Why has Canon omitted 24p 4K recording in their new cameras such as the EOS M6 Mark II, EOS 90D and EOS RP?

unfocused

EOS 5D SR
Jul 20, 2010
4,871
1,128
65
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
Dilbert "weaker"? He is as tough and resilient as old boots and he wasn't driven away by Neuro - his identity was, quite out of order, outed on the site. Dilbert gave as good as he got and I would presume not like being labelled "weaker".
Sorry, wasn't clear in my writing. You are correct, he wasn't weaker. But, in his case, he wasn't always wrong. If you dug deeper, he sometimes had a point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlanF

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,084
1,564
Canada
Sorry, wasn't clear in my writing. You are correct, he wasn't weaker. But, in his case, he wasn't always wrong. If you dug deeper, he sometimes had a point.
I found he often had a point. Sometimes I agreed with him, sometimes not.... but no way could I imagine anyone driving him away.
 

PVCC

Arts & Engineering
Jul 5, 2019
65
15
Those who think 24p is for cinematic look need to realize "The Hobbit" series was shot in 48p.
Yep, but ask the Director the amount of considerations, precautions and post-processing they had to take to look cinematic...

24p is still a great option on digital, and it has higher image quality than higher frame rates because the bitrate is divided on just 24 frames. That's another reason why lot of people shoot 24p
 

Mikehit

EOS 5D MK IV
Jul 28, 2015
3,209
395
Yep, but ask the Director the amount of considerations, precautions and post-processing they had to take to look cinematic...
You are caught in that loop again - apparently it has to 'look cinematic'. And what do people mean by 'cinematic? They mean it looks like 24 because that is what is traditionally shown at the cinema. In other words there is no inherent superiority to 24p other than it is what people are used to. That is like saying 'CD is not superior to vinyl because it does not sound like vinyl'.

So your comment would be re-worded as:

Yep, but ask the Director the amount of considerations, precautions and post-processing they had to take to make it look like what they were used to...
Think of it this way: if you were able to rebuild the entire cinema chain an cinema experience at a stroke, would you choose 24p as your 'obvious' format?
 

hazydave

I'm New Here
Feb 4, 2016
15
21
I'd love if someone who actually knows about electronics could speculate if it could actually be a hardware issue with available timings or something.
Hi! Computer Engineer here. It's not a hardware issue. If you can handle 30p, you can handle 24p. In fact, if you recall, they updated the original Canon 5D Mark II in software to support 24p, after it was already out in the market.

Now, is it technically possible to design a video subsystem that doesn't support 24p? I suppose, if that were your intention, you could have a go at it. The system SOC's image processor, system software, and image sensor have to cooperate in order to deliver video at all. But given that other cameras, specifically the aforementioned EOS R, use the same DIGIC 8 processor and do support 24p, it's not that. The hardware must be capable.

The other video issue, the removal of MOV and ALL-I encoding, might really be about transistor budget; perhaps the hardware just isn't there in DIGIC 8. Though it is a mystery to me why Canon even bothered to make a distinction between MOV and MP4; after all they're just container formats and the actual data is MPEG-4 anyway…
Nope. These are just software issues. MOV vs. MP4 is entirely a software issue. They're ultimately just different choices in a file wrapper. The DIGIC8 image processing hardware is encoding AVC streams, which are then packaged into file wrappers by the CPU. Since MOV is Apple's proprietary QuickTime file format, it could simply be that Canon didn't want to pay Apple for it, assuming they still do. In fact, the MP4 file format was derived from QuickTime's MOV -- they're not the same, but they are very similar.

As for All-I, you can't create AVC without I-Frames. The SD card interface speed is probably the main limit on what they can do with All-I. As for the actual processing, it's dramatically more image processor intensive to create IPB streams than All-I. And from what I've read, the EOS R does All-I at 480Mb/s, a pretty respectible bitrate, particularly given that it's only 8-bit internal. It's the same DIGIC8, same UHS-II SD card, in these other models. Basically, if the camera can read the sensor at 30p, any of these other options (All-I, 24p, MOV, etc) should be nothing more than "a simple matter of software" as we hardware guys like to say (I know software as well, but my primary work these days is in computer system design).
 

cayenne

EOR R
Mar 28, 2012
1,906
103
Yep. The people complaining bitterly about a missing video feature in an amateur/enthusiast stills camera want Hollywood-like video results...without using the equipment Hollywood uses.
Well, to be fair, when the 5D2 came out with video good enough for a relatively cheap price, you DID see movie studios using them for specialized shots in movies, places too tight or dangerous for more $$$ cameras.

So, the DSLR cameras have to date been good enough for some theatrical productions, and that indicated to more amateurs and lower budget shooters that this was a good route to go,, and hence the popularity increase in the market share, of the 5Dx line, etc....so, high quality video at this price and format has been and still seems to be popular.

Honestly, I bought my 5D3 expressly for video originally. I saw a local low budget production here in town using them as primary camera and was blown away at the quality then, with interchangeable lenses, DOF and such at a reasonable price.

The 5D3 was my first DSLR.

Since then, I've actually grown to do stills more and more and MORE. I really enjoy it.

All my videos have been filmed in 24p.....I liked what I considered a more cinematic look.

I would hope that the 5D5 R type camera coming out, has at least the choices I have in the 5D3....I'd be very disappointed if it wasn't at least up to feature set as I have had with 5Dx series to date.

I"m not sure where I stand on the lower cameras...I have to say I can't think of a valid reason to cripple or omit it, since people have to jump in at some level and they're likely wanting to get all the feature bang for their buck that they can.

And once you start on a brand in cameras, well, i'd venture to guess most people stay with that line largely, especially after an investment in lenses.

So, seems it would make sense to keep a feature like 24fps on the newer lower end cameras. I can't think of a negative to keeping it a feature.

Seems a lot of people would want it too....

OH well.

C
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Photo Hack

stevelee

FT-QL
Jul 6, 2017
1,167
224
Davidson, NC
As for All-I, you can't create AVC without I-Frames. The SD card interface speed is probably the main limit on what they can do with All-I. As for the actual processing, it's dramatically more image processor intensive to create IPB streams than All-I. And from what I've read, the EOS R does All-I at 480Mb/s, a pretty respectible bitrate, particularly given that it's only 8-bit internal. It's the same DIGIC8, same UHS-II SD card, in these other models. Basically, if the camera can read the sensor at 30p, any of these other options (All-I, 24p, MOV, etc) should be nothing more than "a simple matter of software" as we hardware guys like to say (I know software as well, but my primary work these days is in computer system design).
I'm no engineer, so I could easily be jumping to wrong conclusions. My impression is that All-I would be less work for the camera processor, and also less work for the computer upon which the video is edited. The main advantage of All-I then is for editing on slower computers. My almost four-year-old iMac chews right through 4K video with no sweat (or however you mix your metaphors). So I would expect IPB to be less of a problem these days than a few years ago.
 

HarryFilm

EOS 7D MK II
Jun 6, 2016
445
43
Thanks for posting that, Harry I found it very interesting.
However, I doubt that when 24 fps was decided on as the frame rate the film producers had absolutely no idea this 'reasoning' even existed. Which begs the question I asked in my post is whether 24fps really does have a 'magic' or if it was simply what we are used to seeing in film. But I am sure what you CANNOT do is apply 24fps processing techniques to 30fps frame rates.
When Jackson released the 48fps version of The Hobbit, it is clear that not everyone found it unnerving, but I also read a very cogent article about the way that 48 fps has to considered in every single stage from shooting to projection but unfortunately this is continuity is rarely possible when a new format is introduced.

I also recall that the comments about 24p relate to film cameras using frame rate + rotary shutters and digital cameras using simple frame rate which muddies the waters still further. However I do recall that when Panasonic released their cameras, there was a hack on YouTube about settings that would mimic the shutter angle and produce a more pleasing result.

So I still ask what is inherently 'magic' about 24fps unrelated to any technology.

---

24 fps has a MAGIC ASPECT because of the 21 millisecond (1/48th of a second) to the maximum 42 milliseconds (1/24th of a second) that the shutter is open. That shutter-open time is enough to allow motion blur on subjects that are moving in a horizontal and vertical direction (or moving at an oblique angle!). Again, our corporate scientists (a PhD with a numerous peer-reviewed papers on the specialty of Computational Neurobiology) and an Optical Physicist (PhD) have given me biological and human anatomy reasons why 24 fps SEEMS to be more pleasing than 48 fps or 60 fps but those reason I am told were NOT the specific reasons why 24 fps was chosen as the standard. It was a economic film-cost reason AND a maximum-speed-of-available-camera-motors reason that 24 fps was chosen.

On a biological basis, it seems the human eye (and visual cortex) expends a lot of effort scanning across images in a Z-like pattern looking for HARD edges. Too much scanning over too short a period over images that are too sharp and/or too colour-saturated literally gives is a big headache! So, to get more PLEASING looking video imagery at high frame rates and high resolutions YOU MUST:

a) reduce overall sharpness (i.e. soften the video ever so slightly!)

b) Introduce motion blur on object/person edges that are moving in a specific direction

c) desaturate the colour by at least 10% to 20%

d) reduce the overall image contrast ratio

e) prevent hard and or solid colour regions that transition suddenly
into hard edges by introducing noise or extra patterns into your imagery.
This means stop crushing the blacks and clipping the highlights!
You MUST keep details in clouds and sky and keep fine details
in shadows such as the weave of dark clothing so that highlight
and shadow detail roll-off is smooth and analogue looking.

f) Use good lighting to HIGHLIGHT important subject matter and
use BOKEH to blur out unneeded/unwanted areas of an image

The key points are STOP making the human visual system work so hard
by using the ARTISTRY of common analogue cinematography techniques
within the digital realm to ensure your imagery LOOKS LIKE Hollywood Cinema
even IF it was shot with $1500 camera at 60 fps!

.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Photo Hack

HarryFilm

EOS 7D MK II
Jun 6, 2016
445
43
Good luck shooting stills on the Black Magic.
---

The 6K video frame on the BMPCC6K is about 18 megapixels which is about what the original Canon 5D mk2's did when you cropped them properly. AND at 24 fps to 60 fps, you're are basically getting a HIGH END Sports/Action/Wildlife Camera with Very High Burst Rate! Shoot at 24 fps+ and choose your BEST action shot from the captured video frames. Just remember to shoot Cinema Flat LOG OR FULL RAW at the highest colour sampling 12 to 14 bits per channel and use Blackmagic Resolve to colour correct that frame and send it to your editor as UNCOMPRESSED PNG 18 megapixels 12 or 14 bits per channel.

THEY will then crop and put it on the web! I've printed an 18 megapixel image as large as 36 by 24 inches on premium glossy photo paper using 600 dpi with error diffusion set to ON. If I use a FRACTAL IMAGE RESIZER, I've resampled 18 megapixel image to a large as 72 inches by 48 inches and they STILL look fantastic (usually printed at 300 ppi which is technically about 1200 dpi). Those sports/action photos were put on bus stop billboards all over the world in HK, London, Berlin, Moscow, New York, Toronto, etc and no-one complained! The editors didn't complain and the ad companies didn't complain!

This NEW Blackmagic 6K camera is PERFECT for Sports/Action/Wildlife IF you know how to ANTICIPATE action and press record JUST BEFORE you think the good stuff will happen! That does take experience and I've done that a LOT with the Canon C700-series cameras using a CINEMA camera as a 60 fps stills imager for the mostly online web content arena! When the C700 FF came out I could now do 15 megapixel+ imagery for high end sports companies (Ski, F1, Football aka soccer, Rugby, Hockey, Basketball, Sail/Powerboat Racing, etc) with NO ISSUE! The KEY POINT is to shoot RAW and at a high colour bit-depth! You do the colour correction afterwards! I've gotten a LOT of much better stills because I essentially have a 60 fps burst rate stills camera on the C700 FF!

--

I'm just waiting for the NEW Medium Format 60 fps 50.3 megapixel at 8192 by 6144 at 48 bit colour RAW camera to come out "Officially" so I can use it for my work in an official capacity! Shouldn't be too long now!

---

.
 

HarryFilm

EOS 7D MK II
Jun 6, 2016
445
43
Wait. Neuro is HARRY FILM??????
NO! NO! NO! I am HarryFilm --- NO ONE ELSE --- .... AND .....


--- I --- AM --- CANADIAN --- living in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada !!!!!!!!!

He is probably NOT !!!


..

BUT.... I do have friends and contacts VERY HIGH UP ON THE TOTEM POLES in the Aerospace, Intelligence (HumInt/SigInt) AND electronics engineering/design communities, so I get a LOT of "Inside Information" that Neuroanatomist SIMPLY WILL NOT HAVE ACCESS TO !!!!

It ALSO HELPS to have family and personal friends in the SAME said industries! That helps too !!! I may not get paid for all of this (except for CODEC design!) BUT OMG! Do I EVER get access to a LOT of free ultra-cool imaging/computer gear and technology FIRST before ANYONE ELSE !!!!

.
 

YuengLinger

EOR R
Dec 20, 2012
2,423
476
Southeastern USA
Try this for fun: Replace "FRBs" with "Canon's withholding of features." Then think about this thread, and sooooo many others like it. :D

"Fact is, we simply don't know what causes FRBs. But here's my take: Almost every time astronomers turn up some unexpected new phenomenon in the sky, they're baffled. Quasars and pulsars were deeply puzzling when first discovered. So researchers adopt a Sherlock Holmes approach and collect clues — which is to say, they find as many examples of the new phenomenon as they can. These observations became grist for the theoreticians — wonky types who like nothing better than to solve nature's riddles.

The new, repeating FRBs...are likely game-changers because they're ripe to be pinpointed and studied in detail. The drama of the FRBs is about to enter its second act, and I dare say that two years from now FRBs will be just another critter in the cosmic zoo."

From: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/mysterious-radio-bursts-from-space-may-soon-have-an-explanation/ar-AAGKAyg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Photo Hack

Mikehit

EOS 5D MK IV
Jul 28, 2015
3,209
395
---

24 fps has a MAGIC ASPECT because of the 21 millisecond (1/48th of a second) to the maximum 42 milliseconds (1/24th of a second) that the shutter is open. That shutter-open time is enough to allow motion blur on subjects that are moving in a horizontal and vertical direction (or moving at an oblique angle!). Again, our corporate scientists (a PhD with a numerous peer-reviewed papers on the specialty of Computational Neurobiology) and an Optical Physicist (PhD) have given me biological and human anatomy reasons why 24 fps SEEMS to be more pleasing than 48 fps or 60 fps but those reason I am told were NOT the specific reasons why 24 fps was chosen as the standard. It was a economic film-cost reason AND a maximum-speed-of-available-camera-motors reason that 24 fps was chosen.

On a biological basis, it seems the human eye (and visual cortex) expends a lot of effort scanning across images in a Z-like pattern looking for HARD edges. Too much scanning over too short a period over images that are too sharp and/or too colour-saturated literally gives is a big headache! So, to get more PLEASING looking video imagery at high frame rates and high resolutions YOU MUST:

a) reduce overall sharpness (i.e. soften the video ever so slightly!)

b) Introduce motion blur on object/person edges that are moving in a specific direction

c) desaturate the colour by at least 10% to 20%

d) reduce the overall image contrast ratio

e) prevent hard and or solid colour regions that transition suddenly
into hard edges by introducing noise or extra patterns into your imagery.
This means stop crushing the blacks and clipping the highlights!
You MUST keep details in clouds and sky and keep fine details
in shadows such as the weave of dark clothing so that highlight
and shadow detail roll-off is smooth and analogue looking.

f) Use good lighting to HIGHLIGHT important subject matter and
use BOKEH to blur out unneeded/unwanted areas of an image

The key points are STOP making the human visual system work so hard
by using the ARTISTRY of common analogue cinematography techniques
within the digital realm to ensure your imagery LOOKS LIKE Hollywood Cinema
even IF it was shot with $1500 camera at 60 fps!

.
So in other words, you can shoot at 60fps for an acceptable result as long as you follow these guidelines you mention.
In other words there is nothing 'magic' about 24fps - you just need to learn a new workflow. Exactly the same way you don't master digital music recordings the same way you master vinyl recordings.
 
Aug 1, 2017
379
222
Have you tried the MF on the r/RP? I’m finding it easier to do manual focus on my RP than I do with my x-e3.

And the R focus triangles look like they’d be brilliant, but I’ve only tried that in a store.

Disclaimer: I don’t use MF much, so take what I say with a healthy dose of salt
I haven't tried MF with the R's but I understand Canon has added some manual focusing aids to the R. I don't know how well they work. They are completely absent in the DSLR line so that is definitely a step in the right direction. The DSLR's are pretty much DPAF only in my experience.
 

cayenne

EOR R
Mar 28, 2012
1,906
103
So in other words, you can shoot at 60fps for an acceptable result as long as you follow these guidelines you mention.
In other words there is nothing 'magic' about 24fps - you just need to learn a new workflow. Exactly the same way you don't master digital music recordings the same way you master vinyl recordings.
Ooh...not a good comparison...ie, the 'compression wars' that have ruined most modern recordings put out, and often decimated classic recordings when they remix or remaster them, taking out all of the dynamics of the songs.
 

stevelee

FT-QL
Jul 6, 2017
1,167
224
Davidson, NC
Ooh...not a good comparison...ie, the 'compression wars' that have ruined most modern recordings put out, and often decimated classic recordings when they remix or remaster them, taking out all of the dynamics of the songs.
Just because people do it badly for commercial reasons these days does not mean it can't be done well. The tools are better than ever.
 

Mikehit

EOS 5D MK IV
Jul 28, 2015
3,209
395
Ooh...not a good comparison...ie, the 'compression wars' that have ruined most modern recordings put out, and often decimated classic recordings when they remix or remaster them, taking out all of the dynamics of the songs.
I made no reference to the compression wars, and had no intention to.
The need to adapt process to match the technology is relevant - I meant what I wrote:

you don't master digital music recordings the same way you master vinyl recordings
 

PVCC

Arts & Engineering
Jul 5, 2019
65
15
You are caught in that loop again - apparently it has to 'look cinematic'. And what do people mean by 'cinematic? They mean it looks like 24 because that is what is traditionally shown at the cinema. In other words there is no inherent superiority to 24p other than it is what people are used to. That is like saying 'CD is not superior to vinyl because it does not sound like vinyl'.

So your comment would be re-worded as:



Think of it this way: if you were able to rebuild the entire cinema chain an cinema experience at a stroke, would you choose 24p as your 'obvious' format?
No, that's your opinion.

Cinematic involves much more than just 24 fps.

It's also related to what people are used to see on movies.

But making it at 48p required the Director, DoP and other crew members to take special cares to make it look as it's usually seen on movies, with the "dreamy" look, and so on.

You can achieve cinematic look with 30p if you know what you do, but it's a step easier with 24p. And on digital you even get better IQ, as I mentioned before.

Is that simple.

Shoot at 60p and PROJECT the footage at 60p on the screen, and you'll have terrible troubles to make it look "cinematic"

I won't keep writing about this. More important things to do.

Cheers
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: navastronia

Mikehit

EOS 5D MK IV
Jul 28, 2015
3,209
395
No, that's your opinion.

Cinematic involves much more than just 24 fps.

It's also related to what people are used to see on movies.

But making it at 48p required the Director, DoP and other crew members to take special cares to make it look as it's usually seen on movies, with the "dreamy" look, and so on.

You can achieve cinematic look with 30p if you know what you do, but it's a step easier with 24p. And on digital you even get better IQ, as I mentioned before.

Is that simple.

Shoot at 60p and PROJECT the footage at 60p on the screen, and you'll have terrible troubles to make it look "cinematic"

I won't keep writing about this. More important things to do.

Cheers

In other words you agree with me - I was talking only about shooting in 24p.