Canon officially announces the EOS 90D and EOS M6 Mark II

stevelee

FT-QL
Jul 6, 2017
1,167
224
Davidson, NC
And his decision backfired. A lot of people didn't like the image "look" at 48fps. There's a reason also why Canon delivered its Sumire Prime lenses.

Human eye is the same it was in 1920 and probably will be the same in 2120. Evolution needs some more time to change things.

He also multiplied a short book in three whole movies, but that's another story... even if it's still an evidence about trying to aim to the wrong result just because you think you can.
Buffalo Bob used to show movies shot at 16fps, more or less, at 24fps, and kids watched them on 30i screens. The howls of the Peanut Gallery added to the effect.

What percentage of folks who objected to 48fps would have reacted that way if no one had told them it was shot at 48fps? Was it a true 48fps, or some NTSC-like approximation?

I’ve never seen a 24fps movie projected without repeated frames. That was abandoned so rapidly, it must have looked really bad. I guess I see Blu-Ray movies at 24fps on my 120/sec. refresh rate TV screen.

I guess we will have 8K TVs before the human eye has evolved to resolve a 4K picture viewed from ten feet on a screen of a reasonable size.
 
Aug 1, 2017
379
222
Certainly. So why is it that people assume it's capricious, malicious, or just plain crazy? It's a business decision. People may not like it, but Canon would have considered that and decided to do it anyway.
That's fine. Lets just stop pretending that Canon doesn't intentionally reduce the functionality of it's lower cost products. That's their choice and hopefully the market will respond accordingly.
 

Joules

EOS RP
Jul 16, 2017
226
144
Hamburg, Germany
I does seem already, that DPR is spreading not so accurate info. Maybe it was just uninformed remark of some US Canon representative, who knows, but .e.g. Canon UK comments it a bit differently. That might easily mean, that there is going to be an M5 II (or even the 7D III), unless we hear it clearly stated by Canon otherwise ....

View attachment 186247
They didn't answer the question though. I think nobody was wondering if the M5 was still for sale now that the M6 II is out.

The question was if we could expect a M5 II and it wasn't answered.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pj1974
They didn't answer the question though. I think nobody was wondering if the M5 was still for sale now that the M6 II is out.

The question was if we could expect a M5 II and it wasn't answered.
Neither it was denied. If such info would be publicly available, it would be stated so. Other than that - companies mostly don't communicate future products ahead, unless they are ready to (pre)announce.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SteveCheetham

Sharlin

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 26, 2015
962
409
Turku, Finland
They didn't answer the question though. I think nobody was wondering if the M5 was still for sale now that the M6 II is out.

The question was if we could expect a M5 II and it wasn't answered.
Of course they did not answer the question. This site wouldn't exist if they answered questions like that on Twitter.
 
Aug 1, 2017
379
222
Who is claiming that's not the case?
Seriously? Isn't there another thread on this site attempting to shift the lack of 24 P to some obscure licensing rule?

Personally, I don't have an issue with Canon leaving high end features & benefits off low-mid priced cameras. I do have a concern when I think they are intentionally compromising the quality of the output rather than simply allowing a less efficient workflow to get through.

IMO, inefficient workflows are fair game for consumer cameras, intentionally restricting the inherent output quality is not. Removing 24P, on the basis of product segmentation rather than technical feasibility or cost, crosses that line IMO.

As it stands, I doubt it would have much effect on sales one way or the other but as a marketing decision it seems an ill-advised way to bring down a lot of bad press and re-inforces the worst impressions of Canon. Bad call in my opinion.
 

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D SR
Jan 28, 2015
3,697
1,277
Irving, Texas
As it stands, I doubt it would have much effect on sales one way or the other...
Isn't this the whole point? Or lack of one? I've watched 1,000s of YouTube videos over the years. Never cared what they were shot in as long as the information I wanted was there. Let's be real, no serious movie would be made with one of these anyway. I'll bet most people don't care how the movie they are watching was shot, as long as it is a good movie plot and well acted. Case in point: CGI. And I am only talking about the CGI parts. Also, "both Oklahoma! (1955) and Around The World In Eighty Days (1956), big brash 70mm numbers, were shot and projected at 30 fps." More recently, there has been some IMAX and theme park work in 48fps.
Harry Potter.JPG
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Durf

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,691
785
119
I think the most positive thing to take from the unbelievable wailing, keyboard pounding and general dismay and despair about the lack of 24p is that not one person who has used the camera has said anything like 'DR still lags behind the competition', I take this to mean the DR question has been put to bed and the unsated critical page and viewer hit searchers have found their next meme.

It's all bullsh!t, if you are making the next Sundance sleeper hit with no budget you are borrowing somebody else's camera anyway.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: dcm and CanonFanBoy

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D SR
Jan 28, 2015
3,697
1,277
Irving, Texas
1199$ for a camera that don't do 24fps 1080p video? what is this? 2008? hahaha!


When all its predecessors has it (70D, 80D, 77d, even the rebels) There is no excuse but to wanted crippling the camera.

Sad! I was really hoping to upgrade my 70D, but none the RP/90D do 24fps
Haven't you heard? Nobody uses 1080p anymore. 4k is the only thing people care about. ;) This is 2019. 1080 is obsolete.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: jonbenz

Aussie shooter

@brett.guy.photography
Dec 6, 2016
399
394
Seriously? Isn't there another thread on this site attempting to shift the lack of 24 P to some obscure licensing rule?

Personally, I don't have an issue with Canon leaving high end features & benefits off low-mid priced cameras. I do have a concern when I think they are intentionally compromising the quality of the output rather than simply allowing a less efficient workflow to get through.

IMO, inefficient workflows are fair game for consumer cameras, intentionally restricting the inherent output quality is not. Removing 24P, on the basis of product segmentation rather than technical feasibility or cost, crosses that line IMO.

As it stands, I doubt it would have much effect on sales one way or the other but as a marketing decision it seems an ill-advised way to bring down a lot of bad press and re-inforces the worst impressions of Canon. Bad call in my opinion.
But that thread clearly states that the 'licencing issue' is a matter of cost as they have to pay for it and therefore that may be the reason they are leaving it off the lower priced models.
 
  • Like
Reactions: neuroanatomist

OneSnark

Canon Fanboy
Aug 20, 2019
17
6
I think the most positive thing to take from the unbelievable wailing, keyboard pounding and general dismay and despair about the lack of 24p is that not one person who has used the camera has said anything like 'DR still lags behind the competition', I take this to mean the DR question has been put to bed and the unsated critical page and viewer hit searchers have found their next meme.

It's all bullsh!t, if you are making the next Sundance sleeper hit with no budget you are borrowing somebody else's camera anyway.
Maybe - just maybe - nobody is talking about DR because nobody has had any *real* opportunity to use the camera?
Nobody has actually had time to study DR performance of the new Canon cameras, because everyone has only had the same 3 hour window in Atlanta to study the cameras.

I have been looking at the various reviews. . . not just for the M6 and 90D; but also the new crop of 1" P&S's.
OMG - - - > So much heat. So little light. These "reviews" are all blatantly heavily biased, and focused on the wrong things.

The canons lack 24p. Disney Studios should look elsewhere for a camera. Got it.

It's almost worse with the 1" cameras. Oh my word - - -> everyone clearly declaring the Sony RX100 VII the "clear winner" over the Canon G5-II. Barely glossing over the fact that the Sony is a full THIRD more expensive than the G5-II. . . .I mean the Sony is not even in the same *price category* as the Canon.

So for me. . .the hype is backfiring.
Since I can't find any real information. . .I assume they are hiding something. I can't be bothered to find out what. . .moving on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

OneSnark

Canon Fanboy
Aug 20, 2019
17
6
So - - - being "that" guy; I decided to glance at the manuals for the new APS-C cameras and compare to the manuals I already have. . . .oh - - - fancy that - - -> Manuals are not available yet.
 

Durf

Picture Taker - Image Maker
Isn't this the whole point? Or lack of one? I've watched 1,000s of YouTube videos over the years. Never cared what they were shot in as long as the information I wanted was there. Let's be real, no serious movie would be made with one of these anyway. I'll bet most people don't care how the movie they are watching was shot, as long as it is a good movie plot and well acted. Case in point: CGI. And I am only talking about the CGI parts. Also, "both Oklahoma! (1955) and Around The World In Eighty Days (1956), big brash 70mm numbers, were shot and projected at 30 fps." More recently, there has been some IMAX and theme park work in 48fps.
View attachment 186248
Yes I do tend to LOL when I see a YouTube video or read a forum post when someone's world is coming to an end when a camera is released that doesn't shoot 23.976p, but does shoot 25p.
Most youtube videos are basically a person in front of a camera talking and it really doesn't matter if its 24 or 30p.....a youtube vlog or basic review or tutorial is not a Hollywood theater production made to be seen on the big screen hoping for an oscar! LOL. Even some of the best youtube videos are watched on a phone and the person watching it most likely can not tell if its 24 or 30p.
Then again, if there wasn't something to always complain about then everything would be perfect and boring....
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy