Jrsisson

It's frustrating to see Mokara make the same argument over and over again despite all logic and reason.
Canon left out 24p in their lower end cameras because they wanted those users to spend more and/or invest in the new RF mount cameras. 
It really is that simple. It's a calculated move where they've decided that the rewards outweigh the negatives. 
Casual users are unlikely to care or notice, which is the only thing Mokara is correct about. 
Enthusiasts/low budget filmmakers will either pay up for more "premium" cameras, because of brand loyalty or the amount of money they have already invested in Canon gear, or they will move on to a different camera system. 
From a purely financial standpoint it makes sense, because unless their sales absolutely tank, they'll end up making more by forcing people to pay more for the features they've always had, even if a percentage of users abandon Canon. They've probably calculated those customers were at risk of buying different cameras anyway. 
But by removing 24 fps from their new sub $1,300 cameras they've given you two choices if you want to stay with Canon: pay up or buy up the remaining inventory of soon to be phased out cameras that are collecting dust in warehouses and store back rooms. 

So I guess you're only shooting with Arri and Red cameras (because they're professional) using Zeiss Primes (because they're professional) and put it all on O'Connor sticks (because they're professional)? Anything else and you should expect 480p TOPS (because it's not professional) ? 
 
I hate these kinds of stupid comments. He should absolutely expect a perfectly usable product for 200 euro. Not everyone needs 3km range and perfect crystal clear full spectrum audio that will make sure bride's "yes I do" will be transmitted on hollywood level never seen before on a damn youtube wedding video.
 
I've been using my Rode Filmmaker Kit with zero issues in tightly packed convention centers. My drone has more issues being on 2.4 Ghz than the Rode.

I wish he would shut up already. This thing has already been debunked and he is still going off. 

As a person that has a degree in computer science and experience in the industry (now left) good software is developed to share as much code base as possible.
So your argument is that Canon tested 29.97 FPS to make sure it works flawlessly in their latest cameras but couldn’t put forth the pitiful amount of effort it would take to test and record 23.97 FPS? Especially when they’ve included 23.97 FPS in the past with the same models?
How did canon pull off 24fps in the 6d mark ii and the original M6? It has a lessor processor, the DIGIC 7, in the same form factors.
You are saying somehow canon can’t develop and test 24fps with their DIGIC 8 processor, which by the way is built on the same foundational knowledge as it’s successor the DIGIC 7, in the M6 ii ?
The same DIGIC 8 processor in the M50 that SOMEHOW included 4k24p recording.
You’re just trolling at this point.
Please show me or find someone that can confirm your license theory. It doesn’t add up. There has been no evidence for it.
Somehow every other camera manufacturer can manage to “afford” 24fps codec licensing terms. Canon can’t? They must really be fucked as a company then if they can’t afford the single frame rate every single person wants in their camera as a base.
Its Canon playing shenanigans with brain dead feature segmentation.

Very, very, very unlikely. Such logic operations are done inside digic. And EVEN if that was true, their $0.03 on savings will cost them millions on bad press and sales.

Regardless, this does not exactly play in their favor. Sony chipsets and other chipsets in the market are able to do in 1 chip what Canon's do in 3. Either way, they're behind.
It costs them $0 to include it. The feature was always there for 10 years now, and it was always part of their OS. This was a clear move to push people to buy more expensive models. They aggressively segmentize and they've done so in the past (I will explain below). And that would work if they were a monopoly. But they have competitors that include more than just 24p in their cheaper cameras, they also have zebras, log etc. So why go with Canon then? Only Canon thinks that Canon users will stay with Canon no matter what. Little did they know, their EF lenses are getting adapted well to other systems as well.
So, for a little history lesson. As a few people mentioned above, I indeed used to run a video-related blog back in the day. My little niche was "filmmaking on the very cheap". Basically, back then there wasn't much processing power to do 1080/30p on P&S digicams, manufacturers were often forced to use 24p (just because it was easier to encode). So Canon had a line of P&S cameras with 1080/24p at 36 Mbps. There were no manual controls, but there was exposure compensation & exposure lock. Which was enough to create artsy videos or short films on the super-cheap that looked rather professional -- if you were careful of how you were shooting with them. Add on top the ability to get a rather flat look to widen the DR (there were sharpness/contrast/sat controls), and it was a pretty sweet deal for cameras costing $150-$300.
So for a couple of years, we had a number of P&S cams from Canon specifically that could be seen as alternatives to their 5D MkII, T2i, and 7D of that time (at least for people who couldn't afford these cameras and their lenses). I even shot a couple of music videos with such cams (we were not allowed to use my 5D MkII in the Santa Cruz Boardwalk to shoot a music video, but when I showed to the guards the tiny Canon SX30 HS P&S cam, they had no problem -- so they were really good guerrilla cams). The magic feature here was the exposure lock, that made those videos look pro.
Fast forward to 2012. New Canon P&S line up announced across the board. And each one of these had exposure lock in video mode REMOVED (AEL for photos was still there). And in some other models, they removed exposure compensation as well (again, these features had been there for years at that point in video mode). They had to remove these because they couldn't remove 24p outright (simply because their processors were not fast enough yet to do 30p at 1080p, they were stuck with it). They probably saw that some people who could not afford dSLRs used these small cams as a cheap replacement for filmmaking, and they wanted to push these same people to upgrade. The thing is though, if these people had the money to buy a dSLR, they would have done so anyway.
So, since then, I have a love-hate relationship with Canon. But their recent removal of 24p from a rather high end super-35 camera (the M6 MkII is not as low end as say, the M100) is unforgivable, sorry. Just because that's the EF-M line, should not make it a useless line for filmmaking. Some of us, want such cameras simply because they are small. The EOS R is much larger in comparison (and expensive when you account for native lenses).
So yeah, what Canon is doing now, they've done before. It's part of their MO. And if it's true that they are upscaling 2.8k to 4k and lying about it, then they are really unforgivable. I have lost all the respect I had for that company all these years ago.

I agree.  It's the only lens still on my wishlist!!
Not because it has great bokeh, but because it works in lower light situations (more of blue hour and into the night with city lights and cityscapes).  Generally if I'm shooting wide I'm doing it because I want a grand scene, not as a vlog or anything.  I do film myself, but more as B-roll and I've found an action camera is better for those shots as they're about me in the place rather than putting the focus on only me.  Plus it's easier to hold up an action camera than a GH5 and big MF lens (it's also way less embarrassing too!)
This are the shots I'm interested in:

@jake all the above are the 8mm SLR Magic.

He's still going...
Holy fuck.

The small hole is actually to reduce the amount of material required, thus saving 0.23 cents/unit on manufacturing costs. It's the compromise they made in order to afford the 24p license.

Conspiracies, cost cutting, delusions... it's all the same to me. There's only so much value to be had in speculation about the whys and hows. The bottom line is: I'm not buying any camera that doesn't shoot 24p.

Well said.
The cheapest camera with 24p is probably something like $80
And people still believe the Canon rep PR spin that 24p had to go to bring the price of their $1400 camera down a bit and that Canon did everybody a favour and it's good business! LOL!
People are so gullible it saddens me to the core.
Even the EOS 1300D has 24p!
Obviously not in 4K but this is one of their cheapest and worst DSLRs.
There is a reason Canon do not want filmmakers and enthusiasts using 4K 24p for under $2000 and it has nothing to do with profit margins, licensing costs, technological capabilities and everything to do with forcing these advanced users to pay more for a different model, end of story.

That is my reading of it from the document itself as well as their FAQ.
Worth bearing in mind that h.264 is licensed in really cheap stuff like the Raspberry Pi where margins are tighter than a duck's arse.

And they continue to role out that terrible body design year after year. What a job they have, here ya go boss, same as last year, well done.  But the you tubers are going to praise this thing like crazy, and it will be painful to watch.

Please don't try and drag me into your sad little fanboy rants. The only thing I care less about than specs are trolls like you. 

No you are not alone.
I mostly shoot 25/50p here, no one asked me to shoot 30p/24p, I do get occasional 60P request

One of five films created for Morrison’s in the UK (supermarket chain).
 
Filmed on two GX80’s.
 
Discreet, stabilised and good enough for this job.
 
 

No chanse Sigma FP will cost more than 2κ $.
Propably will be around 1500-1800$. 
Image quality will define which proposition is better.
 
ps
We live in a wonderfull tech age for our interests guys.It's a bless that small companies like BM and Sigma offer this kind of products at these prices. Thank God that we don't expect that from Sony, Panasonic, Canon, Arri and Red.
BlackMagic is the new RED.

A moderator should really sweep by this thread and remove all of the off-topic politics shit. I'm here to escape from the bullshit and talk cameras.

 
Downloading it now, I'm eager to check these files!

Kinda went off the deep end on that one. 
Hmm, I live in the present moment. I like my MFT camera and I can’t be bothered to shit on whatever you use because it’s a waste of time and it does no one any good. You’ve been doom and gloom for so long it’s tiring.

If a 1000 Dollars separates you from the competition I think you need to rethink this industry. That is chump change. Not even a good Tripod, a good Anything, let alone great..
Anyone that is half serious about making money can buy this new 6K camera and make it happen like it or not. Separates the men from the boys

Can't say that this unwieldy beast of a $2500, plastic "pocket" camera does anything for me. The Sigma FP is mighty interesting though.

I think you’ve got a over focus on technology, particularly resolution.
 
I turn up on plenty of jobs with small cameras (including the ‘hobbyist’ LX100 and no one cares.
 
The results matter but probably more importantly how I get the results. Quietly, unobtrusive and with the minimum of fuss.
 
I get hired over so many obnoxious idiots with their massive cameras and attitudes to match..
 
But please, keep making your grand statements..

One of five films created for Morrison’s in the UK (supermarket chain).
 
Filmed on two GX80’s.
 
Discreet, stabilised and good enough for this job.
 
 

Canon will be around in five years... I don’t see them dropping out of the consumer market. They may simplify their offerings. They might have to stop leaving out desired features. The new Eos R Pro and 1DXMK3 will speak to weather Canon has learned anything about the new camera market.
Sony will be around, but might withdraw from being a smartphone manufacturer. Let’s hope the A7S4 (skipping 3 I assume?) will deliver something innovative and fresh.
Nikon... RIP. Too little, too late. How’s that raw output going? Did they already run out of cash for further development?
Olympus... dead and buried... they just don’t know it yet.
Pentax? Didn’t they go out of business in the 1980’s? They are the walking dead. 
Panasonic will survive but will need to modify their thinking. Clearly the new FF cameras are not selling as well as they would have liked. I also feel the new S1H would have lost some of its luster once it finally is released. Too many competitors will have equal or better specs by that time.
Fuji is thinking outside of the box. I’m confident they will make the cut beyond the 5 year mark. I’m excited to see that the X1H Mk2 will bring.
Camera sales are down for most of the major players...? Sony included. Those that will survive are those that can evolve.
A few that had no mention:
Sigma, let’s hope they are a new rising star.
Leica... is jewelry. They will be around for sometime to come.

If Canon would Just have FF 4K in the EOS-R, and DPAF in the M50 in 4K they would take back tons of shooters. Heck I would buy a M50 tomorrow if they did. I am in the market sad to say. It isn't rocket science. Well maybe to Canon it is. ☹️