Mattias Burling

Its not insanely high. The good old bmpcc could pull that of imo.

@Mattias BurlingI feel the same about Canon, but not this one.
I will add another camera to a dozen we have already mention being a better buy.
The 1300D kit with the Canon EG100 bag and a 16GB SD card costs 325-350euros over here (all the shops selling this kit, and the country has one of the highest VAT numbers in Europe), and it has everything the 40000 has, plus a larger more detailed screen (Gordon Laing's words, not mine), metal mount, better build quality (also the usual Canon lettering and symbols on the buttons) and NFC. Everything else spec wise is the same, and the 40000D will launch for 380 euros body only. I will gladly pay less and get a better camera, + a lens, + a bag (it's free, why not) and a 16GB SD card.
From whatever angle, it doesn't cut it. This should have been a 199$ release, so more people in India and China buy Eos cameras. A 380euros body only camera is not cheap for India.
 

Zeiss Jena are fun. Yashica Yashinon (not yashikor) are also nice.

As a creator I never see the need to analyze or quantify what I like and dont like.
Imo Mojo isn't just some fluff word. Its a feature. I know when I see it and I definitely know when I dont. But just like everything within art its subjective. There is no point in trying to transfer it to someone elses eyes. They have to figure it out for them selves. Some like high resolution others hate it. Nothing wrong or right about it.
I often get the feeling that it scares certain people. Some people are afraid to stick their neck out and say, "I like this and thats ok". They rather have a group behind them validating their opinion (thats how the fanboy wars begin). Or they take comfort in numbers (enter the spec warriors).
I could show examples and go into detail why I think one image has more mojo than another. But I rather not. Because a great artists once said, "The problem with people that don't understand art is that they are trying to understand it". 
I try  to live by that rule.
(Ps. Im not talking about anyone particular. Just in general.)

As a creator I never see the need to analyze or quantify what I like and dont like.
Imo Mojo isn't just some fluff word. Its a feature. I know when I see it and I definitely know when I dont. But just like everything within art its subjective. There is no point in trying to transfer it to someone elses eyes. They have to figure it out for them selves. Some like high resolution others hate it. Nothing wrong or right about it.
I often get the feeling that it scares certain people. Some people are afraid to stick their neck out and say, "I like this and thats ok". They rather have a group behind them validating their opinion (thats how the fanboy wars begin). Or they take comfort in numbers (enter the spec warriors).
I could show examples and go into detail why I think one image has more mojo than another. But I rather not. Because a great artists once said, "The problem with people that don't understand art is that they are trying to understand it". 
I try  to live by that rule.
(Ps. Im not talking about anyone particular. Just in general.)

As a creator I never see the need to analyze or quantify what I like and dont like.
Imo Mojo isn't just some fluff word. Its a feature. I know when I see it and I definitely know when I dont. But just like everything within art its subjective. There is no point in trying to transfer it to someone elses eyes. They have to figure it out for them selves. Some like high resolution others hate it. Nothing wrong or right about it.
I often get the feeling that it scares certain people. Some people are afraid to stick their neck out and say, "I like this and thats ok". They rather have a group behind them validating their opinion (thats how the fanboy wars begin). Or they take comfort in numbers (enter the spec warriors).
I could show examples and go into detail why I think one image has more mojo than another. But I rather not. Because a great artists once said, "The problem with people that don't understand art is that they are trying to understand it". 
I try  to live by that rule.
(Ps. Im not talking about anyone particular. Just in general.)

Im surprised so many call it overpriced, all the stores I've seen are listing it very cheap.

As a creator I never see the need to analyze or quantify what I like and dont like.
Imo Mojo isn't just some fluff word. Its a feature. I know when I see it and I definitely know when I dont. But just like everything within art its subjective. There is no point in trying to transfer it to someone elses eyes. They have to figure it out for them selves. Some like high resolution others hate it. Nothing wrong or right about it.
I often get the feeling that it scares certain people. Some people are afraid to stick their neck out and say, "I like this and thats ok". They rather have a group behind them validating their opinion (thats how the fanboy wars begin). Or they take comfort in numbers (enter the spec warriors).
I could show examples and go into detail why I think one image has more mojo than another. But I rather not. Because a great artists once said, "The problem with people that don't understand art is that they are trying to understand it". 
I try  to live by that rule.
(Ps. Im not talking about anyone particular. Just in general.)

This.
The thing to look for isn't so much Mojo but Mego as in it makes you want to go out and use it.
That's what concerns me about the A7iii as its a great spec but the only thing I ever feel like shooting after picking up one of their cameras is myself, with a large calibre pistol.
 

mojo is a sexiness. a cool factor.  a near universal appeal, regardless of tastes. again think of Austin Powers. 
it is if your Ed David!

Is the Red One MX fifth?

What no love for the 2.5K BMCC?

I think the ES that @jonpais is using is "Errata Sendorum", which is an old Latin phrase used in English contract law in reference to failing to deliver an SLR Magic Rangefinder

Ebrahim Sadaawi.

The cameras with the most mojo Ive had have all been low cost and much cheaper relative to the new releases. So it absolutley isnt a correlation between mojo and price imo.

1) Several. And its not so much the camera imo as the camera and lens combination.
2) Sensor and lens combination. So it includes sharpness/lack of sharpness, colours, rolloff, DR, sensor texture, curve, rendition, etc and so forth.
3) Very little and it requires to much work imo. Better to get it right in camera.
(All of the above is imo and according to my experience.)

The cameras with the most mojo Ive had have all been low cost and much cheaper relative to the new releases. So it absolutley isnt a correlation between mojo and price imo.

I agree with you about costs. I spent a ton of time and a ton of money trying to find the right camera that fit my needs and non-traditional way of shooting narratives.
After a dozen sub $1000 cameras I ended up trying the XC10... which I loved but the depreciation was way too much and way too quick for my budget minded way of shooting.
I tried the Pocket and the Micro but both are not really suitable for run and gun. And to make them suitable required me to use Micro 4/3 lenses... which I hate.
So on a lark, I bought a 50D and fell in love with Canon and ML Raw. But that camera is a pain for Raw video for narratives... so I tried a few other cameras and inevitably saved up for a 5D3 and I couldn’t be happier.
But the 5D3 is big and as you know, Raw video takes a lot of storage. So when I was cleaning out an old hard drive, I found a bunch of old tests and although the resolution of the various 4K cameras I owned “looked” better... my favorite videos were made with a Canon camera.
Seriously I liked my old t2i videos better than I liked the G7 videos. Obviously Panasonic makes a great product but I just find I prefer Canon video... I enjoy that soft and flattering shallow depth of field more than I like tack sharp wide angle shots. Also I find the Canon looks more cinematic.
So, that’s why I would choose the M50 over the G7 or the G85. Also I want to start doing more stills and the appeal of the aps-c sensor suits me more than the Micro 4/3. But for the occasional 4K video... I can deal with the crop. But this is just a casual camera for hobby shooting, so for what it is, it could be great. Of course I probably won’t buy one until they drop below $700 or a lot less... so who knows what will be released by then.
But if I was trying to make a living with video, I’d honestly buy an 80D until I could save up for a C100 II. That camera is just a workhorse and would pay for itself with a couple jobs. I work in the trade show industry and nine out of ten times, the videographers on the show floor are shooting with Canon DSLRs or C100s. It’s only on web forums where those cameras get looked down upon.
I’d love to know how you make a little extra cash? I’ve been thinking of ways to recoup a little of the money I spent over the past couple of years but I wouldn’t even know where to begin.

And thats for creating content for Netflix in 4K. To aired on netflix is another deal.
A great feature Ive watched more than once on netflix was shot on in good old HD with a 5Dmkii, standard video. And it looks fantastic.

Definitely a case of crossing that bridge when you come to it with regards to what to use when commissioned for a Netflix Original production.
The only Netflix spec that I have to concern myself with meeting is the £7.99 a month payment 

No its not bad. It is market value. Its just that market value has gone up at the rate of specs the last few years.
So the "cheap DSLR revolution" isn't exactly around anymore. This cost about the same as a pro video camera did back when the revolution started.
We started using cheaper cameras and then started asking for more features in them, features from the expensive cameras.
And the companies gave it to us, the prices to

And it sometimes seems like we still think we are using cheap cameras just because they are hybrids or still cameras. 
But in reality plenty of pro video and cinema cameras are cheaper these days.

Just thinking out loud.

No its not bad. It is market value. Its just that market value has gone up at the rate of specs the last few years.
So the "cheap DSLR revolution" isn't exactly around anymore. This cost about the same as a pro video camera did back when the revolution started.
We started using cheaper cameras and then started asking for more features in them, features from the expensive cameras.
And the companies gave it to us, the prices to

And it sometimes seems like we still think we are using cheap cameras just because they are hybrids or still cameras. 
But in reality plenty of pro video and cinema cameras are cheaper these days.

Just thinking out loud.

No its not bad. It is market value. Its just that market value has gone up at the rate of specs the last few years.
So the "cheap DSLR revolution" isn't exactly around anymore. This cost about the same as a pro video camera did back when the revolution started.
We started using cheaper cameras and then started asking for more features in them, features from the expensive cameras.
And the companies gave it to us, the prices to

And it sometimes seems like we still think we are using cheap cameras just because they are hybrids or still cameras. 
But in reality plenty of pro video and cinema cameras are cheaper these days.

Just thinking out loud.

To be fair, Sony have been listening and their latest gen bodies/batteries are narrowing the gap between consumer/prosumer.
Also instead of cutting off a bunch of features and pricing the cam at 1400/1500. Sony actually gives you a lot of their flagship specs for "only" $2000.
It's a smart strategy. People think they're getting a bargain when they are going to be spending a lot more for the entry-level model than previously.

please fellows, lets not encourage shit-posting.. some people are genuinely interested in this camera..
X cinema page up on Fuji's site with a bunch of new videos shot on H1: https://fujifilm-x.com/cinema/