Is the *optical* quality of a Canon CN-E50mm T1.3 L F better than the IQ of a 50mm 1.2L? If yes, it would be interesting to get compared to the Zeiss Otus 55 f1.4...
Should be the same or virtually identical, different coatings maybe so maybe better contrast, more aperture blades I think, better mechanics.
Smart, if this is true. But it doesn't address the pressing need for a 7DC or 5DC 4K DSLR or Cinema EOS equivalent for under $10K, does it Canon?
You personally not having a need for it does not mean there is not a need for it. The fact that there is so much interest in ML and Black Magic cameras clearly proves the point that there very much IS a need for it.
There's interest, but relative to the CX00 line.... there aren't sales. The BMCC and ML products are "alternative" products that cater to niche audiences (primarily high end hobbyists) that Canon does not need to cater to because this market is much smaller (with significant competition) than the market (low end tv/indie cinema/high end event and wedding) they are doing exceptionally well in. C300s rent very well and are ubiquitous on reality shows as A cams and dramatic tv as B cams.
Besides, since the Black Magic cameras and 5D hack already cater to this market... there are already products here to choose if you are not interested in what the CX00 line has to offer. Hence what need is there for the same product but Canon-branded (and inevitably much more expensive)? Were Canon to add raw and 4k to its dSLRs it would cannibalize 1DC and C500 sales, which are already workflow nightmares, and force immature workflows onto consumers who are likely not as ready for them as those willing to drop huge price premiums are, compromising the company's reputation for easy-to-use production-ready hardware. Black Magic caters to an enthusiast crowd (similar to Red) that is willing to put up with workflow issues and immature hardware for what they perceive to be significant image quality gains... Canon is interested in the "good enough for your client and really easy to use" market.
When 4k tvs, monitors, and post-production workflows are mainstream Canon dSLRs will shoot 4k. (Maybe a few years after even, Canon dawdles a bit with such tech it seems.)
This may be true, and yes, Canon is responsible to its shareholders and needs to maintain profitability by choosing carefully what markets and niches to enter, but --
What some of us are trying to say about this mentality is that, from a product standpoint, it's not forward-looking. Yes, an introduction of a 4K camera under $10K will cannibalize **some** of its higher end products. But Apple has proved that you can pinpoint where a market is headed and leap forward to cannibalize yourself before others do it for you. You put out a product that is ahead of the curve and sell on volume.
Any prosumer or high-end enthusiast who buys into a $6K-10K priced 4K DSLR or Cinema EOS body will be prepared for any workflow issues. And the amount of these bodies Canon would sell would make up for any cannibalization of the higher end. Pros want the higher end bodies anyway- reality shows are not going to give up their C300s for a DSLR form factor or crippled, lower end Cinema EOS body just because it does 4K.
Canon can really have their cake and eat it, too, here- we just don't want them to be too afraid to try