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

mb66energy

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 18, 2011
1,139
109
Germany
www.MichaelBockhorst.de
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

EOS 5DMkIV
Feb 14, 2018
276
123
Australia
www.michaelborisenko.com
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

EOS RP
Feb 25, 2015
201
75
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 :)
 
Reactions: crazyrunner33

mb66energy

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 18, 2011
1,139
109
Germany
www.MichaelBockhorst.de
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.
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 :)
 
Reactions: crazyrunner33

koenkooi

EOS RP
Feb 25, 2015
201
75
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

EOS M50
Jan 8, 2019
27
20
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.
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.
 
Reactions: crazyrunner33

Quarkcharmed

EOS 5DMkIV
Feb 14, 2018
276
123
Australia
www.michaelborisenko.com
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.

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

EOS RP
Feb 25, 2015
201
75
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 :)
 
Reactions: crazyrunner33

Go Wild

EOS 80D
Dec 8, 2014
100
41
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!!! :D 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!! :D I am still a believer!

Come onnn Canon, launch some great white (well...black) sharks into the water!!! :D 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!!! ;)
 
Last edited:

crazyrunner33

EOS RP
Nov 4, 2011
230
69
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.
 
Reactions: cayenne

sdz

EOS 80D
Sep 13, 2016
139
66
Pittsburgh, PA
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.
 
Last edited:

bokehmon22

EOS RP
Oct 31, 2016
329
169
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 :)
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

EOS RP
Oct 31, 2016
329
169
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.



Agreed. They should fix this in firmware.
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

---
Sep 9, 2015
361
209
Calgary, Canada
www.flickr.com
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

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 18, 2011
1,139
109
Germany
www.MichaelBockhorst.de
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!!
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 ...
 
Reactions: Kharan

Sharp

Sharp says m00!
Mar 26, 2012
21
4
39
Montreal, QC
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

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 18, 2011
1,139
109
Germany
www.MichaelBockhorst.de
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.
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.