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

[navastronia]

I'm astounded by the arrogant photographers in this thread trying to tell video makers what they need and don't need.

Here's an idea: instead of asking those of us arguing in favor of 23.98 and 24p video options to justify ourselves, why don't you go and find a statistic about how many Hollywood movies are shot at 30p and converted to 24p?

 

[MayaTlab]

I’m certainly not arguing that their market research is pinpoint accurate down to the level of individual features. But I would argue that in aggregate, their decisions on these sorts of things have been broadly effective. The evidence for that is their domination of the ILC market for 16 years and counting.

I agree that relatively speaking it worked out better for Canon's camera division in the long run (but not their sensor's division - not developing and selling to third parties might have been the biggest mistake Canon made in the last 15 years as of all the markets Canon was in it's the one that grew the fastest by far and they used to be at its forefront).
I would argue though that Canon was greatly helped by their competitor's incompetence. In the grand scheme of things all camera manufacturers have flatly failed to anticipate where photography was going, still do (connectivity is still way below what it could be in 2019), and are paying for it. To me that means that their understanding of their own customers was very much perfectible and that many assumptions they had about them were wrong.
And many variables besides necessarily imperfect market research can affect decisions being taken, some of which are definitely not rational. Anyone who's worked in a large company before would get that I think.

 

[Loswr]

Here's an idea: instead of asking those of us arguing in favor of 23.98 and 24p video options to justify ourselves, why don't you go and find a statistic about how many Hollywood movies are shot at 30p and converted to 24p?

And that would be relevant because…the M6II, 90D and RP are the cameras of choice for shooting Hollywood movies?

 

[Jonathan Thill]

And yet big companies go bankrupt or fail spectacularly all the time due to bad decisions. Wait, I know... Those just must be the companies that didn't make their decisions as carefully as Canon.

Canon has already massively diversified their portfolio, if they stopped selling consumer based Camera's tomorrow it would have little impact on their business as a whole.

Canon might be known for Camera's today but if they continue to buy into other fields with their war chest they will be fine. The doom and gloom of the consumer camera market might be real but to classified Canon as flippant with their business decisions to wholly wrong.

Look at Motorola (yeah they used to make Phones) just passed 180USD a share and they have not made a phone in years.

 

[privatebydesign]

I'm astounded by the arrogant photographers in this thread trying to tell video makers what they need and don't need.

Here's an idea: instead of asking those of us arguing in favor of 23.98 and 24p video options to justify ourselves, why don't you go and find a statistic about how many Hollywood movies are shot at 30p and converted to 24p?

I'm astounded that video makers are so insistent at forcing their will and demands onto photographers cameras. There are lots of video orientated cameras at all price points with specific video orientated features, ND filters, frame rates, audio recording and headphone sockets, etc etc etc.

 

[Kit.]

While both videos show how pathetic those Internet talking heads look when displayed at 24p on a 60p monitor, the first video actually tells how to do the proper conversion from 30p to 24p. The guy in the second one obviously has no idea.

 

[navastronia]

And that would be relevant because…the M6II, 90D and RP are the cameras of choice for shooting Hollywood movies?

Films are shot natively in 24p in Hollywood because the frame rate is part of the look and the format of feature film. Amateur filmmakers want their films to look like Hollywood films. Films that are captured at the wrong frame rate will never look professional.

This argument is already so painfully self-evident that I don't think explaining it any further is going to help.

 

[navastronia]

I'm astounded that video makers are so insistent at forcing their will and demands onto photographers cameras. There are lots of video orientated cameras at all price points with specific video orientated features, ND filters, frame rates, audio recording and headphone sockets, etc etc etc.

Ah, but this is where we agree! You're saying that filmmakers need different features in their cameras than photographers do. No argument from me, there. My issue is with those who are trying to tell filmmakers what they need and don't.

EDIT: Last point and I'm done in this thread - whatever Canon's reasons are for leaving 24p out of these cameras, there will be a flood of people on YouTube telling filmmakers to stay away from Canon's entry level cameras and buy a Sony, Nikon, or Fuji instead, and those people will be right.

 

[Famateur]

And now I've learned something today from both of you. Thanks!!

You're welcome!

 

[Loswr]

And yet big companies go bankrupt or fail spectacularly all the time due to bad decisions. Wait, I know... Those just must be the companies that didn't make their decisions as carefully as Canon.

Yeah, I just knew you’d eventually get to YAPODFC.

 

[privatebydesign]

Ah, but this is where we agree! You're saying that filmmakers need different features in their cameras than photographers do. No argument from me, there. My issue is with those who are trying to tell filmmakers what they need and don't.

I'm happy to agree. I won't comment on video features in video orientated cameras, you won't comment on video features not in photo orientated cameras. I won't say you don't need that feature and you shouldn't say my photo orientated cameras should have that feature. Agreed?

 

[dtaylor]

At this point Canon should add 24p wherever it's missing via firmware updates just to save the electricity being used to argue about 24p online. There is the environment to consider after all.

 

[Kit.]

Here's a video with 24p and 60p footage shown side by side. Do you prefer 60p?

Hello? They are both the same 24p footage converted to 60p. They just use different conversion methods.

 

[Don Haines]

Glad you pointed that out, Don - I was just about to post that I'm heartily sick of discussions about cameras being hijacked by habitually malcontent wannabe videographers...

Yes!

The ergonomics on any DSLR are pathetic compared to a video camera. If these people really want to be a videographer, then go get the right tool for the job!

 

[Photo Hack]

I'm happy to agree. I won't comment on video features in video orientated cameras, you won't comment on video features not in photo orientated cameras. I won't say you don't need that feature and you shouldn't say my photo orientated cameras should have that feature. Agreed?

Maybe the problem here lies in the fact the lines between photo and video products have been blurred and will continue to do so even more, hence the entire reason this debate is even happening.

The main criticism seems to me that Canon is slow to respond to this reality in the same way they were to full frame mirrorless. I don’t think anyone can argue with the fact that the (edit: many of the) people left in this shrinking market are moving towards mirrorless and they demand the best of both worlds in photo & video.

The photo only consumer market is shrinking drastically. That’s a fact. The YouTube generation and video market is increasing. Video content commercially consumed is massive and growing.

Unfortunate for camera makers, a phone will do just fine for a majority of internet photos and apps. Not so for video.

And lastly, everyone wants value and versatility to some extent. Much of the market that is spending $10k-20k on gear wants all of it to work seamlessly together. One brand, one set of lenses, photo and video together......

And I’m willing to bet amateurs, small studios, commercial and portrait, marketing companies, and especially the wedding industry are bursting at the seems with hybrid shooters.

 

[Famateur]

I'm also pretty sure that none of them would be able to provide for tangible evidence and even if they did that it wouldn't pass scrutiny.

This is an interesting statement to me. It seems to present Canon decision makers as inept, out-of-touch and negligent in their lack of scrutinizing product segmentation decisions. Such a supposition would mean that either Canon's success to-date is completely accidental, management responsible for successful endeavors to date has been replaced by morons, or they all suddenly lost their business and marketing acumen. Is this what you believe is true? More so than the possibility that they have legitimate reasoning for the decisions they make that, perhaps, haven't occurred to you?

I'm genuinely curious.

 

[Loswr]

The ergonomics on any DSLR are pathetic compared to a video camera. If these people really want to be a videographer, then go get the right tool for the job!

I’m not a videographer, but rather a dad who shoots occasional home movies. For me, a camcorder is the right tool for the job. Oh, and it shoots p24...not that I care.

 

[Photo Hack]

Glad you pointed that out, Don - I was just about to post that I'm heartily sick of discussions about cameras being hijacked by habitually malcontent wannabe videographers...

Yes!

The ergonomics on any DSLR are pathetic compared to a video camera. If these people really want to be a videographer, then go get the right tool for the job!

You guys do realize you’re commenting on a thread wholly devoted to video. Who’s hijacking the discussion? No one is forcing you photographers to read and comment on video lol. As long as there’s video capability on these cameras, it will be a discussion of the camera.

And it’s pretty evident you guys aren’t doing video. Tripods, monopods, gimbals, glidecams, sliders, etc. don’t care what ergonomics your DSLR has.

 

[Famateur]

This is going to sound like I was born yesterday, but I really am shocked by the Canon apologists in this thread tying themselves in knots attempting to explain why customers should be fine with 30p when they want 24p.

The gist I'm getting from the "apologists" is more along the lines of, "If you need 24P for professional reasons, you'll have no problem getting a camera that provides it, Canon or otherwise. If the M6II doesn't have it, but you want it, you're not the target market for the M6II. Amateur stills shooters that want basic video functionality for home use likely are the target market. Sure, it's a head-scratcher, but if the 'professional results' you need can only come from 24P, you can easily justify purchasing the product that provides it."

Honestly, I haven't met a Rebel/M shooter who gives two hoots about frame rate in video, let alone is aware that there's a meaningful difference. When the curious exploration of a feature's absence from an amateur/enthusiast camera turns into lamentation and criticism of a "greedy" company, it sounds more like budget-constrained video "pros" who want to get what they need from an amateur/enthusiast stills camera...instead of just buying the professional gear.

(Honest Question) Who is more closed-minded: die-hard brand apologists, or those who criticize a brand for not giving them what they demand rather than just buy what they need from another brand? Food for thought...

 

[f119a]

I'm sorry to say it but the fact is -
IF you're thinking you need 24p to make your videos "looking good", you're a really, really miserable shooter who puts everything else before good contents.