivalent, but you're talking heavier/more expensive lenses than an EF-S 10-18mm.


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 16, 2019)

... or is the RP just a test object where they respond after users had their word? Some type of market research which is much cheaper and maybe much better than doing that by a consulting firm which (1) has no interest in photo/video and (2) no interest in a good outcome of its consulting.

If it goes the way of the EOS M original it will be 700 EUR/$ within one year so I have to rethink buying it just for FF photography or they add some features afterwards via firmware. Both ways are suited to convince me to try that camera.


----------



## Kit. (Feb 16, 2019)

tmroper said:


> If Canon is going to do this kind of thing with video in 2019, they'd be better off selling it with no video capabilities at all. Leica does just that with certain models, and it's at least honest and clear: this camera is for stills, not video--please buy a different model if you want moving picture.


I am pretty sure that this camera will produce more video coverage than all Leica models combined.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Feb 16, 2019)

2 crazy things is that canon had the first 4k dslr back in like 2012. and then the 1dx II has 4k 60p and 120 1080p. so their cameras are capable of good video modes. this has to be just nerfing on purpose or the digic 8 is crap. I just say that because there is a lot of talk about canon cant do certain thing because of the processors but a 3 year old camera is killing it even compared to their 2019 line up.


----------



## JonSnow (Feb 16, 2019)

but but.. canon sells a lot of cameras and they have the biggest marketshare. that must count for something.

canon is always right....


----------



## neo302 (Feb 16, 2019)

I've never preordered and cancelled a camera so fast. The video features are a complete joke. Canon obviously doesn't care to lead in this space for now as they could if they wanted to. They need to get back to the mentality they had when they released the 70D.


----------



## Nelu (Feb 16, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> You are relics. Video is important in 2019.


For you, not for me!
Speak for yourself, you jacka$$!


----------



## sdz (Feb 16, 2019)

Canon sometimes acts in annoying and inexplicably irrational ways. The company spends much time and money getting the body right. It also cripples camera performance that accomplishes nothing more than to annoy its customers. Why? Who? 

And Canon resists adding features with firmware updates. Why? Who?


----------



## tmroper (Feb 16, 2019)

Kit. said:


> I am pretty sure that this camera will produce more video coverage than all Leica models combined.


Well, that's true. Leica shooters in general probably aren't into video as much as others.


----------



## jvillain (Feb 16, 2019)

I just don't get Canon at all any more. Cell phones are eating our lunch so lets take features out of our cameras that cost nothing to include? If they hadn't taken such a vindictive approach to their video features here they had a chance to step on the competitions air hose. But they blew that as well. As it is, I don't see who the target audience is either on the stills side or the video side for this Frankenstien camera.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 16, 2019)

TMHKR said:


> When (read: if ever) DIGIC 8 gets hacked, most of these could be, eh... "Fixed by force".



I wouldn't count on it. Magic Latern still hasn't release a 5D IV FW and it's a Digic 6/6+. It has been released since 2016.

If anything, they have made security more difficult with each Digic processor.

Edit: Buy the camera that fit your needs. Don't expect third party solutions. You may have to wait for years, if ever, for those features.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 16, 2019)

Nelu said:


> For you, not for me!
> Speak for yourself, you jacka$$!



Easy there. It's only a camera. No need to be hostile to him about it


----------



## lightthief (Feb 16, 2019)

hi.
I own and like canon's fisheye zoom. Sometimes i wish i could use it at 8mm for video. But it seems it is not possible.
Is it possible (work around) to get a video from the full 3:2 sensor, or, why isn't it possible? The cropped full circle at 8mm looks strange.
Please, Canon, can i have a 3:2 video mode? Thanks.


----------



## peterzuehlke (Feb 16, 2019)

tmroper said:


> Well, that's true. Leica shooters in general probably aren't into video as much as others.


Or maybe the Leica people have enough money that when they shoot video it is on a Canon C300. And this is what the Canon plan is. Video is important, and if it is important to you you buy a Canon cinema camera.


----------



## bhf3737 (Feb 16, 2019)

I am not going to defend the decision of missing 24p and I think that the users should have the option of using or not using it rather than being denied at the first place. I also think that 24p it can be added rather easily via firmware update.
But, and it is a big but here. We shouldn't forget: (1) who is the end user of this camera; and (2) who is going to evaluate the footage that comes out of this camera. I guess Canon believes that the answer for both is average users (travel guys, pet adorers, soccer moms, etc.) who buy this low end and low cost camera.
Videographers know that 24p give a (perceived) cinematic/artistic look. But 24p does not look smooth on 60Hz (normal) television/displays without proper treatment and the image gets jittery (2:3 pull-down effect), i.e., the shots, specially panning shots, will not look good unless you do "slow and steady pans" that the soccer moms are not used to it. They are not used to NLEs like Premiere Pro to adjust the speed-duration in the timeline, too. 
So if I am an average user and use 24p to shoot my dog running around and pull the video as it is and show it on my TV, it won't look good and stutters. Then my impression will be what the heck! I spent 1300$ on this camera to get footage like this that jumps every other second? But if I shoot in 30p and watch on 60Hz television everything will look perfect and I'll be happy and Canon will be happy to sell more. 
Conclusion: There may be a good reason behind every nerfed decision, even if you don't like it.


----------



## sdz (Feb 16, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> I wouldn't count on it. Magic Latern still hasn't release a 5D IV FW and it's a Digic 6/6+. It has been released since 2016.
> 
> _If anything, they have made security more difficult with each Digic processor. _{emphasis added}



So, Canon engineers do accomplish some goals!

/sarcasm


----------



## N-VB (Feb 16, 2019)

Canon "Why don't you sell your kid for spare parts, many rich peoples are looking for a liver or heart... then buy a C300"


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 16, 2019)

bhf3737 said:


> I
> 
> [...] But if I shoot in 30P and watch on 60Hz television everything will look perfect and I'll be happy and Canon will be happy to sell more.
> Conclusion: There may be a good reason behind every nerfed decision, even if we don't like it.



Is a modern TV not a computer display with built-in video reproduction (from USB) soft- and hardware and some satellite receiver?
As far as I know BlueRay has often 24p and TV sets have to be compatible with it.


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Feb 16, 2019)

I think many of us would be much more tolerant of Canon's technical hurdles with video if they weren't so obviously screwing us over for marketing and product placement purposes. Areas where we know they have the tech to compete, they just won't. 

Honestly, if video is something you care about you owe it to yourself to look elsewhere while Canon sorts this out. A FujiFilm X-t3 is cheap, comes packaged with an excellent IS kit lens, and runs rings around every non-cinema body Canon makes. I love Canon for stills but they've allowed Video to pass them by which is sad because, at it's core, DPAF should be a winner.


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 16, 2019)

N-VB said:


> Canon "Why don't you sell yor kid for spare parts, many rich peoples are looking for a liver or heart... then buy a C300"



I had the same thought - not about selling some organs, not necessary, I buy cheap 2nd hand cars and use them for an extended period - ok. it is pricey but if you really are into video maybe worth it. Maybe a C100 with XLR inputs is a much better option than an SLR if 1080p is sufficient.
For me I do not want to own to many different series of products. (O.k., too late, EOS M, APS-C, 5D i as FF) I want to reduce the number of things I own and would have been happy with a solid FF photo + video camera in ONE package.
I decided to buy a 4 channel XLR recorder for a 4 MIC setup to have good audio which is very often more essential than some percent more sharpness. The RP would have been an option for FF high aperture scenes in ... 1080 24p - I lik e my EF 100 f/2.0 and combining that with the control ring adapter: gorgous.

Just yesterday I viewed the movie Taxi Driver from 1976. Grainy video, good 1280x720 is adequate to reproduce that film. But the sound design is great and ... this movie is truely immersive - not by using surround and 4k but by using very good sound (I have only a stereo setup), great lighting and a great story.


----------



## stevelee (Feb 16, 2019)

mb66energy said:


> Is a modern TV not a computer display with built-in video reproduction (from USB) soft- and hardware and some satellite receiver?
> As far as I know BlueRay has often 24p and TV sets have to be compatible with it.


I would think by now that all TVs of any size run at 120 Hz or 240 Hz. My 10-year-old Sony LCD set runs at 120 Hz, and everything still looks good on it. I watch a fair number of movies on Blu-Ray. 120 is divisible by 24 as well as 30 and 60. 25 Hz PAL wouldn't do so well, but then I don't have any sources for it.


----------



## Talys (Feb 16, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> This is why we criticize Canon. too many fanboys always find a way to defend them even when they pull crap like this. Then you got the "I dont do video" guys. No one cares about you guys. You are relics. Video is important in 2019.


Canon cares about us guys who don't want to pay more for video features we won't use, and they show this by segmenting their product line. They are rewarded by having the highest camera sales. 

Now, I truly don't care about video, and I don't care about you, either, but that's just reciprocating your indifference to what I want in a camera. However, Canon does care about you and other video centric users because they make cameras that are great for video, from the M50 to 1DX2 and professional video products, too.


----------



## 5D35D46D2R (Feb 16, 2019)

Yes. Yes. And yes please Canon. Please add these two features mentioned above.

Can I also please ask, whilst we are asking for these for the EOS RP, can you kindly publish the major firmware update for the EOS R.

Specifically, software upgrade / firmware for Eye Detect AF.
Two specific user requirements .
1. The proximity of eye detection needs a big improvement. Currently, eyes are only detected at a headshot distance. This needs to change.
2. Currently, with the EOS R, Eye Detection AF is only possible when AF 1: AF Operation is set to One Shot and AF Method is set to Face+Tracking.

We need this to change to include AF 1: AF Operation set to Servo and AF Method is set to Face+Tracking. 

There are a few other desirable functionality but these two will be a big improvement to the Canon R eco system.


----------



## Talys (Feb 16, 2019)

mb66energy said:


> Is a modern TV not a computer display with built-in video reproduction (from USB) soft- and hardware and some satellite receiver?
> As far as I know BlueRay has often 24p and TV sets have to be compatible with it.


They're optimized for different things, even though they are often based on the same or similar technology. Movies or sports don't look amazing on most monitors for PCs and text is usually inferior on a TV compared to a same size computer monitor.


----------



## Andrei (Feb 16, 2019)

In my 4 years as a pro photographer a shoot with 6d and 5d3.
I never touch the video function for the camera... 
Ok mabey one time...accidentallly.

But...in 2019...when competition has so much to offer....not putting 24/25/30/60 and so on in every camera and to have superb quality on 1080...you must have belly...or be stupid. 
If you have belly...that meens that you have best sensor on market (eitch it isn't) best af sustem... And so on with 1st in mind photografy... And shure... In the price range... 
But wheit....canon does not have belly... Because it's not the greatest on the market on photography more specific...including apsc also
So... The first variant with belly...not the case here.... Witch meens that... Beeing stupit is the only thing left. 

Eaven if i don't make video... I can say this... 750d frim nikon... It's miles away better then 5d3 or 6d...in photography... 
I don't have one...and i regret now that wasn't buy first a 610d
Canon simply don't listen...they have a beautifull ecosistem...i can admit that...but the main tool to drive the ecosistem it's not what we want and need. 

A lot of canon shoothers has left canon...for fuji and sony.... Not the same for nikon... 

So... In 2019...not having 24/25/30/60/120 in 1080 at a high quality... It is a shame... And a proof that someone... Can and it does...piss on us. 

Shame cancrap...just bring something good on the table to give you my money again.


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Feb 16, 2019)

Talys said:


> Canon cares about us guys who don't want to pay more for video features we won't use, and they show this by segmenting their product line. They are rewarded by having the highest camera sales.
> 
> Now, I truly don't care about video, and I don't care about you, either, but that's just reciprocating your indifference to what I want in a camera. However, Canon does care about you and other video centric users because they make cameras that are great for video, from the M50 to 1DX2 and professional video products, too.


The 1DX2 is not remotely "great" for video. Although it can deliver decent output if you are willing to put up with it's limitations, it's mostly just better than Canon's other non-cinema products. If canon allowed 4K HDMI output, CLog and any number of other improvements they could easily make with firmware it might be a pretty good video camera but they won't because it might cost them a Cinema camera sale.


----------



## bf (Feb 16, 2019)

"I also realize Canon seems to want to protect camera models that are up the food chain. Though I’ve always liked Steve Jobs’ philosophy on this; “If you don’t cannibalize yourself, someone else will”. But that’s a conversation for another day."

Thanks for starting this discussion! My thinking is that each product has to offer the maximum possible value for the customers.
Canon executives ususlly say it was the best that we could offer for such a price point. If it means, certain HW or even FW development has not been within the budget, I respect it! If it means they are protecting a more expensive product, that's wrong.
I also think Canon, specifically in the DSLR libeup has too many models. I think there should be 2 or 3 levels for each product line and each fully optimized.


----------



## Go Wild (Feb 16, 2019)

This are the reasons i bought a Sony A7RIII to go side by side with my 1Dx mkII....Either Canon just can´t match Sony and Panasonic in video features (in hybrid cameras), or they are playing fools out of ourselves. If they want to piss off people that have invested a huge amount of money in their stuff....well they are hitting the point! 

Let´s go see this things in a perspective...
Sony Cameras are on the market for looong time. Mirrorless ones are on the market for loong time. They can offer both solutions. Either better cameras for vídeo, that also make reasonable stills (A7s - series), or they offer great stills cameras with more that reasonable video features (A7rIII). They also launch for the market one fast camera with great video and great stills and tremendous fast for sports/wildlife (A9). They also send to the market a balanced camera with more modest features but still great, the A7III. 

And what Canon do??? Launch the EOS R that is a good camera, no doubt on that, but unimpressive if you compare to Sony ones....Then they launch the EOS RP with good price, no doubt on that, but far behind the reality of the mirrorless world... This camera would be AWESOME in....2016!!!! 

So.....What the heck! I was "forced" to buy the Sony A7R3 in December 2017 because Canon couldn´t give me an alternative body for the 1dxmkII. At that time they launched the 5ds and 5dsr with fantastic still quality but poor video! (no 4k....WTF???) Then came the 5dmkIV! Good for stills, good for video, but....less that impressive and with a stupid 120fps at...720HD!!!! Really???? Not to mention the lack of the C-log that Canon then give in firmware update! Ohhh by the way.....And what about the 1dx MKII CANON????? Why no C-log update for us?????? Just one more....

So at that time i bought the Sony one. I didn´t want to, i still desire A LOTTT to have 2 Canon bodys, but at that time was just impossible. I am working now with the Sony and the Canon and I am restraining myself of Selling everything that i have from Canon because I do love the 1dx mkII and do love the lenses I have...

Damn it Canon, can´t you jus make a F***king good camera like Sony??? 


But then....i check the market and i do believe that this new Canon R can be a great camera for guys that don´t care abou video, or non professional ones. And after I see this I do believe Canon want´s to say good bye to professional guys that do both vídeo and stills. No solutions, and the perfect solutions are already in stores with Sony brand on it.....I think i am tiring of waiting for a great solution from Canon....It´s been a more than 2 years wait....


----------



## -pekr- (Feb 16, 2019)

ketsang said:


> The person who made these decisions in Canon must be paid by Sony!!!
> 
> It could have been so so so so much better.



The person who made these two decisions should be fired and once on its way out, should pack the guy who had final go for the 6DII sensor's decision.


----------



## bluediablo (Feb 16, 2019)

I just don't get all this complaining. Vote with your wallet (this is where Canon will take notice) and purchase a tool for your specific needs. All this fuss over an entry level camera to boot. I kinda wish Canon had fully eliminated the video on the RP and sold it with Sony noise canceling head phones.


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 16, 2019)

stevelee said:


> I would think by now that all TVs of any size run at 120 Hz or 240 Hz. My 10-year-old Sony LCD set runs at 120 Hz, and everything still looks good on it. I watch a fair number of movies on Blu-Ray. 120 is divisible by 24 as well as 30 and 60. 25 Hz PAL wouldn't do so well, but then I don't have any sources for it.



I just checked the (german) wikipedia web site: The highest framerate in progressive mode is 24p for Full HD and it has the 23.796p too. I am not shure if it runs always at 120Hz which is the refresh rate of the pixel content. If the BlueRay player only delivers 24 fps you do not need to update that often because the TFTransistors for the subpixels store their state until the next refresh. But in general there is no argument to restrict a camera to 30 or 60p to avoid 24p because it doesn't look well.


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Feb 16, 2019)

bluediablo said:


> I just don't get all this complaining. Vote with your wallet (this is where Canon will take notice) and purchase a tool for your specific needs. All this fuss over an entry level camera to boot. I kinda wish Canon had fully eliminated the video on the RP and sold it with Sony noise canceling head phones.



I generally don't pander to the complaints and agree with what you're saying, but I just can't with the giant issue of 1080 @ 24. A dang Rebel T7 can do this... there's zero additional cost to including it in the EOS RP.


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Feb 16, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> I generally don't pander to the complaints and agree with what you're saying, but I just can't with the giant issue of 1080 @ 24. A dang Rebel T7 can do this... there's zero additional cost to including it in the EOS RP.



Even my old T3i had that feature, both in standard full frame readout and crop mode. The other big feature they removed from video mode this time around was the various exposure modes. Either manual or auto, no aperture or shutter priority.

I unfortunately ended up voting with my wallet this time like the previous commenter suggested. The Z6 will finally take me away from having to rely on a GH5 for video and a Canon for photography. Though, I'm still recommending an RP for my father since he doesn't need any video features.


----------



## -pekr- (Feb 16, 2019)

bluediablo said:


> I just don't get all this complaining. Vote with your wallet (this is where Canon will take notice) and purchase a tool for your specific needs. All this fuss over an entry level camera to boot. I kinda wish Canon had fully eliminated the video on the RP and sold it with Sony noise canceling head phones.



I just don't get all those excuses and pushing away loyal users out of the Canon brand. Some ppl are well invested into Canon and we are not asking for a rocket science here, nor for features, which would eventually made the camera more expensive. Canon just pushes their product nerfing beyond one's wildest imaginations. Or did YOU expect removal of a feature, which is present on many other lower rank models?


----------



## bluediablo (Feb 16, 2019)

[/QUOTE]I generally don't pander to the complaints and agree with what you're saying, but I just can't with the giant issue of 1080 @ 24. A dang Rebel T7 can do this... there's zero additional cost to including it in the EOS RP.[/QUOTE]

"Canon doesn’t like this site all that much, so they’re probably not going to listen to me. However, they will listen to you, the consumer. Get your voice heard in any way you can..."

just responding to the main point of this thread. You want Canon to listen? Stop buying.


----------



## Nelu (Feb 16, 2019)

bluediablo said:


> I kinda wish Canon had fully eliminated the video on the RP and sold it with Sony noise canceling head phones.


I think you're missing a pair of quotes here: "Sony noise" cancelling headphones
I also hate that "Sony noise" and there's too much of it here on Canon Rumors...


----------



## bhf3737 (Feb 16, 2019)

mb66energy said:


> But in general there is no argument to restrict a camera to 30 or 60p to avoid 24p because it doesn't look well.


Actually there is. The person who is taking the video may not have the skills to pan or crawl the camera well and the end result may look stuttering on the TV or monitor. Just check Red Pan Calculator that says the time for 24p and 30p or 60p for a given focal length for a smooth panning shot is quite different and if you don't do it right (average video shooters do not get it right) your shot will not look good. 60p and 30p are more forgiving than 24p here.


----------



## bluediablo (Feb 16, 2019)

-pekr- said:


> I just don't get all those excuses and pushing away loyal users out of the Canon brand. Some ppl are well invested into Canon and we are not asking for a rocket science here, nor for features, which would eventually made the camera more expensive. Canon just pushes their product nerfing beyond one's wildest imaginations. Or did YOU expect removal of a feature, which is present on many other lower rank models?



Yes I agree they should have included it, the main theme of this post was to get Canon to listen. I just buy what I need and from who can provide the product for my needs the best. The market responds to money.


----------



## apfilmworks (Feb 16, 2019)

Meanwhile, nikon just announced an upcoming firmware update for the Z6 and Z7 giving them uncompressed RAW output. I'm beginning to really resent my pile of EF lenses...


----------



## LSXPhotog (Feb 16, 2019)

The Canon EOS 4000D with a plastic lens mount has 24fps 1080 video....

Glad to see Canon Rumors is vocal about this subject. Canon Watch is incredibly blind to anything negative about Canon. I recently saw a video produced by Michael the Maven about fanboys. It was meant to be globally referencing fanboys for all sides, but directly mentioned and discussed Canon. I shoot Canon and I make every single dollar in my bank account and travel the world with a Canon in my bag - I really like working with these cameras. I take offense when someone claims what Canon offers isn't good enough. It's the internet and people can't see beyond a spec sheet. I've also found that the majority of Sony shooters commenting on the internet are pretty inexperienced and appear to really _need _camera features to help them get their job done. That's a story for another day...

But, there is a time you step aside from your personal bubble and attack a decision made by a company you love. 24fps needs to be added into this camera and there is no logical reason for it to be missing. 1080p with an EF-S lens is a HUGE boost for migrating over to this camera. What are you protecting, Canon? You want this to be the perfect camera for APS-C DSLR users to migrate over to full-frame, but you're then forcing everyone to also sell their EF-S lenses for arbitrary reasons while crippling 4K video to not allow Dual Pixel AF.

I stand by Canon and love this brand, but this decision cannot and should not be defended by anyone on this website. It's 24fps video...the most BASIC form of video.


----------



## Kit. (Feb 16, 2019)

mb66energy said:


> Is a modern TV not a computer display with built-in video reproduction (from USB) soft- and hardware and some satellite receiver?


I don't know about a modern TV (haven't used one for a long time), but my notebook's 4K UHD 100% Adobe RGB display is 60 Hz only.

Still, I am not a fan of dumbing down the choice. Put it into some kind of "advanced" menu if you think a "regular" user should not have an easy access to it. Custom Function 1005001: 0/1 for "normal"/"extended" video format list.


----------



## bluediablo (Feb 16, 2019)

bhf3737 said:


> Actually there is. The person who is taking the video may not have the skills to pan or crawl the camera well and the end result may look stuttering on the TV or monitor. Just check Red Pan Calculator that says the time for 24p and 30p or 60p for a given focal length for a smooth panning shot is quite different and if you don't do it right (average video shooters do not get it right) your shot will not look good. 60p and 30p are more forgiving than 24p here.



interesting concept: More forgiving for an ENTRY level camera. Maybe 30 is the new 24


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Feb 16, 2019)

bhf3737 said:


> Actually there is. The person who is taking the video may not have the skills to pan or crawl the camera well and the end result may look stuttering on the TV or monitor. Just check Red Pan Calculator that says the time for 24p and 30p or 60p for a given focal length for a smooth panning shot is quite different and if you don't do it right (average video shooters do not get it right) your shot will not look good. 60p and 30p are more forgiving than 24p here.



If that were the issue, Canon wouldn't have put 24p in the 4k mode of in all the consumer cameras. I agree that not everyone gets it right, and that's why 30 or 60 is normally default. If a videographer or consumer is using enough panning for


apfilmworks said:


> Meanwhile, nikon just announced an upcoming firmware update for the Z6 and Z7 giving them uncompressed RAW output. I'm beginning to really resent my pile of EF lenses...



Do you have a 5D Mark III? The ML RAW has me holding on to it still, even though I don't daily drive it. Most of the time I shoot with the GH5's 4K for ease of use, but the 5D still outperforms it.


----------



## tarjei99 (Feb 16, 2019)

Canon usually have a reason for doing stuff.

In this case I wonder if they have been a bit too smart. However, we have to think about the *intended customers* for this camera. And I assume that Canon have a long list of cases regarding beginners using cameras that are really too advanced for them. The EOS RP seems to be a somewhat idiot proofed full frame camera.

This is a camera for utter beginners who don't understand the spec sheet. I think that the 30fps stuff is a really good idea despite the complaints here. It reduces the number of complaints about the camera.

If the the user can't turn off the automatic switch from Full HD to HD, that is annoying and stupid. If it can be turned off (which I don't think it can) I'm perfectly fine with the default.

And despite claims of the opposite, Canon frequently disrupts itself. We see often that cheaper cameras get features we don't even have on the more expensive cameras. e.g. My 7D2 only have one F/8 AF point. The 80D have a lot more. I'm envious.

It is perfectly valid for Canon to take my envy into account when adding features to their cameras. After all, I could get so pissed off that I stop buying their cameras. Or only buy the cheap ones.


----------



## Shakey (Feb 16, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> This is why we criticize Canon. too many fanboys always find a way to defend them even when they pull crap like this. Then you got the "I dont do video" guys. No one cares about you guys. You are relics. Video is important in 2019.


Pretty bold statement. Do you have scientific facts to prove your point or are these just your personal feelings? PS: I would prefer a FF camera with no video at all. There are a multitude of excellent video cameras available. Not so much for stills only cameras. Not sure why people feel that insulting someone in their comments is so fashionable...could it be the anonymity of the internet?


----------



## Shakey (Feb 16, 2019)

N-VB said:


> Canon "Why don't you sell your kid for spare parts, many rich peoples are looking for a liver or heart... then buy a C300"


Very poor taste with this comment. If you do not like Canon then move on to something you like and support it.


----------



## sdz (Feb 16, 2019)

Talys said:


> Canon cares about us guys who don't want to pay more for video features we won't use, and they show this by segmenting their product line. They are rewarded by having the highest camera sales.



I doubt anyone wants a $1,300 stills camera to have capacities that enable its use as a Cine camera substitute. The core compliant here is a simple one: Canon should ship cameras that enable users to use standard video frame rates, especially when enabling these frame rates require a costless software adjustment. This is not a frivolous criticism.


----------



## Antono Refa (Feb 16, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> This is why we criticize Canon. too many fanboys always find a way to defend them even when they pull crap like this. Then you got the "I dont do video" guys. No one cares about you guys. You are relics. Video is important in 2019.



Sounds more like Canon doesn't care about you.

You talking out of your ass telling people they're relics and too stupid to understand their needs makes it a bit easier for me to understand why Canon would like to lose you as a customer.


----------



## LensFungus (Feb 16, 2019)

apfilmworks said:


> Meanwhile, nikon just announced an upcoming firmware update for the Z6 and Z7 giving them uncompressed RAW output. I'm beginning to really resent my pile of EF lenses...


That is awesome news for Canon shooters.

Fujifilm is doing their Kaizen firmware updates for multiple cameras for a long time and at some point Sony started to give some good updates, the most prominent being the shortly announced big AF update. Now Nikon is giving users a big update. I don't think Sony and Nikon will be as diligent as Fujifilm with the number of updates, but I could imagine that Sony will choose that strategy from now on from time to time. My point is if especially Nikon and Sony keep doing that, Canon will follow. Right now big Canon updates are more like "Oh, you wanna have C-Log? Okay, pay us some money, minion!"


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Feb 16, 2019)

Shakey said:


> Pretty bold statement. Do you have scientific facts to prove your point or are these just your personal feelings? PS: I would prefer a FF camera with no video at all. There are a multitude of excellent video cameras available. Not so much for stills only cameras. Not sure why people feel that insulting someone in their comments is so fashionable...could it be the anonymity of the internet?



While photography isn't going out of fashion, video is definitely the hot commodity in the marketing world. This is mainly due to the way social media platforms prioritize posts. Unfortunately, my workload has transitioned to mostly video. Usually two versions of each video, 16:9 and 1:1 with open captioning.

Events will still be dominated by photography, and I'd love to transition more into that world.


----------



## bluediablo (Feb 16, 2019)

Antono Refa said:


> Sounds more like Canon doesn't care about you.
> 
> You talking out of your ass telling people they're relics and too stupid to understand their needs makes it a bit easier for me to understand why Canon would like to lose you as a customer.



+1000


----------



## max_sr (Feb 16, 2019)

What I don't get are the statements that Canon won't put better video features into their DSLRs and mirrorless cameras to "protect" their cinema cameras. 

First, not everyone has thousands of $$ to spend on something that just does video. Second many people shoot stills and video, so why not give them a camera that can do both equally well?

And the last point is, that this makes no sense. Someone, who is just starting with video (and who also shoots stills) will never buy a C200 as a second body to his EOS XY. But someone, who gets a true Canon hybrid camera and lots of lenses for it, uses it for all kinds of videos and so on, might eventually buy a Canon cinema camera once their skills/needs have reached that kind of level.
However, if this person instead buys a Sony or Panasonic hybrid camera, they most likely will buy an Sony or Panasonic Cinema camera later on, because they will have invested lots of $$ into those ecosystems.
So in the end Canon is losing 2 or more) camera sales and lots of lens sales just because they are trying to "protect" their cinema line. Makes no sense.


----------



## proutprout (Feb 16, 2019)

It’s true actually, i’m waiting desperately for a video body, but maybe i’m just going to end up buying Sony. I’m getting tired to wait for half functionnal cameras. At least Sony will get us what we want !


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 16, 2019)

GREAT post. Yeah, I'm a CPS GOLD member for years and have nearly 100 CPS points. This RP is a total punch in the face for video folks. I'm still primarily a stills guy, but like you, CR, I've been find more opportunities to shoot video for hire. 4k24 is great but no 1080p24 is utterly absurd, and I have NO idea what Canon was thinking with this.


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 16, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> 2 crazy things is that canon had the first 4k dslr back in like 2012. and then the 1dx II has 4k 60p and 120 1080p. so their cameras are capable of good video modes. this has to be just nerfing on purpose or the digic 8 is crap. I just say that because there is a lot of talk about canon cant do certain thing because of the processors but a 3 year old camera is killing it even compared to their 2019 line up.



Yes but even the 1DX2 was strategically crippled by restricting HDMI output to 1080p instead of the full 4K it's capable of.... I own one.... it's frustrating that a $6000 top of the line camera was deliberately kneecapped like that for no reason in 2016/2017.


----------



## tmroper (Feb 16, 2019)

sdz said:


> Canon sometimes acts in annoying and inexplicably irrational ways. The company spends much time and money getting the body right. It also cripples camera performance that accomplishes nothing more than to annoy its customers. Why? Who?
> 
> And Canon resists adding features with firmware updates. Why? Who?


And so much time and money creating fantastic lenses. World-class glass, and then this thing? Which doesn't sound like a horrible camera for the price, and if you want only stills. But it's at odds with the lens roadmap.


----------



## slclick (Feb 16, 2019)

I really need some sort of ad blocker to take anything VIDEO out of my internet feed. Hell, it's to the point where C vs N vs S, or DR battles are easier to stomach than another video beotch session.


----------



## Nelu (Feb 16, 2019)

proutprout said:


> It’s true actually, i’m waiting desperately for a video body, but maybe i’m just going to end up buying Sony. I’m getting tired to wait for half functionnal cameras. At least Sony will get us what we want !


Don't forget to close the door on your way out!


----------



## sdz (Feb 16, 2019)

tmroper said:


> And so much time and money creating fantastic lenses. World-class glass, and then this thing? Which doesn't sound like a horrible camera for the price, and if you want only stills. But it's at odds with the lens roadmap.



I do not plan to buy the RP. I spend money on lenses. I might buy the R once the price drops. I might not. That said, I almost admire Canon for the products they make, the quality of their lenses, the color produced by their cameras. I have owned five since 2000. I bought into the system, the brand. But, Canon makes some products defined, in part, by head scratching 'gotchas.' The RP is one of those products. I expect Canon to sell many RPs.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 16, 2019)

Guys...*Canon is not reading this thread.* If you feel passionately about this then *you need to email Canon directly.*


----------



## Otara (Feb 16, 2019)

bhf3737 said:


> Actually there is. The person who is taking the video may not have the skills to pan or crawl the camera well and the end result may look stuttering on the TV or monitor. Just check Red Pan Calculator that says the time for 24p and 30p or 60p for a given focal length for a smooth panning shot is quite different and if you don't do it right (average video shooters do not get it right) your shot will not look good. 60p and 30p are more forgiving than 24p here.


 
Just watched an otherwise lovely video by my nephew with this exact issue.

If you're buying an entry level camera they're going to make it entry level, for video and for stills. Nothing to do about cost to do so. They will presumably consider changing when another company releases a new full frame with 24p at this price point.


----------



## nchoh (Feb 16, 2019)

I noticed that there weren't many of the regular Canon positive posters on this thread. I guess that's what happens when the CanonRumorsGuy himself invites a Canon bashing.


----------



## bergstrom (Feb 16, 2019)

I won't be buying an R for a long time, if ever, happy with my dslr's


----------



## slclick (Feb 16, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> Guys...*Canon is not reading this thread.* If you feel passionately about this then *you need to email Canon directly.*


Oh man, I wish someone would have told me this 3000 posts ago.


----------



## Jethro (Feb 17, 2019)

I'm a 'virtually never' video user, so this would frankly form a very minor consideration for me (actually not at all as I have the EOS R). But, it is (for once) an actual 'nerf', and it's fair to ask why? Cynically, you could say it's to push people wanting these features up to the EOS R price point, or to more specialised cameras? The whole EOS/RF release program has been heavily marketing & segmentation-driven, so it could be an actual strategy.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 17, 2019)

-pekr- said:


> The person who made these two decisions should be fired and once on its way out, should pack the guy who had final go for the 6DII sensor's decision.



I'm not going to defend Canon on the video decisions. The RP should have 1080 24p as well as 1080 crop modes. There's no technical reason for not having them. If Canon is afraid that newbie users will get poor footage with 24p (panning or monitor frame rate mismatches) then they can hide it behind a custom function just like extended ISOs. 1080 crop should be an always available option that is automatically engaged with an EF-S lens attached.

As for 4k: it's clear that Canon has a sensor readout speed issue even with the latest 5D IV sensor architecture. That's what's killing them on FF 4k, and 4k + DPAF at any crop on lower end sensors (FF or APS-C). They're probably still working on replacement sensors that can handle the required video readout speeds across the line. (I debated this with someone on this forum at one time, but now I forget who. On reflection I'm convinced they were right.)

Given that reality, if they were going to release the RP right now then they had to use an existing sensor design. The only candidate is the 6D2 sensor *unless* they were going to drop down to 20mp and use the 1DX2 sensor. *Maybe they should have done that.* Though we associate the 1DX2 sensor with the cost of the body the sensor itself likely costs little to manufacture at this point. Canon marketing would have a fit because a cheaper camera would have better video specs than the 5D IV or the R. But given the stills limitations on the RP body you're probably not cannibalizing 5D4/R sales so much as adding to them. At the same time you're preventing video guys from fleeing to Sony or Fuji. It might cannibalize some 1DX2 sales (those that are exclusively for video) but as Canon Rumors Guy pointed out, in business if you don't cannibalize your own products a competitor will.

As an example, I would have preordered an RP if it had the 1DX2's sensor and video specs without any stupid compromises to "protect" the trickle of 1DX2-for-video sales. As is I will pass. For that matter, I would probably buy an R body at the R's price point if it had the 1DX2's sensor and video specs. Maybe Canon should have done that instead. Maybe they still should since they could throw it together fast and it would stop the bleeding of EF lens owners who want solid video.

All of that said: I have and will defend the 6D2 sensor on stills. If you're a stills shooter looking at your first FF the 6D2/RP sensor is notably better at low ISO than the 21mp sensors Michael Riechmann was using to produce large fine art prints back around the turn of the decade. It's far and away better than those sensors were at high ISO and competitive with other sensors on the market today. It's also a good 1 stop better at high ISO than the other cheap FF option, the Sony A72.


----------



## Etienne (Feb 17, 2019)

max_sr said:


> What I don't get are the statements that Canon won't put better video features into their DSLRs and mirrorless cameras to "protect" their cinema cameras.
> 
> First, not everyone has thousands of $$ to spend on something that just does video. Second many people shoot stills and video, so why not give them a camera that can do both equally well?
> 
> ...



Exactly. Why would I buy a C300 and have to pair it with one of these EOS-R or RP, when I could buy a FS7 and pair it with an A7III or upcoming A7sIII. Most people want to stay in one system for simplicity. Canon is banking almost entirely on the superiority of their lenses. How long will that last?

To be honest, I really want this EOS-R for photography, but I'm not going to buy one because it's another piece of equipment that can't double in video, so I would most often leave it at home.


----------



## Kit. (Feb 17, 2019)

slclick said:


> I really need some sort of ad blocker to take anything VIDEO out of my internet feed. Hell, it's to the point where C vs N vs S, or DR battles are easier to stomach than another video beotch session.


If you use Firefox, NoScript is quite good.


----------



## slclick (Feb 17, 2019)

Kit. said:


> If you use Firefox, NoScript is quite good.


I was joking but thanks for the advice. I can self moderate....how else could I have lived through AvTvM and the like around here for years? 

I'm one of those knuckleheads that wishes Canon would put out a stills only body, never gonna happen.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 17, 2019)

Etienne said:


> To be honest, I really want this EOS-R for photography, but I'm not going to buy one because it's another piece of equipment that can't double in video, so I would most often leave it at home.



This is what's happening with me. I would really like a FF backup to my 5Ds that can handle video. I've passed on the R and now the RP. I really don't like the idea of dealing with Sony's UI or non-native lens adapters, plus Sony bodies are useless in poor weather. But when is Canon going to deliver decent video specs?

Dynamic range I could care less about, and I shoot scenes (including occasional real estate interiors) that should put me in the category of caring greatly about it. I know what I can do with the 5Ds sensor, I know how narrow the DR band actually is between the 5Ds and Sony sensors, and I know how to handle the scenes that exceed any sensor's DR.

But video...the other guys are doing oversampled 4k footage (generally 6k-to-4k) that looks beautiful. They do this with their best AF modes enabled and with no stupid restrictions on frame rates. And with Sony they do this in FF mode for low light situations.

The more I think about it, the more I wish Canon had used the 1DX2 sensor in the R, the RP, or both. Until they get their readout speeds figured out they need a solid FF video camera.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 17, 2019)

s66 said:


> I honestly don't get why those who only do video don't buy a video camera - seems that would do what they want.



Quite obviously because the competition is providing cameras that can do both well. And EF glass owners want that to.



s66 said:


> FWIW: there's likely all sorts of patents and license fees associsted with video that will drive up costs even if they already know how to make the software (or have done so). Those licenses can cost ridiculous amounts of money that will cost all the rest who never shoot video too.



I'm not sure what you think those licenses might be, but Canon would already be paying them to put in the crippled video we've got.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 17, 2019)

Andrei said:


> In my 4 years as a pro photographer a shoot with 6d and 5d3.
> I never touch the video function for the camera...
> Ok mabey one time...accidentallly.
> 
> ...



Like you, I rarely touch the video option on my 5D IV. It isn't about wanting the best video features but somewhat usable video option in 2019. *This just tell me Canon is still run by accountants*. There is no free lunch. They could offer better video features but that would take out some EOS R sale.

It's more than wanting features, but values for the money. If the Canon EOS R has dual card slot even if they charge a little more, it would eat into Canon 5D IV even though it's more expensive than the competitions. They are competing against them self mostly.

I wonder what other Canon EOS R Pro features will be gimped. It will likely be expensive compared to the competition. Although Canon EOS RF lenses are nice and expensive, I just can't buy into the RF system. If Panasonic S1 or Sony A7RIV/A9II have what I need vs EOS R Pro, I will leave Canon too.


----------



## KrisK (Feb 17, 2019)

I’m not big on 4K, but understand the appeal. Same with 4K 60p. And 120 FPS.

But why is 24p so important? I get that it’s the standard FPS for cinema, but why is it so desired by the vlog crowd? Just curious.


----------



## cpreston (Feb 17, 2019)

It seems clear that the ef-s crop for the RP is using a crop of the FHD 1080p output to create the 720p video file. The ef-s crop for the EOS-R is actually a debayered version of the 4K output. The reasoning for the lack of 1080p crop in the RP may actually be due to processor limitations. Or the team just didn’t feel like writing and testing the software. 
The lack of 24p is probably deliberate dumbing down by Canon since it takes more skill to get decent looking handheld footage at 24p than at 30p.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 17, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> *This just tell me Canon is still run by accountants*. There is no free lunch. They could offer better video features but that would take out some EOS R sale.



They have a silicon problem. If it was just accountants I don't think they would disable DPAF in 4k on the RP. For that matter I don't think the 5D IV would have shipped with cropped 4k, and they would be doing oversampled 1080p in that body.

I don't know who made the idiotic decision not to include 1080 24p or 1080 cropped though.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 17, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> They have a silicon problem. If it was just accountants I don't think they would disable DPAF in 4k on the RP. For that matter I don't think the 5D IV would have shipped with cropped 4k, and they would be doing oversampled 1080p in that body.
> 
> I don't know who made the idiotic decision not to include 1080 24p or 1080 cropped though.



You might be right. This may be why explain why they can't get better eyeAF performance, better sensor with better ISO & DR. This may explain why it's taking longer for them to make EOS R Pro and also incorporating better 4K and IBIS.

They should be able to 1080 24p and uncropped 1080. It's mostly a marketing team decision.


----------



## ashmadux (Feb 17, 2019)

jvillain said:


> I just don't get Canon at all any more. Cell phones are eating our lunch so lets take features out of our cameras that cost nothing to include? If they hadn't taken such a vindictive approach to their video features here they had a chance to step on the competitions air hose. But they blew that as well. As it is, I don't see who the target audience is either on the stills side or the video side for this Frankenstien camera.



Couldn't agree more. They omitted features on this camera that exist in the baby mirrorless version.

I saw how cut down the video specs are, and still no dpaf in 4k..well no thanks. No longer plan to buy, ill make due with a m50 and cut my video teeth on that.

This reduce features nonsense has become canon's disease, adn we are all paying for it. With the market shrinking, instead of going for the dollars, they would pass on guaranteed money just to protect video cameras that none of this segment will buy. Insane, stupid, and modern canon.

Lastly, the features in phones are so beyond what we can do in cameras...+ more flexible software...and THIS is canons approach. wow.


----------



## ashmadux (Feb 17, 2019)

KrisK said:


> I’m not big on 4K, but understand the appeal. Same with 4K 60p. And 120 FPS.
> 
> But why is 24p so important? I get that it’s the standard FPS for cinema, but why is it so desired by the vlog crowd? Just curious.



makes the video look more cinematic. you cant get that feel with 30fps


----------



## analoggrotto (Feb 17, 2019)

We can all agree; the RF launch is peculiarly out of sync. Superlative lenses ready for press duty on top of compact sub-pro bodies just seems strange. Its as if they are preparing the stage frantically for something incredible to truly harness the 28-70 F2 and 50 F1.2. Some more F1.8s and a pancake or 2 would have made sense for the R and RP. 

I hope the 5D replacement is the Double R. Double Digics, Double Card Slots, Double Dials, Double ISO, Double the Money!


----------



## Navism (Feb 17, 2019)

Canon doesn't even release C100 mark iii, XC20 or 90D. You can see they just don't want to hurt their high end cinema camera sale. 
I have XF400. It is very great.
I am 100% sure Canon knows that even it is 1 inch sensor but it is interchangeable lens camera. People will not buy high end camera. 
For Canon eye, they still don't want 8000usd C200 to get 10bit 4.2.2.
On the other hand, XF705 includes 10bit 4.2.2 h.265 every newest Canon code because it is fix lens camera.

I can feel Canon thinks they made a mistake when Eos R includes 10bit 4.2.2 They can't do anything when Z6 has.

So Nikon will have prores raw. I am sure Canon can't respond.

Canon just made a mistake to have Cinema Line. 
1DC to C700 FF.
They just see interchangeable lena 4k = over 10000 USD.
C200 is their C100 mark iii but they don't want to sell 5000-6000 usd. So they add Raw light to pretend C200 to set 8000usd.

Really sad.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 17, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> You might be right. This may be why explain why they can't get better eyeAF performance, better sensor with better ISO & DR.



Their ISO is competitive across the board, and their DR is competitive on models with on-chip ADCs such as the 5D IV. Those aren't readout speed issues.

But video relies on fast, power/thermal efficient readout.



> They should be able to 1080 24p and uncropped 1080. It's mostly a marketing team decision.



Agreed. They should fix this in firmware.


----------



## cpreston (Feb 17, 2019)

KrisK said:


> I’m not big on 4K, but understand the appeal. Same with 4K 60p. And 120 FPS.
> 
> But why is 24p so important? I get that it’s the standard FPS for cinema, but why is it so desired by the vlog crowd? Just curious.



From a purely rational standpoint, nobody wants to watch 4K, 24p, digitally stabilized footage of vlogger talking into a camera while they are walking around. But people do it. And somehow the audience manages to contain their nausea while watching it.

Canon has decided to force people into 30p. Apple also doesn't offer 24p in their camera app. I'm guessing the lack of 24p is a marketing decision rather than a tech decision. The number of people who would actually want to use this camera to shoot 24p footage is extremely low, even if it had a 24p option.


----------



## flip314 (Feb 17, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> As for 4k: it's clear that Canon has a sensor readout speed issue even with the latest 5D IV sensor architecture. That's what's killing them on FF 4k, and 4k + DPAF at any crop on lower end sensors (FF or APS-C). They're probably still working on replacement sensors that can handle the required video readout speeds across the line.



I'm starting to suspect the same thing. With all the crap the R took for its video limitations and lack of pro features, could you imagine what they'd get for a 5D IV replacement that still had the same limitations? They'd be crucified for a "pro" body with so many sensor limitations at a time when Sony seems to have already mostly figured this stuff out (down to some thermal issues). The DR of the 5D IV sensor may also play into it (it's not horrible, but still behind sony)

As someone who thinks most of the criticism against the entire R line is overblown, I think it's clear that Canon wants to get its first pro mirrorless correct the first time. Just based on product development time, they must already pretty far into their development cycle already if they want to release it in the next 12 months, but we have no visibility. Releasing the R/RP in the meantime gets them products in the markets, gets them some feedback, and buys them time to complete the next generation of sensor development (and possible IBIS implementations/whatever you think Canon has up their sleeves).


----------



## CaMeRa QuEsT (Feb 17, 2019)

The best Canon EOS digital camera you can buy is the newest, highest level model that has a fully functional Magic Lantern port available, allowing you to fully de-cripple it!


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Feb 17, 2019)

s66 said:


> I honestly don't get why those who only do video don't buy a video camera - seems that would do what they want.



In or marketing department we have a few people dedicated to video. While they have a lot of nice cameras, they always gravitate towards the DSLR body. Why? Because it's small and comfortable to hold. We can get a steady shot without fatigue. 

For a stable shot without a gimbal or anything else, we just use the IBIS and OSS combination with our next strap. Hold the camera straight out with tension against our neck strap. Doing this with a slow hip and knee movement and we can even manipulate a small slider shot without using stabilization in post. When we need to, these small cameras also easily slap onto a gimbal. 

At the end of the day, why would we want to give up this mobility that can still achieve an incredible image? The expensive and bulky dedicated video cameras are just not as convenient.


----------



## Talys (Feb 17, 2019)

flip314 said:


> As someone who thinks most of the criticism against the entire R line is overblown, I think it's clear that Canon wants to get its first pro mirrorless correct the first time. Just based on product development time, they must already pretty far into their development cycle already if they want to release it in the next 12 months, but we have no visibility. Releasing the R/RP in the meantime gets them products in the markets, gets them some feedback, and buys them time to complete the next generation of sensor development (and possible IBIS implementations/whatever you think Canon has up their sleeves).


Besides, if "Pro" means a 1D class -- and priced -- camera, they'll sell way, way more RP's than R Pro's.


----------



## degos (Feb 17, 2019)

LSXPhotog said:


> What are you protecting, Canon? You want this to be the perfect camera for APS-C DSLR users to migrate over to full-frame



Maybe they don't, perhaps you are projecting what you think Canon want. 

Certainly a 4000D user would look askance at a $1299 camera versus the $400 he paid for body + kit. That's car money!

A 7D2 user will laugh at the pitiful framerate and lower pixel density.


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 17, 2019)

bhf3737 said:


> Actually there is. The person who is taking the video may not have the skills to pan or crawl the camera well and the end result may look stuttering on the TV or monitor. Just check Red Pan Calculator that says the time for 24p and 30p or 60p for a given focal length for a smooth panning shot is quite different and if you don't do it right (average video shooters do not get it right) your shot will not look good. 60p and 30p are more forgiving than 24p here.



This leads me to the conclusion that the 280 $/EUR 4000D with kit lens is a camera for more advanced users than the EOS RP because it has these modes.

I think "panning compatibility" is absolutely not the reason to omit 24p. And if a user uses EOS RP as beginners camera there is the "beginners menu" setting in all "lower" camera models which provides additional information about settings.

IMO there are only two reasons to omit it:
* some programmer has accidentally commented out the line which defines the mode
* marketing decision
finally I cannot understand the missing 24p (and non-existence of 1080p with EF-S)


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Feb 17, 2019)

mb66energy said:


> IMO there are only two reasons to omit it:
> * some programmer has accidentally commented out the line which defines the mode
> * marketing decision



It doesn't work like that. Could be an epic fail of the whole development cycle at Canon but I doubt it. If it's a programmer's mistake, there's QA and test plan. It just wouldn't have passed the QA if it was supposed to be there but wasn't there.

So it may be a technical issue they didn't manage to fix before the release, in which case you may expect it to be fixed in the next firmware.
Or it's a marketing decision, in which case I wouldn't expect it to be fixed.

Most likely it's all about marketing IMO.


----------



## koenkooi (Feb 17, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> I wouldn't count on it. Magic Latern still hasn't release a 5D IV FW and it's a Digic 6/6+. It has been released since 2016.
> [..]



Magic Lantern doesn't do releases anymore since the different camera models have all differing amounts of progress. Instead a build is made anytime a change is made, have a look at the builds page. There's also the experiments page where features are testing before being merged into the main branch.

Some progress was made on the R port, have a look a the EOS R Thread or the Digic 8 'Powershot' thread.

Having said all that, if there's isn't a working version for your camera right now treat it like there never will be a version for it. The intersection of people with that camera, people with the required knowledge and people with enough spare time is pretty much zero. 
Porting has been made a lot easier the past year, you can run the Canon firmware in an emulator for most models, so the bulk of development can be done more safely and quickly than before. This was done to encourage more people to try things themselves instead of waiting for Alex to do everything. 

For a number of camera models there are requests out for testing and feedback, ranging from "Does this run on your camera?" to "Take a few pictures in different modes" to more involved tests. If you have some free time and a bit of motivation, read through the thread for your camera model to see what you can contribute


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 17, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> It doesn't work like that. Could be an epic fail of the whole development cycle at Canon but I doubt it. If it's a programmer's mistake, there's QA and test plan. It just wouldn't have passed the QA if it was supposed to be there but wasn't there.
> 
> So it may be a technical issue they didn't manage to fix before the release, in which case you may expect it to be fixed in the next firmware.
> Or it's a marketing decision, in which case I wouldn't expect it to be fixed.
> ...



The "programmers mistake" was meant as a joke, sorry, maybe I had to exaggerate that intention ... I think we agree that the by far most probable reason is marketing at least with 24p in FF/FullHD mode.

The only thing which might be a technical issue is the Full HD readout of the 4k sensor region because UltraHD is 1:1 pixel by pixel while FullHD makes binning of the pixels necessary or lineskipping. IMO it is easier to bin 4 subpixels into a full color pixel for FullHD than debayering the UltraHD sensor area but there is a good chance I am wrong


----------



## koenkooi (Feb 17, 2019)

mb66energy said:


> Is a modern TV not a computer display with built-in video reproduction (from USB) soft- and hardware and some satellite receiver?
> As far as I know BlueRay has often 24p and TV sets have to be compatible with it.



Correct, but modern TVs also have all kinds of "enhancements" and Canonesque segmentation. With the default settings 24Hz content will be converted to 60/120/240Hz with the dreaded soap opera effect. Some models don't advertise a 24Hz mode at all in their specs!
For my 2016 LG TV I had to disable all "enhancements" for each HDMI port and then for all modes (1080p, 4k) for builtin streaming apps (netflix, amazon).

Also, not every bluray player will output 24Hz for streaming content, so discs will look good, but the netflix app will show the soap opera effect.

If you are, like me, sensitive to judder in 24Hz videos and hate the soap opera effect, you will need to research purchases a lot. The rtings.com website has the appropriate tests for all that in one place, some tech sites do thorough reviews, but not for every TV they review.

The next question is: Does the camera change refresh rates appropriately when connected to a TV directly? I've seen a number of video devices that will default to 50/60Hz output to make it "Just Work" with random TVs.


----------



## max_sr (Feb 17, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> It doesn't work like that. Could be an epic fail of the whole development cycle at Canon but I doubt it. If it's a programmer's mistake, there's QA and test plan. It just wouldn't have passed the QA if it was supposed to be there but wasn't there.
> 
> So it may be a technical issue they didn't manage to fix before the release, in which case you may expect it to be fixed in the next firmware.
> Or it's a marketing decision, in which case I wouldn't expect it to be fixed.
> ...



They definitely use line skipping for the 1080p fullframe video, which is probably hardwired into the sensor. And for EF-S lenses they just crop from that output instead of having a seperate set of circuitry for cropped 1080p. This would be the same with the 6DII, but nobody noticed, because there is no crop mode at all.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Feb 17, 2019)

Ok it may be a joke but in fact the missing 24 fps may be related to a weird software bug they couldn't fix in time. So there's a tiny chance it's the case and they'll fix it in the next firmware.



mb66energy said:


> The "programmers mistake" was meant as a joke, sorry, maybe I had to exaggerate that intention ... I think we agree that the by far most probable reason is marketing at least with 24p in FF/FullHD mode.
> 
> The only thing which might be a technical issue is the Full HD readout of the 4k sensor region because UltraHD is 1:1 pixel by pixel while FullHD makes binning of the pixels necessary or lineskipping. IMO it is easier to bin 4 subpixels into a full color pixel for FullHD than debayering the UltraHD sensor area but there is a good chance I am wrong


----------



## Kit. (Feb 17, 2019)

koenkooi said:


> The intersection of people with that camera, people with the required knowledge and people with enough spare time is pretty much zero.


If I were a Canon executive responsible for the EOS cameras, I would "unofficially" support Magic Lantern development.


----------



## koenkooi (Feb 17, 2019)

Kit. said:


> If I were a Canon executive responsible for the EOS cameras, I would "unofficially" support Magic Lantern development.



The rumour is that provided Magic Lantern doesn't touch the 1D series, Canon won't pull a Nintendo and sue them. I don't know if that's true, but it's a good start


----------



## Go Wild (Feb 17, 2019)

The big problem is NOT this camera....or even the first R camera....I do find this cameras really good for the target users that they are made! I do believe that for enthusiastics or some people that just like to make some normal day videos this camera is just great! And for a good price tag. And the problem is not 30 fps.....HOw many people even know whats the difference in 30fps or 24fps (25 for PAL) For people who buy´s this camera they don´t really care about it....and they will film in 30fps a 1/500....So the problem of Canon is not this sort of things....

So what is causing this "anger" in Canon users? The lack of Sharks! We are expecting the mirrorless line from Canon for about 2 years and 2 years is a looong time! After those 2 years we expect nothing but the sharks!! The tip of the sword, the kinda camera that could tell us....WOOOW Canon is back in the game!!!  That´s what we expect and we haven´t seeing that....Nikon Launch the Z7, a pro model and the Z6 a more like "pro-sumer" body. Canon launch just entry levels...And it´s ok with that....but like i said in the previous post....who work and make money with image need a bit more....I do believe that in 2019 Canon will surprise us with a fantastic pro body with high resolution and a fantastic fast camera for wildlife and sports!!  I am still a believer!

Come onnn Canon, launch some great white (well...black) sharks into the water!!!  I will be tremendously happy to change the sony body and be again 100% Canon....! 


Ohhhh By the way....Have you seen the new 70-200!!?? So small! Just great!!!


----------



## Kit. (Feb 17, 2019)

koenkooi said:


> The rumour is that provided Magic Lantern doesn't touch the 1D series, Canon won't pull a Nintendo and sue them. I don't know if that's true, but it's a good start


With helping Magic Lantern, Canon could cater to the "enthusiast" market without giving any "pro" guarantees of stability (or even any warranty at all).


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Feb 17, 2019)

Kit. said:


> With helping Magic Lantern, Canon could cater to the "enthusiast" market without giving any "pro" guarantees of stability (or even any warranty at all).



Oddly enough, in my experience I found that ML RAW is more reliable the early generation Sony cameras in 4K mode.


----------



## sdz (Feb 17, 2019)

flip314 said:


> I'm starting to suspect the same thing. With all the crap the R took for its video limitations and lack of pro features, could you imagine what they'd get for a 5D IV replacement that still had the same limitations? They'd be crucified for a "pro" body with so many sensor limitations at a time when Sony seems to have already mostly figured this stuff out (down to some thermal issues). The DR of the 5D IV sensor may also play into it (it's not horrible, but still behind sony)
> 
> As someone who thinks most of the criticism against the entire R line is overblown, I think it's clear that Canon wants to get its first pro mirrorless correct the first time. Just based on product development time, they must already pretty far into their development cycle already if they want to release it in the next 12 months, but we have no visibility. Releasing the R/RP in the meantime gets them products in the markets, gets them some feedback, and buys them time to complete the next generation of sensor development (and possible IBIS implementations/whatever you think Canon has up their sleeves).



It seems likely that the 'pro body' R camera will debut a new sensor platform. They must if Canon wants to remain current with Sony and Nikon. Considered differently, a new sensor will give Canon a base upon which it can build the 1Dx replacement it will need for the 2020 Olympics. That camera should have the FPSs needed to shoot sports, capacities their current mirrorless cameras lack. It should also have dual Digic processors. Canon may first introduce a 5Dx replacement that has the new sensor. But it will need the mirrorless 1Dx camera for the Olympics. Canon would be embarrassed if it failed to provide this camera. It may have to update the 1DX II. That would not be the best solution for the company, all things being equal. A new sensor platform appears on the horizon.


----------



## sdz (Feb 17, 2019)

Go Wild said:


> So what is causing this "anger" in Canon users?



I believe the anger about the RP video modes is motivated by the belief that Canon intentionally crippled the camera for what are irrational reasons.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 17, 2019)

koenkooi said:


> Magic Lantern doesn't do releases anymore since the different camera models have all differing amounts of progress. Instead a build is made anytime a change is made, have a look at the builds page. There's also the experiments page where features are testing before being merged into the main branch.
> 
> Some progress was made on the R port, have a look a the EOS R Thread or the Digic 8 'Powershot' thread.
> 
> ...



The most recent stable build is Canon 5D III/EOS M.

EOS R and 5D IV both have progress threads with technical testing still being done. No stable FW released. 

I wouldn't expect much for ML for release sough after features. Nikon, Sony, Panasonic, Fuji has been really good at releasing new FW wit new features. I wouldn't expect from Canon or Magic Lantern


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 17, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> Their ISO is competitive across the board, and their DR is competitive on models with on-chip ADCs such as the 5D IV. Those aren't readout speed issues.
> 
> But video relies on fast, power/thermal efficient readout.
> 
> ...



They are competitive but they still trail behind Nikon (D850) and Sony. Canon also trail in multiple area such eyeAF, 4K, video features, no IBIS. Sony new AF algorithm actually is very competitive against DPAF.

I wonder if Canon will improve upon those in their EOS R Pro or competitions will make up on the area of deficiency that Canon excel (ergonomic, touch screen menu, etc). Interesting time ahead.


----------



## bhf3737 (Feb 17, 2019)

mb66energy said:


> I think "panning compatibility" is absolutely not the reason to omit 24p.


That is your (strong) opinion that should be supported by (strong) evidence. Have you got any?
There are tons of documents/articles on the Web suggesting otherwise. Here is a quote from one:
"24fps is a lingering dinosaur in the industry, kept for two main reasons: the majority of movie theaters can’t support anything else, and it’s perceived to be the film style.”
and
"a lot of videographers like to shoot in 24p just for the sake of saying that they do so."
And interestingly, some vloggers who wanted 60p a couple of months ago with EOS-R , now want 24p!!


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 17, 2019)

bhf3737 said:


> That is your (strong) opinion that should be supported by (strong) evidence. Have you got any?
> There are tons of documents/articles on the Web suggesting otherwise. Here is a quote from one:
> "24fps is a lingering dinosaur in the industry, kept for two main reasons: the majority of movie theaters can’t support anything else, and it’s perceived to be the film style.”
> and
> ...



My statement was: " I think "panning compatibility" is absolutely not the reason to omit 24p. "

My reason is: just the 250 $/EUR 4000D has it as option. If a camera targeted not so much at professionals has it I do not see any reason to omit it in a camera which is designed for more advanced users. By the way: BlueRay is nailed to 24p or 23.976p for the Full HD format. If someone wants to master his/her video on BlueRay it is maybe easier to do it if the original material has the right frame rate (exept 120 fps, 240fps or so).
So I hold my ground especially because the "beginner menu" of e.g. M50 and RP give the opportunity to warn the unexperienced about possible problems with different setting ...


----------



## Sharp (Feb 17, 2019)

About the 24p, might turn out to be a basic math issue (not solvable with a firmware). Normally things work at 60hz in north america. If you want to playback at 24p, you basically need to run at 240hz (60hz as basic frequency x 4 cycles per seconds); then you output the same frame 10times in a row, so you get 24 frame / sec. Maybe the R cannot run at 240 so cannot produce 24p?


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 17, 2019)

koenkooi said:


> Correct, but modern TVs also have all kinds of "enhancements" and Canonesque segmentation. With the default settings 24Hz content will be converted to 60/120/240Hz with the dreaded soap opera effect. Some models don't advertise a 24Hz mode at all in their specs!
> For my 2016 LG TV I had to disable all "enhancements" for each HDMI port and then for all modes (1080p, 4k) for builtin streaming apps (netflix, amazon).
> 
> Also, not every bluray player will output 24Hz for streaming content, so discs will look good, but the netflix app will show the soap opera effect.
> ...



I was shure that they use the TV display like a computer monitor which can provide lots of modes. My TV set has 24 fps with HDMI 1.sth but only the display port (protocol?) compatible HDMI plug supports e.g. 60Hz.

You provided interesting aspects about streaming: I do not use streaming so I have no experience in that field. But exporting video in the wrong frame rate / chosing the wrong options results in awkward quality. I am sensitive to all types of strangeness: oversharpening, stuttering, bad synchronization (wishing for a roating knob on my remote to adjust the delays). I turned these enhancements to low values or off after I bought my S amsung TV 4 years ago, a cheap 40" UHD display I still really like.

The 50/60 Hz outputs were IMO for PAL and NTSC modes via S-Video ports where the frequencies have been essential: Ancient TVs were strictly normed. While todays multimedia world allows for much better quality all these video "norms" destroy the potential user experience in a lot of cases.


----------



## amorse (Feb 17, 2019)

Sharp said:


> About the 24p, might turn out to be a basic math issue (not solvable with a firmware). Normally things work at 60hz in north america. If you want to playback at 24p, you basically need to run at 240hz (60hz as basic frequency x 4 cycles per seconds); then you output the same frame 10times in a row, so you get 24 frame / sec. Maybe the R cannot run at 240 so cannot produce 24p?


Fair enough, but why can the 4k run at 24? Honest question; I'm far from an engineer.


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 17, 2019)

Sharp said:


> About the 24p, might turn out to be a basic math issue (not solvable with a firmware). Normally things work at 60hz in north america. If you want to playback at 24p, you basically need to run at 240hz (60hz as basic frequency x 4 cycles per seconds); then you output the same frame 10times in a row, so you get 24 frame / sec. Maybe the R cannot run at 240 so cannot produce 24p?



....No. there is no technical or hardware limitiation as to why this camera can not do what every other camera can do and has been doing for nearly a decade. Canon deleted the lines of code in the firmware that did it, same as the crop lens issue. This a was pure (boneheaded) marketing decision to arbitrarly render the RP useless for folks who wanted it for video. In other words, they seem to assume if you want a normal video machine in Canon’s new FF MILC lineup, spend an extra $1000 for the EOS R. $2300 for basic, 2018-2019 entry level video capabilities... this is why a not-insignificant market of video folks have migrated to Sony, Panasonic, now Fuji... and now Nikon who is gonna have a ProRes Raw capability with their Z cameras and the Atomos line of recorders. 
The RP is a great stills camera value at $1299 but there’s no excuse for what they did on the video side. There were more than enough reasonable downgrades already from the R with loss of CLog, loss of 4k30, loss of 10bit output, loss of DPAF in 4k shooting, etc... but no, let’s get completely ridiculous and shank the 24p in 1080. They took it out, they can issue an update and put it back. Otherwise all the video folks who were really excited and waiting for this camera will keep their money instead of gladly handing it to canon like I was gonna...


----------



## EduPortas (Feb 17, 2019)

The reasoning behind this cameras insane:

4K video/Mic port/headphone jack: check! But no DPAF with EF-S lenses in 1080p. In fact, no 1080p at all with those lenses! What?!

Yet, you CAN get 4K with EF-S lenses and 1080p with DPAF with EF-S lenses in a subframe body in the M50. Alas, no headphone jack. What?!

That my friends, make no sense at all. Unless you're a Canon beancounter.


----------



## Cee Log (Feb 17, 2019)

The reason why no EF-S lenses in FHD is simple: that enables FHD crop mode which is in fact downsampled 4K (it has been like that since 1DC) and since Canon want to prevent DPAF in 4K they simply removed crop mode from 1080p as that would be a workaround.

Omitting 24p from FHD is just another way of segmenting the camera.

None of these are technical limitations, just crippling to segment EOS RP from it's $1000 more expensive big brother.

Begging Canon to add this is a futile exercise in my opinion, its like asking them to add 1/8000 SS to 6D/6D2/RP.

Not going to happen, they have marketing experts that worked very hard to place these limitations.

On the bright side, EOS RP only has a 1.6x crop in 4K vs EOS R's 1.78x due to its 26.2MP sensor. 
That makes it perfect for APS-C / EF-S lenses with full coverage and no weird FoV math.


----------



## Kathode-Ray (Feb 17, 2019)

I seriously don't get all this fuss about missing 24p. What's the big deal? Set the cam to PAL and shoot 25p, what's the difference?

Here in Europe, we shoot video at 1080p25 all the time, so I couldn't care less about 24p...


----------



## Del Paso (Feb 17, 2019)

I never shoot video, in fact, I don't give a damn about video.
BUT: since Canon has been leading (5 D II), and is so often criticized for having become unable to compete with Fuji, Panasonic and Sony, I just don't understand their lack of reaction.
Looks like (a few, some, many???) want better video specs, why not offer them what they (wish, want, need ???) provided technically possible?
Wanting to sell specific video equipment while sacrificing video specs of "stills" cameras benefits competition and gives biased and unbiased youtubers arguments against Canon...


----------



## Cee Log (Feb 17, 2019)

The problem is Canon is severely lagging in the sensor tech department. They simply can't compete in video due to this.

All the other camera manufacturers are now buying their sensors from Sony who are way ahead of Canon , while they are left recycling year old sensors from their DSLRs.

Until Canon develop a new batch of sensors with things like BSI, 6K supersampling, 4K full readout, better rolling shutter, they will keep losing to all other camera manufacturers in the video department..


----------



## davidhfe (Feb 17, 2019)

The problem with the "buy something else if this doesn't meet your needs" argument is that for better or worse, the big time influencers right now all give a lot more extra weight to video because that's how they're reaching their audience. They see their one missing feature an upload a video with a thumbnail that says "CANON EOS RP FAIL!" People buying entry level cameras are going to be turning going a google search for the camera and that's what pops up at the top of the feed.

CR Guy is 100% on target when he says nobody was expecting groundbreaking features at $1299. But there's a pretty basic set of spec checkboxes that just need to be reliably checked or this is gonna be the story for the next 5+ years. Their high MP, IBIS, etc sensor tech is going to need to make a hell of a splash to turn the conversation around.

And yeah, Canon is still on top of sales, but in a world where the ILC market is contracting they need to remember a business line can come crashing down really, really quickly. "How do you go bankrupt? Slowly then all at once"


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 17, 2019)

Kathode-Ray said:


> I seriously don't get all this fuss about missing 24p. What's the big deal? Set the cam to PAL and shoot 25p, what's the difference?
> 
> Here in Europe, we shoot video at 1080p25 all the time, so I couldn't care less about 24p...



Because in America, 24p is THE standrd for almost everything nowadays.


----------



## amorse (Feb 17, 2019)

I'm not going to lie, I really like Canon's cameras for what they do offer. I own a 5D IV and I love it - it has yet to let me down. I don't really shoot video, so the video specs never really bothered me on any of their releases. I've been able to understand the decisions Canon has made up to this point and accepted the limitations for what the were. I could even accept the 6D II using an older sensor tech and there are reasonable explanations for those decisions. I get all of that - sacrifices need to be made in order to build a product at a target price point, and that makes sense. But I'm really struggling with the omission of 24 fps at 1080 here, not because it affects me, but because it seems petty and intentional. 

I really don't understand this decision - I don't see any way of explaining the removal of 24 fps at 1080 other then segmentation, especially when it's available for 4k in the same body. Don't get me wrong, I still like my gear, I still think they'll sell a boat load of RP's, and I'm not going to say I or anyone else will change brands, but this does really make me question their intent and what it means for future releases. The decision doesn't affect my use, but it does indeed leave a very sour taste in my mouth just because it all seems so blatant and unnecessary.


----------



## steve oakley (Feb 17, 2019)

Dear Canon, I've spent a healthy 5 figures with your company over several decades from an A1 + FD glass, EOS-1 + EF glass, Several D series digital bodies and several C series cameras including a C300 mk2. Do you know what I think of your EOS R line ? I just bought a FujiFilm XT3 because it delivers the goods, no excuses especially on the video side. I won't waste my time complaining because its clear you don't want to change your ways. I"ll just move my purchases to other companies willing to give their best value to their customers. Thanks, good luck.


----------



## slclick (Feb 17, 2019)

I wonder how important ergonomics, color, menu ease of use and lens selection mean to people any longer? Those are my reasons for staying with the Canon Ecosystem.

I have looked into jumping ship, tried a couple other brands as supplementary/travel cameras and each time those things listed above were boxes the other companies simply could not check.

I can't imagine giving them up for video features and a stop of DR.


----------



## davidhfe (Feb 17, 2019)

slclick said:


> I wonder how important ergonomics, color, menu ease of use and lens selection mean to people any longer? Those are my reasons for staying with the Canon Ecosystem.
> 
> I have looked into jumping ship, tried a couple other brands as supplementary/travel cameras and each time those things listed above were boxes the other companies simply could not check.
> 
> I can't imagine giving them up for video features and a stop of DR.



Sony's ergonomics/reliability are catching up faster than Canon is catching up in terms of features. I used an A7S for a shoot and was instantly appalled by the feel. A few years later, I played around with an A9 and was impressed. Sony now has a solid stables of lenses that cover 80%+ of what most shooters need: Fast zooms options in the "standard" ranges and a few faster primes in the "right" focal lengths (eg 85mm).

I generally love my 5D4, but I miss more shots due to a totally unstabilized system with the 24-70, lack of eye-af (I am a hobbyist do not tell me to lrn2focus) or frame rate (when shooting sports) than I would due to Sony's color management. I also sigh when people say "hey, can you shoot a quick video for us with your big camera?" because I know it means reformatting CF cards to side step file size limits, penciling in some time to transcode the unwieldy format, and (to a lesser extend) re-learning all my focal lengths to adjust for a 1.7 crop. I keep hearing amazing things from the rumor pipeline, but Canon really hasn't delivered yet on the things I care about for my next camera in 1-2 years. The RF mount has already got me holding off on lens purchases (Was going to buy a 100-400 but will just rent it for the time being) and Canon's continued WEIRD product segmentation decisions are just throwing fuel onto that fire.


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 17, 2019)

EduPortas said:


> The reasoning behind this cameras insane:
> 
> 4K video/Mic port/headphone jack: check! But no DPAF with EF-S lenses in 1080p. In fact, no 1080p at all with those lenses! What?!
> 
> ...



That reflects my feelings: I was glad to reuse the 10-22 for video because it is a 16-35 and for me a well known crop factor. I thought it was one of the reasons to put the RP on the market: APS-Users.

And I am counting beans since ~ 8 years: I am buying only cameras in the lower price segment because they are good enough and the cameras in the higher price segment are to heavy / do have unneeded features. I need solid 3fps - every 2 years - nothing more. But I want a clean compatible set of features that are standard in the rest of the Canon world.


----------



## jayphotoworks (Feb 17, 2019)

I was impressed with the RP specs when it launched. I thought that seeing 4K, 422 8bit, C-AF Eye-AF was a good sign for the upcoming flagship in terms of specs as I was certain the RP was going to top out at 1080p. Initial tests show similar rolling shutter to the EOS R and 5DIV, which I expected and no DPAF @ 4K which I also expected. What I was most surprised by how the camera locks you in at 720p when you use EF-S lenses.. I didn't even know about that until it was mentioned by CR...


----------



## Kathode-Ray (Feb 17, 2019)

slclick said:


> I wonder how important ergonomics, color, menu ease of use and lens selection mean to people any longer? Those are my reasons for staying with the Canon Ecosystem.
> 
> I have looked into jumping ship, tried a couple other brands as supplementary/travel cameras and each time those things listed above were boxes the other companies simply could not check.
> 
> I can't imagine giving them up for video features and a stop of DR.



Exactly! I've tried Sony and Nikon, but within two minutes, I am fighting with the ergonomics and the menu system. Button placement, icons and menu layout are exactly opposite to what I find logical, so these cameras are not for me. For example, turning the lens clockwise to unlock it, really?? That will be something I will curse on every time I use such a camera.


----------



## stevelee (Feb 17, 2019)

My guess is that their research showed that folks buying entry-level cameras hardly ever shoot video at 24 fps, and hardly any of those who do would miss it if it isn't there.


----------



## sdz (Feb 17, 2019)

stevelee said:


> My guess is that their research showed that folks buying entry-level cameras hardly ever shoot video at 24 fps, and hardly any of those who do would miss it if it isn't there.



Yet, if it costs nothing to turn it on, then those users who want to shoot at 24 FPS can.....


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 18, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> They are competitive but they still trail behind Nikon (D850) and Sony.



They really don't trail behind on ISO. FF sensors are almost all within a fraction of a stop of each other, and there are examples of Canon models being better than Sony models. To give an example, the 'old and busted' 6D2 sensor is much better at high ISO than the 'new hotness' A72 sensor, and they were contemporaries. It's also pretty close to the A73 sensor which is much newer. Another example: people assume every Sony sensor has higher DR than every Canon sensor, but the 5D4 sensor actually out performs several of the A7 bodies that have shipped. (The current 3rd gen matches the D8x0's.)

On DR the difference between the 5D IV and D8x0/A73 generation is pretty small. From a practical standpoint it's a little bit of NR in post. The main "problem" for stills shooters at the moment is that with Canon you can choose high MP (5Ds/sr) or high DR (5D4), but not both. (Though 30 MP is nothing to sneeze at.)



> Canon also trail in multiple area such eyeAF, 4K, video features, no IBIS.



With the exception of IBIS, that all comes down to readout speeds. I don't know if they need further fab improvements, if their engineers are struggling with the required circuitry, or if accountants are really forcing them to use a lower cost/larger feature fab line to make money. But they absolutely have to overcome that hurdle. Yes, there are other important things like color, ergonomics, and weather sealing/durability. Yes, they dominate on lenses. Yes, they continue to hold the #1 market position. But they can't hold off the competition forever with poor sensor readout speeds.

Incidentally, it dawned on me that Sony is at the limits of their readout speeds in some respects. Otherwise there wouldn't be a 1.2x crop at 4k30p on the A73. We are asking for _state of the art_ features here, and Canon doesn't have to be _that far behind_ at the circuit level to make impossible the things we want like FF 4k.



> I wonder if Canon will improve upon those in their EOS R Pro or competitions will make up on the area of deficiency that Canon excel (ergonomic, touch screen menu, etc). Interesting time ahead.



In theory, now that Sony has solid AF, they should be able to solve all outstanding complaints in one generation. How hard is it to adjust ergonomics and a touch screen? 

In practice their engineers just don't get it when it comes to certain things, so I don't know if they'll ever be solved. Canon has always been a photography company so their engineers get it. Sony is what you get when an engineer who is not a photographer surveys photographers and designs a camera. Canon is what you get when a photographer designs a camera.

I have no idea what's holding Canon up on the hardware side so it's hard to say how long it will take them to overcome it. The interview with Canon execs and the RF lens announcements leads me to think (hope?) that they're only a year out (or less) from their next generation sensors.

FWIW, thinking about chip wars over the decades (CPUs and GPUs), it often seems like one company is 'down and out' for a few years, only to come back and leapfrog the competition. Canon could upgrade their fabs and next thing you know 4k120p full width FF readout. You never know.


----------



## davidhfe (Feb 18, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> With the exception of IBIS, that all comes down to readout speeds



Boiling those features down to "it's just readout speed" has some truth, but it's really reductive. It's the chip architecture, having the fab capability to do it _and do it cost effectively, _the processor and god knows what interconnects and then actually implementing the features (like eye tracking) in software/firmware to work reliably. I mean how many years of engineering to both Nikon and Canon have behind their PDAF+metering sensor motion tracking algorithms?


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 18, 2019)

Sony is what Sony always has been. A lot of flash in the pan specs on paper with comparably lacking performance. I used to sell Sony ES audio gear 20 years ago and nothing has changed. The Marantz and Denon products (Amplifiers and Home Theater devices) always lagged on paper in terms of max power and bells and whistles.... but they sounded so much better in the real world. Canon can compete based on real world performance against the likes of Sony, because Sony still puts actual performance and results second place behind bright lights and shiny objects. Canon needs to be mindful that people are highly susceptible to shiny objects. And when they shank features without cause, these shiny objects become more appealing. If Canon continues to base their entire business model on stills shooters, they may have a rude awakening down the road. People clamor for Canon quality, but they can’t be forever expected to ignore the lack of desire by Canon to accommodate reason and sanity. The RP really bit hard. Canon needs to address this because too many Canon video die hards who have defended them for years were insulted with this.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 18, 2019)

davidhfe said:


> Boiling those features down to "it's just readout speed" has some truth, but it's really reductive. It's the chip architecture, having the fab capability to do it _and do it cost effectively, _the processor and god knows what interconnects and then actually implementing the features (like eye tracking) in software/firmware to work reliably. I mean how many years of engineering to both Nikon and Canon have behind their PDAF+metering sensor motion tracking algorithms?



LOL! Aren't my posts long enough without diving into the engineering issues with sensor fabrication? 

I don't mean to make light of it. I'm sure Canon has been working on it and yet we are still probably a year off from a next gen architecture that can handle the required readout and processing speeds. It's obviously a difficult engineering challenge. I alluded to that when I mentioned that we are talking about the absolute state of the art and that even Sony bumps up against limits and they're arguably the best right now on this aspect.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 18, 2019)

slclick said:


> I wonder how important ergonomics, color, menu ease of use and lens selection mean to people any longer? Those are my reasons for staying with the Canon Ecosystem.
> 
> I have looked into jumping ship, tried a couple other brands as supplementary/travel cameras and each time those things listed above were boxes the other companies simply could not check.
> 
> I can't imagine giving them up for video features and a stop of DR.



A lot of companies catching up to Canon ergonomic, color, menu, fully touch screen etc. I think some companies has match or exceed them in some of those area. Panasonic and Nikon doing that and providing more with IBIS, better eyeAF, 4K, etc.

As to their lenses, there are multiple other companies providing comparable quality to L lens if not better such as Sigma and Tamron. 

I certainly do care about those intangibles but Canon isn't the only in the game that provide all that while behind on the tech side and price more expensive than the competitions.


----------



## slclick (Feb 18, 2019)

intangibles....


----------



## robotfist (Feb 18, 2019)

The only thing Canon will listen to is poor sales. I switched to Fuji 3 months ago. It’s not full frame but the camera does what I need a camera to do in 2019 and the image and colors are fantastic. Bye Canon. I’m done with your lazy innovation and intentional crippling of technology. I should of switched a long time ago but I held off for the Eos-R. After that announcement I made the decision to switch. Bye. I’m done with you.


----------



## Kit. (Feb 18, 2019)

robotfist said:


> The only thing Canon will listen to is poor sales.


Then _we_ are *******.

Because everyone expects this camera to sell well.


----------



## ozturert (Feb 18, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> This is why we criticize Canon. too many fanboys always find a way to defend them even when they pull crap like this. Then you got the "I dont do video" guys. No one cares about you guys. You are relics. Video is important in 2019.


In general Canon gives what the target buyers need most. Not everyone needs [email protected], hell not everyone needs 4K in the first place. I have only tried to take some videos of may daughter in 4K and gave up after I saw how much space they take. Just neat 1080p video is what I want. With the articulated touch screen and DualPixel AF, Canon's 1080p video implementation is one of the best for casual shooters. That may be why most Canon users are happy with what they have.


----------



## baldermort (Feb 18, 2019)

IF you want a video camera ARRI and RED make some nice cameras, with a fairly extensive range of features. (Yes the prices are in the mega-ouch territory) 
IF you are instead part of the snowflake generation who constantly upload all your uniqueness, there are a range of different choices from the GoPro to the RP
There are also people who want to have many other things in their ultimate device. 
I myself am particularly disappointed that the RP omitted to include any form of in-flight/drone capability. 
I had been hoping that the auto-focus, auto-stabilising, auto-everything-else might lead to automated target acquisition where the camera knew what I wanted to "follow"
I find myself at the Bass Rock, on a very unstable boat and throw my camera overboard in disgust. 
The camera inherently knows using AI from some science fiction movie that I wanted some award winning pictures of the Gannets overhead.
Before hitting the water, my new fangled EOS RP+ (with most recent updates to firmware) deploys into "flight mode" 
It identifies the most interesting looking of the 40,000 possible gannets and assumes auto-target-acquisition mode with follow-focus and live-tracking
Using the GPS, weather sensors, thermal sensors and find-the-sun sensor It calculates the best possible point for the ideal shot of the most interesting gannet. 
Because hardly anyone really knows what the ideal video format might be, in addition to taking 300-shots/second, it also records in parallel 7 different video formats.
Everything from 8K to 640x480 at an assortment of different frame rates so that "later" when you decide what you want to do with this, all the right stuff has been captured at source.
Just because I was originally planning to take photographs, there is no reason that Canon should force me to ignore/avoid all of the possible video capabilities. 
Everything from super-slow-motion diving for fishes to time-lapse that shows the evolution from an egg to a fully mature bird. 
I had also been expecting that regardless of which lens I might have chosen, all the flight and video and photo capabilities would not be impacted by the different lenses.
I would expect that flight capabilities are similar with a 15mm fisheye or the 600mm F/4 lens. 
The artificial intelligence and machine learning should be combined to provide (or learn to provide) whatever concept I had been thinking about at any given point in time.
Oh, yeah, I just read something about how "blockchain" is also an important and emerging technology, so it would be cool if they could build that into the camera too!!!!


----------



## Kharan (Feb 18, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> As an example, I would have preordered an RP if it had the 1DX2's sensor and video specs without any stupid compromises to "protect" the trickle of 1DX2-for-video sales. As is I will pass. For that matter, I would probably buy an R body at the R's price point if it had the 1DX2's sensor and video specs. Maybe Canon should have done that instead. Maybe they still should since they could throw it together fast and it would stop the bleeding of EF lens owners who want solid video.



You know, at some point I was stupid and naïve enough to think that Canon would do just that - finally move their best current sensor into the mainstream, by putting it into the EOS R (this based on the early rumors, which overpromised a lot). They'd have had a camera with fast readout, strong burst capability, and good 4K for the masses.
But of course, that could never happen. They'll probably use it in a $4,500 EOS R-pro that will have half the features of the A9 for the same initial price


----------



## LSXPhotog (Feb 18, 2019)

degos said:


> Maybe they don't, perhaps you are projecting what you think Canon want.
> 
> Certainly a 4000D user would look askance at a $1299 camera versus the $400 he paid for body + kit. That's car money!
> 
> A 7D2 user will laugh at the pitiful framerate and lower pixel density.



Canon reps have, verbatim, stated this camera is the perfect upgrade for those coming from APS-C.


----------



## Kharan (Feb 18, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> In theory, now that Sony has solid AF, they should be able to solve all outstanding complaints in one generation. How hard is it to adjust ergonomics and a touch screen?
> 
> In practice their engineers just don't get it when it comes to certain things, so I don't know if they'll ever be solved. Canon has always been a photography company so their engineers get it. Sony is what you get when an engineer who is not a photographer surveys photographers and designs a camera. Canon is what you get when a photographer designs a camera.
> 
> ...



Well, Sony certainly have stuck with some odd choices for their E-mount cameras (causing problems that were already solved in their A-mount bodies - how stupid is that?), but they've been shown to be receptive to user feedback for a lot of things. It can easily be seen in their three generations of A7 products. I don't think they'll get everything right in the next iteration, but they'll be a lot closer.

Investing in a new fab, on the other hand, is something that I'd outright discard for Canon. It's a humongous expense in a contracting market, and their decision to (*finally!*) sell sensors to third parties came way too late in the game, and it's unlikely that the top brass will approve such a move in the coming two to three years, at least. 

So no, the best they can do for now is refine the 1DXII sensor, and move the existing architecture to as many bodies as possible.


----------



## LSXPhotog (Feb 18, 2019)

I'm not going to quote or call anyone out in particular, but there are some incredibly ignorant posts being made in the defense of Canon here.

Video features mean _very _little to me, as I am a photographer. It doesn't mean I can't take a step back and identify the videography market as an important feature in cameras that should be taken seriously and coexist with stills in some way. Having video features that are competitive with the market only helps to improve Canon as a brand and the potential of its future cameras. But, we're talking about 24 frames per second. If you're not aware of what the significance to this frame rate is because you "don't care about video," then you probably shouldn't be commenting about it. ;-) But I will briefly explain to you that 24fps is the industry standard for film. The overwhelming majority of movies and video are shot at 24fps because it still allows motion blur and provides and organic and natural look to video. This dates back to nearly a century of filmmaking.

The absence of this frame rate option essentially kills it from any consideration of being a video camera for basically anyone. A big problem is that 30fps video cannot be used in a 24fps timeline without frame dropping and 60fps will naturally be slow motion when imported or you lose the organic motion blur if it's speed back up to normal speed and it can look very strange alongside ture 24fps footage. Some on YouTube use 30fps out of personal preference, but they are a minority and it's not the cinematic look most seek.

If Canon had just included 24fps - an option available in the M100, M50, 4000D, M1, M3, M5, M6, T4i, T5i, T6i, T7i, 77D, 60D, 70D, 80D, 7D, 7D Mark II, 6D, 6D Mark II, EOS R, 5D Mark II, 5D Mark III, 5D Mark IV, and so many other cameras etc. - then it would challenge absolutely nothing in the lineup, but expand the usefulness of this tool to so many people.

So please get off the principal of "if you want a video camera....buy a video camera!" Because when you're talking about the most rudimentary thing in video established in the 1920s. Your argument is moot. This is laughably inexcusable. And this is coming from a veteran Canon shooter that loves this brand. Just because I follow a brand loyally doesn't mean I have to follow blindly.


----------



## stevelee (Feb 18, 2019)

LSXPhotog said:


> The absence of this frame rate option essentially kills it from any consideration of being a video camera for basically anyone. A big problem is that 30fps video cannot be used in a 24fps timeline without frame dropping and 60fps will naturally be slow motion when imported or you lose the organic motion blur if it's speed back up to normal speed and it can look very strange alongside ture 24fps footage. Some on YouTube use 30fps out of personal preference, but they are a minority and it's not the cinematic look most seek.


I can't recall ever using 24fps and can't really think of a circumstance where I would want to. OK, maybe if I were doing a Fellini parody I'd try for a cinematic look, so yes, I can conceive of my using it, but not in any likely scenarios. 

I am really surprised to read that the vast majority of folks use 24 fps on YouTube. I don't think my iPhone even has that speed, though it does have 60 and 120. I'm not sure about 240. I think newer phones can do that.

Since I don't shoot 24, though my cameras support it—other than the phone, I don't have any experience mixing it in with 30 and 60 fps footage. But I know from my otherwise retiming experience in editing software that there are better ways to change frame rate than frame dropping and pull downs. Optical flow and even old-timey interpolation will usually give better results.


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 18, 2019)

Kharan said:


> You know, at some point I was stupid and naïve enough to think that Canon would do just that - finally move their best current sensor into the mainstream, by putting it into the EOS R (this based on the early rumors, which overpromised a lot). They'd have had a camera with fast readout, strong burst capability, and good 4K for the masses.
> But of course, that could never happen. They'll probably use it in a $4,500 EOS R-pro that will have half the features of the A9 for the same initial price



Would have loved the DX2 sensor in the RP and it would have made a lot of sense. 20MP offers more distinction from the R than 26MP. Would have also made the RP great for entry level video, which a lot of folks were hoping for. The crop would have been 1.3x just like the DX2. The sensor is great, but what you pay $6K for is everything around it. 14fps RAW shooting speeds with AF servo active and a buffer you really cant choke. CFAst2 and CF slots. The most rugged body built in a camera today, internal 4k60 and 1080p120, etc etc.... 

I’m not complaining about the sensor the RP got, but yes the DX2 sensor would be nice. That’s not a knock on the RP as is though. Lots of folks would love to see an EOS RC (cinema) body with something like that sensor in it to compliment the Cinema line. Right now the EOS R is the closest thing we have and I cant see how a future “Pro” model would be better as it would most likely be built to be more like the 5DS with a high res sensor


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 18, 2019)

LSXPhotog said:


> I'm not going to quote or call anyone out in particular, but there are some incredibly ignorant posts being made in the defense of Canon here.
> 
> Video features mean _very _little to me, as I am a photographer. It doesn't mean I can't take a step back and identify the videography market as an important feature in cameras that should be taken seriously and coexist with stills in some way. Having video features that are competitive with the market only helps to improve Canon as a brand and the potential of its future cameras. But, we're talking about 24 frames per second. If you're not aware of what the significance to this frame rate is because you "don't care about video," then you probably shouldn't be commenting about it. ;-) But I will briefly explain to you that 24fps is the industry standard for film. The overwhelming majority of movies and video are shot at 24fps because it still allows motion blur and provides and organic and natural look to video. This dates back to nearly a century of filmmaking.
> 
> ...



Now now, dont start talking logic and sense . That’s not fair... and to the “buy a video camera” argument, remember that a lot of C200, C300, etc users want a smaller companion body that can visually match up well to their bigger cameras. Canon I believe is losing a lot more in potential sales than they believe would be cannabalized from the Cinema line if they did. Full time Pros will still want all the myriad of additional features only a pro level video body can offer in an “A cam”. The more casual $1500-$2000 buyer is not going to drop $7000 on a C200. Different cameras for different markets.


----------



## Hornet (Feb 18, 2019)

s66 said:


> I honestly don't get why those who only do video don't buy a video camera - seems that would do what they want.



I think we've long passed the point where consumers will accept a camera that doesn't have at least BASIC capabilities in both realms, especially in an entry-level camera.


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Feb 18, 2019)

stevelee said:


> I can't recall ever using 24fps and can't really think of a circumstance where I would want to. OK, maybe if I were doing a Fellini parody I'd try for a cinematic look, so yes, I can conceive of my using it, but not in any likely scenarios.
> 
> I am really surprised to read that the vast majority of folks use 24 fps on YouTube. I don't think my iPhone even has that speed, though it does have 60 and 120. I'm not sure about 240. I think newer phones can do that.
> 
> Since I don't shoot 24, though my cameras support it—other than the phone, I don't have any experience mixing it in with 30 and 60 fps footage. But I know from my otherwise retiming experience in editing software that there are better ways to change frame rate than frame dropping and pull downs. Optical flow and even old-timey interpolation will usually give better results.



There is 24 fps on your phone, but 30 and 60 is the way to go on a phone most of the time. As previously mentioned, 24 fps allows you to use motion blur by setting your shutter around 1/40-1/60(180 degree shutter rule). Since we're not carrying around neutral density with us at all times, 30 and 60 is a better choice to avoid the stutter look(see below).


----------



## bhf3737 (Feb 18, 2019)

LSXPhotog said:


> I'm not going to quote or call anyone out in particular, but there are some incredibly ignorant posts being made in the defense of Canon here.
> 
> Video features mean _very _little to me, as I am a photographer. It doesn't mean I can't take a step back and identify the videography market as an important feature in cameras that should be taken seriously and coexist with stills in some way. Having video features that are competitive with the market only helps to improve Canon as a brand and the potential of its future cameras. But, we're talking about 24 frames per second. If you're not aware of what the significance to this frame rate is because you "don't care about video," then you probably shouldn't be commenting about it. ;-) But I will briefly explain to you that 24fps is the industry standard for film. The overwhelming majority of movies and video are shot at 24fps because it still allows motion blur and provides and organic and natural look to video. This dates back to nearly a century of filmmaking.
> 
> The absence of this frame rate option essentially kills it from any consideration of being a video camera for basically anyone. A big problem is that 30fps video cannot be used in a 24fps timeline without frame dropping and 60fps will naturally be slow motion when imported or you lose the organic motion blur if it's speed back up to normal speed and it can look very strange alongside ture 24fps footage. Some on YouTube use 30fps out of personal preference, but they are a minority and it's not the cinematic look most seek.


I do not defend omission of 24p and truely believe that it was a bad decision for the consumers (but not apparently for Canon itself).
But as you mentioned, "there are some incredibly ignorant posts being made" not only "in defense of Canon" but also in the defense of 24p here that I believe partially shows lack of understanding or good research.
Those defending 24p, usually mention that (1) it is de-facto standard for film industry and (2) it delivers organic and natural film look.
Yes, it is historical standard for film industry, no doubt about it. But several award winning movies (Peter Jckson's for example) are shot in frame rates other than 24p and several real cinematographers are moving away from it.
There are tons of argument against the latter and 24p is not the magic potion for the "film look" that newbies seek after with their vlogging camera in hand and moving around assuming that they are delivering film look contents.
What constitutes that magical film look is: time, effort, talent, skill, technique, money, pro crew, lighting, solid camera support, glass, recording media, good editing, quality distribution, aspect ratio, depth of field control, color latitude, grain, sensitivity, projection and finally (perhaps) 24p!!


----------



## Hornet (Feb 18, 2019)

sdz said:


> I believe the anger about the RP video modes is motivated by the belief that Canon intentionally crippled the camera for what are irrational reasons.



I think it's just the opposite. Photographers who are loyal to the Canon brand, and who want to continue to be Canon users, are upset that Canon management very purposefully omits features that are standard with other manufacturers. We can speculate forever about their motives, but the bottom line is that Canon users can reasonably feel that they aren't getting the best value for money.


----------



## cpreston (Feb 18, 2019)

If you need crop framed 1080p in a Canon full frame body, buy the EOS-R. Simple. Don't buy the 5D or 1DX since they don't include it, either. If the price difference between the R and the RP is too much for you to handle, then you don't have the resources for any of this discussion about frame rates and resolution to actually matter. Technical limitations on a camera are insignificant compared to the time and money required to get anything approaching "cinematic" in filmmaking.


----------



## sdz (Feb 18, 2019)

Hornet said:


> I think it's just the opposite. Photographers who are loyal to the Canon brand, and who want to continue to be Canon users, are upset that Canon management very purposefully omits features that are standard with other manufacturers. We can speculate forever about their motives, but the bottom line is that Canon users can reasonably feel that they arent' getting the best value for money.



You made my point, but stated it differently.


----------



## stevelee (Feb 18, 2019)

crazyrunner33 said:


> There is 24 fps on your phone, but 30 and 60 is the way to go on a phone most of the time. As previously mentioned, 24 fps allows you to use motion blur by setting your shutter around 1/40-1/60(180 degree shutter rule). Since we're not carrying around neutral density with us at all times, 30 and 60 is a better choice to avoid the stutter look(see below).


Not on my phone. It is a 6S, and I’m not paying $1,000 or so to upgrade the phone to get 24fps.

I looked, and it does have 240 fps at 720p and only 30 fps at 4K. 1020p will do 30 or 60.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Feb 18, 2019)

Market segmentation pure & simple. Don't like the video spec. buy a video camera.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 18, 2019)

robotfist said:


> The only thing Canon will listen to is poor sales. I switched to Fuji 3 months ago. It’s not full frame but the camera does what I need a camera to do in 2019 and the image and colors are fantastic. Bye Canon. I’m done with your lazy innovation and intentional crippling of technology. I should of switched a long time ago but I held off for the Eos-R. After that announcement I made the decision to switch. Bye. I’m done with you.



I am seeing the writing on the wall too. They could add dual card slot, but it would cannibalize 5D IV sales. They could add better video features, but it could cannibalize EOS R sales.

I suspect the same with EOS R Pro. They could have such and such, but it would cannibalize DSLR/cinema line sale. The RF lenses are nice but it is also very expensive. It's not like third party alternative for 14-200mm are bad either. 

I'll keep an open mind on Panasonic S1 and Sony A7SIII/A9R.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 18, 2019)

jeffa4444 said:


> Market segmentation pure & simple. Don't like the video spec. buy a video camera.



Some of the basic features should be standard. I don't think it's asking too much for 24p in HD. A feature found in all modern camera. I don't even shoot video but I think it's a step backward for consumer.

We are looking for convergent of multiple products to simplify our life. Imagine a smart phone company saying phone is only for calling and texting. 

If you want to watch YouTube, Netflix, play game, surf the net, social media get a dedicate entertainment device for each specific task.


----------



## cpreston (Feb 18, 2019)

I am surprised that nobody on here is complaining that the R cameras can't recognize the cinema lenses. I mean, this is the clearest sign that Canon is intentionally crippling their mirrorless cameras to protect their cinema line. All those people that go out and order the RP and the cine-servo 17-120 are going to be pissed when they find out that their ideal filmmaking set-up isn't going to work out for them.


----------



## cpreston (Feb 18, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> Some of the basic features should be standard. I don't think it's asking too much for 24p in HD. A feature found in all modern camera. I don't even shoot video but I think it's a step backward for consumer.
> 
> We are looking for convergent of multiple products to simplify our life. Imagine a smart phone company saying phone is only for calling and texting.
> 
> If you want to watch YouTube, Netflix, play game, surf the net, social media get a dedicate entertainment device for each specific task.



If you actually care about the quality of your 1080p footage, you are going to shoot in 4K


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 18, 2019)

cpreston said:


> If you actually care about the quality of your 1080p footage, you are going to shoot in 4K



Yes I do. I would prefer 4k down sample 1080 but not everyone need it. It's nice to have options for those that want simple workflow. 4K don't have DPAF


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 18, 2019)

cpreston said:


> I am surprised that nobody on here is complaining that the R cameras can't recognize the cinema lenses. I mean, this is the clearest sign that Canon is intentionally crippling their mirrorless cameras to protect their cinema line. All those people that go out and order the RP and the CN-E 17-120 are going to be pissed when they find out that their ideal filmmaking set-up isn't going to work out for them.



No one is expecting top end video features for $1300 camera like 4K 60p, 10 bit, RAW recording or cinema lenses. No one complain about it.

24p in HD and 4K DPAF isn't asking alot.

You are just being silly in defending Canon. I don't shoot videos and can see through the BS Canon did to protect EOS R sale.


----------



## Kit. (Feb 18, 2019)

cpreston said:


> I am surprised that nobody on here is complaining that the R cameras can't recognize the cinema lenses.


I'm pretty sure they can.


----------



## cpreston (Feb 18, 2019)

Kit. said:


> I'm pretty sure they can.


Not the Cine-Zooms with AF or IS.


----------



## cpreston (Feb 18, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> No one is expecting top end video features for $1300 camera like 4K 60p, 10 bit, RAW recording or cinema lenses. No one complain about it.
> 
> 24p in HD and 4K DPAF isn't asking alot.
> 
> You are just being silly in defending Canon. I don't shoot videos and can see through the BS Canon did to protect EOS R sale.



I do shoot video. I couldn't care less about the RP video features. Video is an extremely capital intensive business. Canon is trying to sell expensive video lenses. From a business segmentation aspect, it makes sense that they aren't concerned with appeasing this theoretical group of videographers who can't spare $1000 to buy the mirrorless camera with the features that they think they want. Canon is trying to sell lenses that are 10x the cost of the camera.

I think it is kind of dumb from a marketing aspect to leave the 24p off of the camera. The targeted market for the camera is not going to care. In fact, that market of people will be pleasantly surprised at how nice and smooth their footage looks on the camera compared to the previous camera they had that was set to shoot 24p by default. But there is enough of this very small but very vocal minority of DSLR video enthusiasts who will make a stink online and convince the people in the intended market for the camera that the camera is incapable of getting "cinematic" footage of their kid playing in their back yard. Canon should have just included the 24p just so that people would have one less thing to complain about. 

Of course, this very small group of DSLR video enthusiasts would still find something to complain about with Canon, since that is just the narrative at this point. It has been ever since the original sin of Canon following up the 5D with the over priced 1DC.

I am only defending Canon in the sense that I think the people whining about video in Canon's photo cameras are missing the bigger picture. And the bigger picture is that the people who care about 24p vs 30p in their photo camera are an insignificant portion of Canon's market.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 18, 2019)

cpreston said:


> I do shoot video. I couldn't care less about the RP video features. Video is an extremely capital intensive business. Canon is trying to sell expensive video lenses. From a business segmentation aspect, it makes sense that they aren't concerned with appeasing this theoretical group of videographers who can't spare $1000 to buy the mirrorless camera with the features that they think they want. Canon is trying to sell lenses that are 10x the cost of the camera.
> 
> I think it is kind of dumb from a marketing aspect to leave the 24p off of the camera. The targeted market for the camera is not going to care. In fact, that market of people will be pleasantly surprised at how nice and smooth their footage looks on the camera compared to the previous camera they had that was set to shoot 24p by default. But there is enough of this very small but very vocal minority of DSLR video enthusiasts who will make a stink online and convince the people in the intended market for the camera that the camera is incapable of getting "cinematic" footage of their kid playing in their back yard. Canon should have just included the 24p just so that people would have one less thing to complain about.
> 
> ...



I'm all about giving the consumers choices especially for low end feature like 24p. You may not need it, but someone will. Who care what they use it for. If enabling a low feature like this will generate more sales, why wouldn't you leave it in other than market segmentation.

People are going to complain about everything these days. I criticize Canon, Sony, Nikon, Panasonic all the same. Panasonic S1 is the only company I complain the least and it's due to lens prices and slightly bigger camera than I would like but similiar to 5D IV.

Canon just irrationally omit basic feature like 24p or DPAF in 4K that it's enough to drive people mad. They could make this even more successful camera with that price point, but didn't. They could have offer dual card slot and joystick for people who don't like touch screen AF for EOS R, but didn't. It's definitely intentionally marketing decision more than technical limitation.


----------



## matthew_r (Feb 18, 2019)

I was really looking forward to being able to use this body as a dedicated video tool, as a second camera to my C100mk2. I've invested years developing muscle memory with my DSLRs and prefer to have completely separate video gear for video, so I'm not worried about remembering to change settings or having that momentary bit of confusion about whether or not I'm shooting stills or video. This seemed like it was going to be a really good solution to use as a 2nd camera for two camera interviews (the "wide" camera, recording 4K so I can crop later if necessary) but also to put on a gimbal or slider. I'm guessing that the firmware update will come with 24 fps, but until then I'll have to stick to the Sony A7riii...


----------



## sdz (Feb 18, 2019)

cpreston said:


> I do shoot video. I couldn't care less about the RP video features. Video is an extremely capital intensive business. Canon is trying to sell expensive video lenses. From a business segmentation aspect, it makes sense that they aren't concerned with appeasing this theoretical group of videographers who can't spare $1000 to buy the mirrorless camera with the features that they think they want. Canon is trying to sell lenses that are 10x the cost of the camera.
> 
> _I think it is kind of dumb from a marketing aspect to leave the 24p off of the camera....
> _
> I am only defending Canon in the sense that I think the people whining about video in Canon's photo cameras are missing the bigger picture. And the bigger picture is that the people who care about 24p vs 30p in their photo camera are an insignificant portion of Canon's market. {emphasis added}



A few lines of code enables 24P. This is a virtually costless improvement. It is an indefensible ommission. That's the gist of the criticism of Canon's new camera.


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 18, 2019)

Round and round with this. Look, it’s 2019 and if you are going to include video in a camera body there are minimal basic features that everyone does. [email protected] is about as basic as it gets.

Again, there are LOTS of perfectly understandable variances in terms of video feature loss going down the R to the RP already without removing a bare bones function like this. 

For $1299 you dont get the great DPAF in 4k, dont get C Log, dont get 10bit out, etc... 

I get that some folks dont ever do video, but imagine if Canon had removed Servo AF when using high speed shooting to differentiate even more from the R? That would be REALLY weird and totally unnecessary even at $1299. That’s the perspective. It’s a basic normal function of any camera. Those arent the sort of functions you cut, and there’s no real good excuse for it.


----------



## jvillain (Feb 18, 2019)

cpreston said:


> I think it is kind of dumb from a marketing aspect to leave the 24p off of the camera. The targeted market for the camera is not going to care.



I have read a lot of posts along these lines and I agree with the first sentence. The second sentence maybe/maybe not. I see 3 target audiences.

Newby mom/pop just getting into the market. What these people really don't care about is full freaking frame. What they do care about is ease of use, cost, size/weight and can it take a good enough picture to suite their needs. I would argue that any camera has good enough picture quality these days to suite this group. But this group doesn't have a mountain of glass sitting on their shelf. The price of the glass is going to scare the ____ out of them. So they are free to look at any thing on the market. For them the XT30 is far more compelling on every front as are several other cameras not made by Canon. Yes Canon will sell more RPs than they sell 1DXs but this group is going to be looking to others to help them make their buying decision and every where they turn they are going to be reading or watching that this is the Edsel of cameras. Because of this I think sales of this body are going to fail to meet expectations of Canon brass.

The next is the APS-C crowd. Restricting the use of APS-C lenses on this thing is an interesting idea if your are trying to get this crowd to step up to FF. The RP would be a considerable step down from my 80D and the 7D guys will say the same thing. I have never bought into the idea that your junk grows 3 sizes the day you buy a FF camera. So his is a tough sell for the APS-C crowd. The R might make sense for me to move to as my second camera if it wasn't $3000 body only in Canada. Unless there is an apoligy from the head of the camera division at Canon when he hands in his resignation the RP has convinced me that Canon really won't come out with a mirrorless version of either the 80D or the 7D. Except for my first camera I have always shot Canon but I am not waiting 3 to 4 years to see if maybe Canon might come out with some thing for me.

The last group is the pros looking for a second shooter. For them there might be a few that bite but if you can afford a a 5DIV and the associated glass you probably already have a back up camera that is way better than this PoS.

One last thing. Closing the shutter when you are removing the lens shouldn't be a feature. It should just be Canon policy as I am sure it will be every where else shortly. I know Canons BS about not wanting people to wreck their camera by touching the shutter. But how does Canon feel aouut some one that would do that digging aound in their camera to clean the sensor? Or worse not understanding what the problem is even though they clean the lenses over an over, becoming frustrated and switching back to their cell phone. Closing the shutter on mirror-less should be the policy at Canon full stop. Heads need to roll.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Feb 18, 2019)

ozturert said:


> In general Canon gives what the target buyers need most. Not everyone needs [email protected], hell not everyone needs 4K in the first place. I have only tried to take some videos of may daughter in 4K and gave up after I saw how much space they take. Just neat 1080p video is what I want. With the articulated touch screen and DualPixel AF, Canon's 1080p video implementation is one of the best for casual shooters. That may be why most Canon users are happy with what they have.


 which camera though did you record in 4k for . also for this camera it doesn't have 1080 24p. which is the stardard for films or filmic video. they might add it later but the omission of that is a true slap in the face. never let those in power totally dictate what you need. brands create standards. competition creates more standards. when "your guys" don't try to live up to others standards or do what the competition does( ifiti works properly), then you have to question them and let them know, we will not accept whatever you give it to us. It's Just common sense when it comes to CONSUMERS (ALL OF US) getting what we want if it is possible. I don't know about you guys but I never been apologetic for big businesses. I didn't mean to call these peopel relics, but someone has to get on their asses.


----------



## transpo1 (Feb 18, 2019)

neo302 said:


> I've never preordered and cancelled a camera so fast. The video features are a complete joke. Canon obviously doesn't care to lead in this space for now as they could if they wanted to. They need to get back to the mentality they had when they released the 70D.



And the mentality they had when they enabled 1080 HD video in the 5DII that creates the HDSLR world. 

FF 4K (no crop) with DPAF and C-Log would make me switch back to Canon right away from my current Fuji X-T3 excursion. Until they stop cannibalizing the video on these models, I’ll hold off buying an R mount.


----------



## bhf3737 (Feb 18, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> It's definitely intentionally marketing decision more than technical limitation.



In this thread I have seen several comments repeating again and again that "marketing decision are the limiting factor for this and that" and most of the time "market decision limits delivering a feature that I want". So many are asking how those decisions are being made and concluding that perhaps there is some stupidity/conspiracy involved on the corporate side to arrive at those insane decisions.

Any Marketing 101 course, will tell you that market segmentation is based on 4 basic rules and corporations (including Canon) are presumably following these rules.
Rule 1: Base segmentation on data not intuition
Rule 2: Segmentation entails dividing customers into distinct groups. Meaning that the same customer do not belong to two segments.
Rule 3: Segmentation properties; accessibility and size is appropriate for having a solid customer base.
Rule 4: Use different metrics, marketing strategy (and tactics) for each segment.

But what we see in some comments here are:
1. The comments are mostly based on intuition not solid data, e.g. "I know better than Canon about including/deleting feature X" or "It's definitely intentionally marketing decision", etc. (violation of Rule 1).
2. Those who provide commenters do belong to a different segment (enthusiasts, semi-pros, etc., rather then the beginners who are the target of the RP camera) and paint the product from their own perspective. Actually we have not seen any comment from a real beginner here so far, have we? Examples of those comments are "it should have feature X because I want it" or "feature X is essential but it is left out of this product", etc. (violation of Rule 1, 2).

But from corporate perspective, it seems that they are doing their homework well, perhaps not perfect. They have more data about their customers, market size and rival products than you and me. They offer products for each segment according to their understanding of the market, and not for the needs of you and me. By doing so, they have ensured size and solidity of their customer base, with measurable targets, i.e. market share and profitability.

Conclusion: Marketing decisions are not that superficial that you may think. If this product does not offer features you want/need, move on, there is a good probability that the product is not meant for you. You shouldn't worry about the wellness of the company. Let the company deal with its own market, rival companies, benefits and losses.


----------



## Random Orbits (Feb 18, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> which camera though did you record in 4k for . also for this camera it doesn't have 1080 24p. which is the stardard for films or filmic video. they might add it later but the omission of that is a true slap in the face. never let those in power totally dictate what you need. brands create standards. competition creates more standards. when "your guys" don't try to live up to others standards or do what the competition does( ifiti works properly), then you have to question them and let them know, we will not accept whatever you give it to us. It's Just common sense when it comes to CONSUMERS (ALL OF US) getting what we want if it is possible. I don't know about you guys but I never been apologetic for big businesses. I didn't mean to call these peopel relics, but someone has to get on their asses.



What changed since the RP announcement is that the stills crowd got another option at a lower price point, and the 4K/filmic video crowd did not. That is it. Complaining here does no good. Perhaps Canon might add features via firmware update if sales don't meet expectations, but more likely, the RP is engineered to be sold at much lower prices to be a viable stills camera with limited video functionality. I wouldn't be surprised if this model goes below 1000 USD in a couple years.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 18, 2019)

bhf3737 said:


> If this product does not offer features you want/need, move on, there is a good probability that the product is not meant for you. You shouldn't worry about the wellness of the company. Let the company deal with its own market, rival companies, benefits and losses.



It seems like a lot of people already have. I'm halfway through the door waiting for EOS R Pro.
You are right that's this camera isn't for me. I don't worry about the wellness of the company either
Complaining on the forums won't change anything. The only thing Canon listened to are sale numbers. 

You are right that they do have a bigger marketing data than everyone here on the forum and they know best. We shouldn't be having these discussion /s.


----------



## bluediablo (Feb 18, 2019)

bhf3737 said:


> In this thread I have seen several comments repeating again and again that "marketing decision are the limiting factor for this and that" and most of the time "market decision limits delivering a feature that I want". So many are asking how those decisions are being made and concluding that perhaps there is some stupidity/conspiracy involved on the corporate side to arrive at those insane decisions.
> 
> Any Marketing 101 course, will tell you that market segmentation is based on 4 basic rules and corporations (including Canon) are presumably following these rules.
> Rule 1: Base segmentation on data not intuition
> ...



Well said!


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 19, 2019)

bhf3737 said:


> Any Marketing 101 course, will tell you that market segmentation is based on 4 basic rules and corporations (including Canon) are presumably following these rules.



What do marking courses say about...

1: Not having ANY segment to serve a large percentage of customers.
2: Trying to segment on features that the competition throws in.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Feb 19, 2019)

Random Orbits said:


> What changed since the RP announcement is that the stills crowd got another option at a lower price point, and the 4K/filmic video crowd did not. That is it. Complaining here does no good. Perhaps Canon might add features via firmware update if sales don't meet expectations, but more likely, the RP is engineered to be sold at much lower prices to be a viable stills camera with limited video functionality. I wouldn't be surprised if this model goes below 1000 USD in a couple years.


Complaining or not buying does work. For all the bragging about a compoany being number one, if they dont make money they would do things to do get it including listening to the demands of the consumer. it seems like you guys dont care or just gave up. Rem eber when C- Log came to the MK IV. People wanted it. they had tons of fake ones and people were selling them. Canon finally did it. Even though they charged. Yet they wouldnt allow it on any other camera outside the cinema line until the EOS R


----------



## RayValdez360 (Feb 19, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> What do marking courses say about...
> 
> 1: Not having ANY segment to serve a large percentage of customers.
> 2: Trying to segment on features that the competition throws in.


Segmentation by pricepoint is one thing but taking little things out to piss off people is not segmentation. I agree with 2. The top camera should have everything. Possible that works properly and the bottom should have the least. now here you got a c300 II with no 4k 60p and 10 bit and no raw, and u got a c200 with no 10 bit but 4k60 and raw. so people were confused on what to buy and most peopel cant afford to buy both hell, most people couldnt afford to buy one.


----------



## stevelee (Feb 19, 2019)

None of this discussion suggests to me that much of anybody among the target buyers will notice or care that it doesn’t have 24fps. Probably more will notice the lack of 4K in the features list, mostly some of those who have 4K TVs. 

Canon likely expects to sell mostly to first-time buyers and to Rebel owners rather than those looking to upgrade their 5D IV.


----------



## Nelu (Feb 19, 2019)

transpo1 said:


> And the mentality they had when they enabled 1080 HD video in the 5DII that creates the HDSLR world.
> 
> FF 4K (no crop) with DPAF and C-Log would make me switch back to Canon right away from my current Fuji X-T3 excursion. Until they stop cannibalizing the video on these models, I’ll hold off buying an R mount.


Just curious, why would you switch back from Fuji?
That cannot be cheap, going back and forth from one brand to another...


----------



## digitalride (Feb 19, 2019)

Personally I shoot video maybe once per month, but I will never buy a camera that can't even shoot 1080p with my EF-S lenses. They are really narrowing down who this camera makes sense for.

People are chomping at the bit for mirrorless options cause its some shiny new thing, but instead of feeding them canon is playing an elaborate marketing game to transition from EF to RF on their terms. Until their mirrorless options are actually desirable everyone should just put an LCD viewfinder on the back of their camera and use live view when they want a mirrorless camera


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 19, 2019)

Nelu said:


> Just curious, why would you switch back from Fuji?
> That cannot be cheap, going back and forth from one brand to another...



Fuji is another company that makes a very compelling argument for video folks. Granted the XT3 is for video, but with the crop factor of 1.75x on the EOS R series. The Fuji is really no different. Fuji also has native lenses that are relatively in expensive. The RF mount offers little as of yet (and I know Canon is pounding away on this fast as they can) in terms of "affordable" native glass.

So for video people a $1399 Fuji XT 3 is very much on par with the $1299 EOS RP but you get 4K60, 10 bit output at 422, and yes, 1080p @24. So It's a really good value for video.

ALL THAT SAID... I'm willing to bet most of those Fuji video people (like Sony shooters as well) would gladly migrate to Canon for the color science and film look that only Canon has really seemed to master. It's just that it's hard for them to give up the shooting versatility you can get in a $1399 body. No Fuji doesn't have as wide (or as good) glass lineup as Canon, but lots of video folks are still fine with adapters and manual focus. It's different world than folks like me who do mainly stills.

Canon doesn't seem interested in really clobbering that market for one reason or another. Imagine having an EOS R that did 4k60. Specs would be ON PAR with Fuji's body and that extra $900 to get that famous Canon look with access to all those sweet lenses with DPAF in servo video... That would be really enticing to a lot of them.

Again, I'm not complaining about the EOS R. It's a really nice feature set and a great looking camera. But the RP at almost the same price as the APSC Fuji XT3 (yes, cheaper) and WAY CHEAPER than the Micro 4/3 Panasonic GH5 would kill it in sales for video people if not for a few lines of code removed from the firmware...

So in otherwords, the investment in the FUJI system for what you get is comparably minimal, and switching over to Canon is not as painful.


----------



## uri.raz (Feb 19, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> Some of the basic features should be standard. I don't think it's asking too much for 24p in HD. A feature found in all modern camera. I don't even shoot video but I think it's a step backward for consumer.
> 
> We are looking for convergent of multiple products to simplify our life. Imagine a smart phone company saying phone is only for calling and texting.
> 
> If you want to watch YouTube, Netflix, play game, surf the net, social media get a dedicate entertainment device for each specific task.



There are many orthodox Jews who buy phones capable of making phone calls only, with no texting, no Internet, no camera, etc. Reasoning is they don't want the ability to be exposed to inappropriate content, e.g. porn and news sites catering to the general population. Companies cater to this audience with dumbed down phones and cell plans with hard zero data traffic and numbers that identify them as belonging to a kosher cell plan. Those phones and plans are, naturally, e.g. a kosher cell plan costs half the price I pay to the same cell provider.

Of course there's a counter movement, ranging from people owning a kosher phone to use in the community and a fully capable smart phone to use elsewhere, or moving to more modern neighborhoods where they would not be judged for using a smart phone.


----------



## Mikehit (Feb 19, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> What do marking courses say about...
> 
> 1: Not having ANY segment to serve a large percentage of customers.
> 2: Trying to segment on features that the competition throws in.



Nothing because those points are irrelevant to bhf373's post. If you can define 'large percentage' and convince me it matches with Canon's definition then you may have a point. What features a different manufacturer adds is relevant only in as much as it points to Canon what is possible.
When the 5DIV came out, Canon explained the 4K function along the lines that their market research told them that a vast majority of people who buy the 5DIV shot short sequences of video to supplement their stills and did not buy DSLRs with the express intention of shooting lots of video. And yet all the complaints came from people heavily invested in video who, because they posted on youtube got what could easily be defined as a voice out of all proportion to their importance to 'the market'. So in that respect it is easily foreseeable that the features the competition adds in are not particularly important to a vast majority of buyers when making their decisions.

It is 8 (?) years since the Sony and Nikon cameras overtook the Canon in technical sensor specifications. In that time a lot of photographers have died or found a different hobby and millions more have taken the hobby up or progressed from phone/compact to DSLR/MILC. If all those features you talk about were that important to the buying decision, Sony and Nikon would have hoovered up those newbies and eaten significantly into Canon's market share. And yet Nikon has fallen further behind and Sony has no greater market share than before they went mirrorless. And the fact I am talking here about old customers dying and new people coming in means that the old whine about 'it is because people are invested in Canon' just does not apply. 

I would love Canon to have sensors with the capability of Sony's. But What this suggests to me is that Canon remains #1 because the technical stuff so beloved of forums and click-baiting youtubers is actually not that high on the buying decision of most customers.


----------



## transpo1 (Feb 19, 2019)

Nelu said:


> Just curious, why would you switch back from Fuji?
> That cannot be cheap, going back and forth from one brand to another...



Yes, it's a very good question, isn't it? 

Canon FF IQ will tempt me back in the long run but only if the video specs were competitive, which so far, they are not. Not to mention, I have lots of EF lenses just sitting around with my 5DIII. 

The Fuji has many attributes- small, light, weather and freeze resistant, great video quality- and I can't see investing in Canon's new system until they unlock the full video potential with no crop FF 4K with DPAF autofocus, 4K 60p, and C-log. 

FF 4K would be a step up from the Fuji in look and feel but no reason to invest if I'm only going to be getting 1.6x crop on the Canon as well  

Hope that answers your question.


----------



## transpo1 (Feb 19, 2019)

PureClassA said:


> Fuji is another company that makes a very compelling argument for video folks. Granted the XT3 is for video, but with the crop factor of 1.75x on the EOS R series. The Fuji is really no different. Fuji also has native lenses that are relatively in expensive. The RF mount offers little as of yet (and I know Canon is pounding away on this fast as they can) in terms of "affordable" native glass.
> 
> So for video people a $1399 Fuji XT 3 is very much on par with the $1299 EOS RP but you get 4K60, 10 bit output at 422, and yes, 1080p @24. So It's a really good value for video.
> 
> ...



Exactly.

And if Canon gave me a reason to switch back and invest in their new FF MILC system, I would LOVE to adapt my much beloved EF lenses and buy new RF glass. 

But without FF no crop 4K, 60p, and the rest of the specs that I've repeated ad nauseam here, there simply is no reason.


----------



## cayenne (Feb 19, 2019)

bhf3737 said:


> Actually there is. The person who is taking the video may not have the skills to pan or crawl the camera well and the end result may look stuttering on the TV or monitor. Just check Red Pan Calculator that says the time for 24p and 30p or 60p for a given focal length for a smooth panning shot is quite different and if you don't do it right (average video shooters do not get it right) your shot will not look good. 60p and 30p are more forgiving than 24p here.




Well, then just set camera out of the box to default 30fps....if the user is that unskilled and that much of a noob, then they won't even know or figure out how to go deep enough into the menu system to change it to 24fps.

But at least have the option there for those that *do* know a bit more and have the skills....eh?

My $0.02,

cayenne


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 19, 2019)

uri.raz said:


> There are many orthodox Jews who buy phones capable of making phone calls only, with no texting, no Internet, no camera, etc. Reasoning is they don't want the ability to be exposed to inappropriate content, e.g. porn and news sites catering to the general population. Companies cater to this audience with dumbed down phones and cell plans with hard zero data traffic and numbers that identify them as belonging to a kosher cell plan. Those phones and plans are, naturally, e.g. a kosher cell plan costs half the price I pay to the same cell provider.
> 
> Of course there's a counter movement, ranging from people owning a kosher phone to use in the community and a fully capable smart phone to use elsewhere, or moving to more modern neighborhoods where they would not be judged for using a smart phone.



That's a very interesting info. I'm sure there are niche of electronic devices to cater to specific demands for security or cultural sensitive. I was talking about in mass context more just like Canon is making product for mass market appeal.


----------



## davidhfe (Feb 19, 2019)

stevelee said:


> None of this discussion suggests to me that much of anybody among the target buyers will notice or care that it doesn’t have 24fps. Probably more will notice the lack of 4K in the features list, mostly some of those who have 4K TVs.



They will care when they google the $1300 camera they're about to buy and see a bunch of "CANON FAIL" videos on youtube. This release has played right into the worst narratives about canon at a time they should be crushing it. DPAF is a killer features for mirrorless and instead of making the competition look like buffoons for not having it, we're arguing about a damn video frame rate. That's why this is a really questionable move on Canon's part.


----------



## cayenne (Feb 19, 2019)

cpreston said:


> From a purely rational standpoint, nobody wants to watch 4K, 24p, digitally stabilized footage of vlogger talking into a camera while they are walking around. But people do it. And somehow the audience manages to contain their nausea while watching it.
> 
> Canon has decided to force people into 30p. Apple also doesn't offer 24p in their camera app. I'm guessing the lack of 24p is a marketing decision rather than a tech decision. The number of people who would actually want to use this camera to shoot 24p footage is extremely low, even if it had a 24p option.



Hmm...I've edited a TON of video in 24fps on my mac, actually pretty much all of my video has been 24fps, most of it from my 5D3....

C


----------



## cayenne (Feb 19, 2019)

stevelee said:


> I can't recall ever using 24fps and can't really think of a circumstance where I would want to. OK, maybe if I were doing a Fellini parody I'd try for a cinematic look, so yes, I can conceive of my using it, but not in any likely scenarios.
> 
> I am really surprised to read that the vast majority of folks use 24 fps on YouTube. I don't think my iPhone even has that speed, though it does have 60 and 120. I'm not sure about 240. I think newer phones can do that.
> 
> Since I don't shoot 24, though my cameras support it—other than the phone, I don't have any experience mixing it in with 30 and 60 fps footage. But I know from my otherwise retiming experience in editing software that there are better ways to change frame rate than frame dropping and pull downs. Optical flow and even old-timey interpolation will usually give better results.



Pretty much everything I've ever shot for YouTube, or anything else, has been 24p. I did want to try to give a somewhat cinematic look to my videos....and, over time they slowly got better (was learning color correction/grading on Resolve over the years too)....

I don't shoot much to publish on my iPhone, but when I do, I use Filmic Pro which allows me to do a number of frame rates (24fps being my main one)...as well as using anamorphic lenses on the phone too.

So, yep, there's a LOT of us out there that use it.

HTH,

C


----------



## Nelu (Feb 19, 2019)

PureClassA said:


> Fuji is another company that makes a very compelling argument for video folks. Granted the XT3 is for video, but with the crop factor of 1.75x on the EOS R series. The Fuji is really no different. Fuji also has native lenses that are relatively in expensive. The RF mount offers little as of yet (and I know Canon is pounding away on this fast as they can) in terms of "affordable" native glass.
> 
> So for video people a $1399 Fuji XT 3 is very much on par with the $1299 EOS RP but you get 4K60, 10 bit output at 422, and yes, 1080p @24. So It's a really good value for video.
> 
> ...


So Fuji's got the specs but ain't got the looks. This reminds my of 
*Shania Twain - Man! I Feel Like A Woman*

How about Sony? They might check all of your boxes?
So there's no single system that does it all...Well, certainly I would not have expected that from the EOS RP, which is an entry level camera. I don't think it's the camera for you, or for me.
Not for you because you care about video; not for me, because I'm quite happy with the 5D Mark IV and the 1DX and to just dip my toes into mirrorless, I would want something more, like an EOS R.
Thank you for taking time to provide an elaborate and thoughtful answer.
Nelu


----------



## Kharan (Feb 20, 2019)

cpreston said:


> If you need crop framed 1080p in a Canon full frame body, buy the EOS-R. Simple. Don't buy the 5D or 1DX since they don't include it, either. If the price difference between the R and the RP is too much for you to handle, then you don't have the resources for any of this discussion about frame rates and resolution to actually matter. Technical limitations on a camera are insignificant compared to the time and money required to get anything approaching "cinematic" in filmmaking.



Whoa, nice chip on your shoulder, mister. Believe it or not, over 96% of the world's population doesn't live in the US, and there's tons of people doing solid professional work with ancient equipment. For them, the RP could have been a fantastic camera - there's absolutely no reason to have gelded it so badly on the video front.
All of your post just screams "buy Panasonic/Fuji/Sony/Nikon!" to me.


----------



## uri.raz (Feb 20, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> That's a very interesting info. I'm sure there are niche of electronic devices to cater to specific demands for security or cultural sensitive. I was talking about in mass context more just like Canon is making product for mass market appeal.



There is no mass market, only segments. People who want 4K video produced from the whole surface of FF digital camera (and care about frame rate, etc) are such a segment, and my guess it's a niche, just like calls only phones.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 20, 2019)

uri.raz said:


> There is no mass market, only segments. People who want 4K video produced from the whole surface of FF digital camera (and care about frame rate, etc) are such a segment, and my guess it's a niche, just like calls only phones.



There are so much much more demand for serious video options than call only phones. Just look at the amount of video on YouTube. People don't want to bring two separate devices for stills and videos. They want portability, quality and convenient.

If there isn't a demand high quality video production, there wouldn't Panasonic, Sony, Nikon offering uncropped 4K, unlimited 4K 30, ProRes Raw, slow mo etc. There wouldn't be accessories made for serious videographers like Gimbal.

I don't even use the video features on my 5D IV because they really gimp on it. I use DJI Osmo Pocket 4K or Galaxy phone to record it. If I get one of the newer camera with better 4K, IBIS, and good video codec like Panasonic S1, I would definitely record it in 4K and down sample to 1080 if I need.

If I'm paying $2500, I would expect Canon to have proper 4K video option that's similiar to the competitions. They are definitely behind in this segment even though the 5D II was a pioneer in the video segment. They just segmented their camera further to protect from cinema line.


----------



## uri.raz (Feb 20, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> There are so much much more demand for serious video options than call only phones. Just look at the amount of video on YouTube.



I doubt the average YouTube video requires FF camera shooting 4K (cropped or not), or frame rates higher than 24/30. Sure, I've seen exceptions, but we're not talking about those.



bokehmon22 said:


> People don't want to bring two separate devices for stills and videos. They want portability, quality and convenient.



How many people?



bokehmon22 said:


> If there isn't a demand high quality video production, there wouldn't Panasonic, Sony, Nikon offering uncropped 4K, unlimited 4K 30, ProRes Raw, slow mo etc. There wouldn't be accessories made for serious videographers like Gimbal.



It proves there is demand. I doubt how high it is.

[/QUOTE]I don't even use the video features on my 5D IV because they really gimp on it. I use DJI Osmo Pocket 4K or Galaxy phone to record it. If I get one of the newer camera with better 4K, IBIS, and good video codec like Panasonic S1, I would definitely record it in 4K and down sample to 1080 if I need to.[/QUOTE]

One person is not a good sample, e.g. I can count on one hand how many times I shot video in the past decade.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 20, 2019)

uri.raz said:


> I doubt the average YouTube video requires FF camera shooting 4K (cropped or not), or frame rates higher than 24/30. Sure, I've seen exceptions, but we're not talking about those.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I don't even use the video features on my 5D IV because they really gimp on it. I use DJI Osmo Pocket 4K or Galaxy phone to record it. If I get one of the newer camera with better 4K, IBIS, and good video codec like Panasonic S1, I would definitely record it in 4K and down sample to 1080 if I need to.[/QUOTE]

One person is not a good sample, e.g. I can count on one hand how many times I shot video in the past decade.[/QUOTE]

I'm not sure why you are asking me how many people. You are the one that said there 4K demand is a niche like call only phone. Again. Same question how many people? lol

You doubt it but provide no facts. Yeah companies like Pansonic, Sony, Nikon, all make photography camera capable of 4K capable camera and accessories (gimbal, external recorder) and because they have no market data. I should just trust some guy on CR over them and believe Canon isn't trying to protect their cinema lines /s

I don't even use video on my 5D IV and even know there is a demand video feature on expensive $2000 camera and up. I can't believe how much Canon user have to tolerate to defend Canon actions.


----------



## Mikehit (Feb 20, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> If I'm paying $2500, I would expect Canon to have proper 4K video option that's similiar to the competitions. They are definitely behind in this segment even though the 5D II was a pioneer in the video segment. They just segmented their camera further to protect from cinema line.



How tedious comment such as this are becoming.Canon do not have the sensor technology to do full-frame 4K - simple as that.No conspiracy, no segmentation explanation just old-fashioned technical limitations.


----------



## Mikehit (Feb 20, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> I'm not sure why you are asking me how many people. You are the one that said there 4K demand is a niche like call only phone. Again. Same question how many people? lol



When they released the 5DIV Canon explained that their research shows that people buying the 5D series generally shoot short segments of video to supplement their stills. 
That is good enough for me to say that 4K, let alone full-frame 4k, is niche. You can argue how big a niche but it is not significant enough to make Canon do things differently.


----------



## Kharan (Feb 21, 2019)

Mikehit said:


> How tedious comment such as this are becoming.Canon do not have the sensor technology to do full-frame 4K - simple as that.No conspiracy, no segmentation explanation just old-fashioned technical limitations.



No, but they *do* have a better sensor in the 1DXII, capable of putting out beautiful footage with only 1.3x crop. So where is it, outside of a super-expensive and massive body?


----------



## flip314 (Feb 21, 2019)

Kharan said:


> No, but they *do* have a better sensor in the 1DXII, capable of putting out beautiful footage with only 1.3x crop. So where is it, outside of a super-expensive and massive body?



The 1DXII only has a lesser crop because it's lower resolution. Canon does 4K by taking pixels 1:1 from the sensor.


----------



## uri.raz (Feb 21, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> I'm not sure why you are asking me how many people. You are the one that said there 4K demand is a niche like call only phone. Again. Same question how many people? lol



Same as you said calls only phones a niche, LOL.



bokehmon22 said:


> I don't even use video on my 5D IV and even know there is a demand video feature on expensive $2000 camera and up. I can't believe how much Canon user have to tolerate to defend Canon actions.



You expect the RP @ $1,300 to give video features of >$2K cameras? LOL.



bokehmon22 said:


> You doubt it but provide no facts. Yeah companies like Pansonic, Sony, Nikon, all make photography camera capable of 4K capable camera and accessories (gimbal, external recorder) and because they have no market data. I should just trust some guy on CR over them and believe Canon isn't trying to protect their cinema lines



I didn't say Canon is *not* trying to protect their cinema lines. I'm saying you expect too much from the cheap RP.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 21, 2019)

uri.raz said:


> You expect the RP @ $1,300 to give video features of >$2K cameras? LOL.



No I expect Canon RP $1300 camera to have the same feature as Canon 5D II that was released more than 10 years ago and significantly cheaper than that.

If I tell you in 2019, there is going to be a $1300 camera that shoot video, what video feature would you expect to have? I wouldn't expect 4K uncropped, but I expect the very least 1080p 24P.


----------



## davidhfe (Feb 21, 2019)

uri.raz said:


> You expect the RP @ $1,300 to give video features of >$2K cameras? LOL.



No, they want some semblance of competitiveness (adjusting for full frame/crop) vs what's offered at $1399 on the 26mp XT3.

Edit: Did I say XT3? I meant the $899 24mp XT-30.


----------



## cayenne (Feb 21, 2019)

My 5D3 still shoots great stills...and for now, I'm mostly all still 1080 for video.

But while I wait on the sidelines to see what the "5D" equivalent of an R camera comes out.....I'm contemplating the Black Magic Design "pocket" 4K camera.


Only about $1300....and with a metabones adapter, can take my EOS lenses.

I'm still researching and may rent one, but seems to me a good video alternative....without the $$$$$ price tag of other cinema cameras, etc.

Thoughts?

cayenne


----------



## uri.raz (Feb 24, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> If I tell you in 2019, there is going to be a $1300 camera that shoot video, what video feature would you expect to have?



I have no expectations from products I have no intentions to buy.

When I do buy a 5DmkIII replacement, I'd like it to have at least uncropped 720p 24fps. I would be surprised & disappointed if Canon's replacement would regress that much.


----------



## Roy Hunte (Feb 24, 2019)

peterzuehlke said:


> Or maybe the Leica people have enough money that when they shoot video it is on a Canon C300. And this is what the Canon plan is. Video is important, and if it is important to you you buy a Canon cinema camera.


The only time you can get full frame 4K on a Canon camera is on the C700 FF, all the rest of the cinema cameras are Super35 so even that is not an argument...... 
A Super35 sensor has roughly a 1.7x crop factor. The same as the 5D IV and the EOS R so maybe that is the reason, 'a super 35 look'.


----------



## Roy Hunte (Feb 24, 2019)

-pekr- said:


> The person who made these two decisions should be fired and once on its way out, should pack the guy who had final go for the 6DII sensor's decision.


You may be speaking of Canon's CEO.


----------



## Roy Hunte (Feb 24, 2019)

cayenne said:


> My 5D3 still shoots great stills...and for now, I'm mostly all still 1080 for video.
> 
> But while I wait on the sidelines to see what the "5D" equivalent of an R camera comes out.....I'm contemplating the Black Magic Design "pocket" 4K camera.
> 
> ...


Remember that camera uses a Micro 4/3 sensor, which is 2x crop, the 5D IV and the R have a 1.7x crop, and the 1DX II has 1.3 Crop, so make sure you make the right decision.


----------



## Roy Hunte (Feb 24, 2019)

Mikehit said:


> How tedious comment such as this are becoming.Canon do not have the sensor technology to do full-frame 4K - simple as that.No conspiracy, no segmentation explanation just old-fashioned technical limitations.


It's not the sensor technology, because the C700 FF does full frame 4K. The rest of the cinema lineup have in Super 35 sensors (with a crop factor of roughly 1.7x) so the 4K crop mimics a Super 35, simple. People need to stop saying Canon is protecting their cinema lineup because the cinema lineup has the the crop at 720p, 1080p and 4K.


----------



## Roy Hunte (Feb 24, 2019)

uri.raz said:


> I have no expectations from products I have no intentions to buy.
> 
> When I do buy a 5DmkIII replacement, I'd like it to have at least uncropped 720p 24fps. I would be surprised & disappointed if Canon's replacement would regress that much.


Whatever you do don't buy a Super 35 equipped Canon cinema camera. You would get an approximate 1.7x crop across the board.


----------



## stevelee (Feb 24, 2019)

There's going to be a certain amount of crop when you shoot a 16:9 movie on a 3:2 sensor.


----------



## uri.raz (Feb 25, 2019)

Roy Hunte said:


> Whatever you do don't buy a Super 35 equipped Canon cinema camera. You would get an approximate 1.7x crop across the board.



I'm unsure whether you're talking to me, or just being cynical.

I don't care enough about video to buy (or rent, or whatever) a Canon cinema camera. All I would care about is my lenses having the same angle of view on stills and video.


----------



## stevelee (Feb 25, 2019)

uri.raz said:


> All I would care about is my lenses having the same angle of view on stills and video.



That's not going to happen as long as 3/2 ≠ 16/9 unless you crop one or the other (the stills, I guess) to get the diagonals to be equal (or however you define the angle of view for your purposes).


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 25, 2019)

uri.raz said:


> I have no expectations from products I have no intentions to buy.
> 
> When I do buy a 5DmkIII replacement, I'd like it to have at least uncropped 720p 24fps. I would be surprised & disappointed if Canon's replacement would regress that much.



You have no expectation on product you have no intention of buying then why are you commenting in EOS RP post?

I'm not buying EOS RP and I still believe it should have the very basic video features that was on a 10 year old 5D II.

When I do buy a 5D IV replacement, I expect it to have competitive video features if they are going to charge more than the competitions.

720p 24p in 2019? Your standard is so low. It's amazing what some people are willing to put up for an expensive device.


----------



## stevelee (Feb 25, 2019)

If all you need is 720p 24p, then why does the date matter?


----------



## cayenne (Feb 25, 2019)

Roy Hunte said:


> Remember that camera uses a Micro 4/3 sensor, which is 2x crop, the 5D IV and the R have a 1.7x crop, and the 1DX II has 1.3 Crop, so make sure you make the right decision.



I"ve got to learn what the "crop" means....I've heard the term, but I don't quite understand the full concept of what that will do to the image in conjunction to my EF lenses.....


----------



## uri.raz (Feb 26, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> You have no expectation on product you have no intention of buying then why are you commenting in EOS RP post?



Because the discussion has expanded to Canon's video strategy at large. And free speech.



bokehmon22 said:


> I'm not buying EOS RP and I still believe it should have the very basic video features that was on a 10 year old 5D II.



And I need to explain myself to you?



bokehmon22 said:


> When I do buy a 5D IV replacement, I expect it to have competitive video features if they are going to charge more than the competitions.



Everyone buys whatever fits their needs. Even you. Even me.



bokehmon22 said:


> 720p 24p in 2019? Your standard is so low. It's amazing what some people are willing to put up for an expensive device.



Why would my standards exceed my needs, which do no include video? Just to make bokehmon22 happy? Sheesh...


----------



## uri.raz (Feb 26, 2019)

stevelee said:


> If all you need is 720p 24p, then why does the date matter?



Are you talking to me?

I don't care about the date, I care about whether the products does what I need & want. It so happens I don't need or want my camera to shoot video or make coffee.


----------



## stevelee (Feb 27, 2019)

uri.raz said:


> Are you talking to me?
> 
> I don't care about the date, I care about whether the products does what I need & want. It so happens I don't need or want my camera to shoot video or make coffee.


It was in reference to a comment about those standards in 2019.


----------



## Mikehit (Mar 1, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> It's amazing what some people are willing to put up for an expensive device.



Why is it 'amazing' if I don't use video?
Do you make camera-buying decisions based on features you don't use?


----------



## bokehmon22 (Mar 3, 2019)

Mikehit said:


> Why is it 'amazing' if I don't use video?
> Do you make camera-buying decisions based on features you don't use?



I don't use video either but I expect a certain standard especially something that was on a 10 years old camera 5DII. It's about getting the most bang for your buck. Who knows, I may use video options on my expensive camera if it produces better video than my GoPro7 or SmartPhone.

I also don't play games on smart phone, but I expect any recent SOC have decent gaming performance when I do decide to play when I have major down time.

There are alot of things I don't use, but others do, and it sort of become an industry standard since all the competitions has it.

I do make camera-buying decision I do need but Canon think $2300 camera shouldn't have it - dual card slot, IBIS, better eyeAF, newer sensor.
All the competitions have IBIS and better 4K options but Canon still do not offer it because users like you than enable them "I don't use it".

I don't care about the video. I care about Canon continue to gimp features just because.


----------

