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