I'm probably not the only one who is wondering if it's safe to get a 5D Mark II now and expect a firmware upgrade with 25p soon, or if I will have to wait for a new version. Is 25p something that can actually be implemented through firmware?

I think I would accept that 5D MkIIs sold in Europe and other PAL countries only have 25p capability... like in the old days for video cameras, but that the 30p model be the only choice does little to foster brand loyalty.

I wish Canon would issue some kind of statement on the subject. As a loyal Canon user for over 30 years (AE1, A1, Rebel, 1n, 30D, 450D) with a reasonable investment in Canon EF lenses, I feel that a purchase of this nature should not be a gamble.

I think Canon's two biggest motivators for a firmware update are:

1) The current auto exposure situation sells Nikon lenses, and
2) 30p-only is deeply insulting to the entire European market.

I would be surprised if manual control can't be added in firmware, but I'm not so sure about the signal processing chain.

Possibilities are:

A) We get a firmware update soon,
B) We get a firmware update after inventories start to grow, or
C) Canon brings the 5D MkIII to market.

I'm still hoping for A, if not B. And I hope that both 1 and 2 (and 24p) are solved. Path C would almost certainly drive me and my growing Nikon lens collection to a future Nikon body (or Scarlet), rather than a MkIII.

...safe to get a 5D Mark II now and expect a firmware upgrade with 25p soon[?]


Danger Will Robinson. Definitely not safe.


Is 25p something that can actually be implemented through firmware?


I haven't read any commentary by sensor designers one way or the other; however, most guesses, including mine, is that it is possible.


25p: what's more likely new model or firmware upgrade?


A new model is far more likely IMHO.

Despite being a happy 5D Mark II owner, I sadly believe that the true realization of the camera's potential is going to come in a true video camera, not in a firmware update. It just doesn't make business sense for Canon to cannibalize their entire video product line (or at least the high end of it) with a still camera body.

If they wanted to put a limitation to the video of this cam because l' they have only made for the half of the market? (PAL). It does not have sense. And it does not have sense that in order to use the 5d in manual way I must buy the objectives of the competition number: nikon. This is a stupid thing! Possible that they have underrated l' use video of this reflex? And then in order to use it to 25fps I make a conversion with COLOR and comes very well. Therefore however the limitations are succeeded to exceed all that have tax. But the history of 25fps own not l' I have happens! I live in Italy and the colleagues take to me in turn because they see to me to use this reflex in order to make video, to the place of mine xlh1. then when they see the result are astonished! Excused my English. Ciao

I think, that the people at canon who designed the 5D MK2 belong to the photo division , not the video division.
That means first of all they watch the sales of people who bought this camera as a photo camera. I´m pretty shure that the photo market is a lot bigger than the pro-video market.

And seen from this point of view the camera is already a hit. So they´re not really upset that a relatively small amount of people switch to nikon optics. Let´s face it, people who are willing to take such a lot of workarounds are video freaks, and independent filmers.

No pro would take the 5dmk2 for a feature film by now. You just can´t risk that clients or actors see you fiddling around with strange rites and gadgets to get you´re fstop and shutter fixed, and that after every take. A documentary where you need to have a small unobvious camera would be an exeption. And very low budget image films where you can convince people that they get something for the money they wouldn´t get otherwise.

So I think canon´s video department is very interested in this market study that becomes visible by the fact which people buy the camera for what purpose.

And shurely they´ll build some monster mixed out of the 5dmk2 and their biggest prosumer camera.

25 frames wouldn´t endanger their video department, but full manual control would.
So what we get will in my eyes be a 25p upgrade if we are lucky, but that´s it.

Holger

And then in order to use it to 25fps I make a conversion with COLOR and comes very well.

How do you convert 30 fps to 25 fps? I am in the same PAL boat and am very interested of other people's experience. Thanks.

...So they´re not really upset that a relatively small amount of people switch to nikon optics. Let´s face it, people who are willing to take such a lot of workarounds are video freaks, and independent filmers.I disagree. I spoke with one Canon rep at CES and complained that the lack of manual control pushed me toward Nikon lenses. There was a small audience listening. The guy's eyes nervously shifted back and forth, he found a Canon guy standing alone, and he directed me to talk with that guy. It was clear that this rep didn't want any potential customers to hear the Nikon lens story.

And then there's the Canon review site that doesn't allow talk of other lenses being used.

It's pretty clear that this is a sore spot for Canon. (It's certainly a sore spot for 5D MkII owners.) The only way they can silence the talk of Nikon lenses on this cam is to offer the firmware update. Without the update, they are creating actively anti-loyal customers.

I have to agree to some extent with Jon. My case is an example. I bought body only, because I have a suit case full of Nikon glass. If if Canon rigged it that just Canon lenses would work with a full manual, I would have bought the package, and would be shopping for other Canon lenses. They are losing that market...

If I were you, I would wait. I don't think anyone knows if they will add 25p support; they may, but I don't think it's worth the risk right now if that's the primary reason for buying the camera.

Playing the waiting game with higher end Canon cameras can mean years. If you need it now, buy it now.

Al least they could give us something that simple as a setting memory - to make settings repeatable in various shots after having tricked the camera into the settings you were looking for.

How do you convert 30 fps to 25 fps? I am in the same PAL boat and am very interested of other people's experience. Thanks.

It must transform all the single ones clip before inziare to work on FCP2. They are imported on COLOR and every single one clip goes modified to 25 fps in the setting. From the way to rendering. At the end the clip will be found modified in the cartellina of rendering. I hope to me to be expressed well. Hello

... grazie mille!

I just ordered a 5dMkII with the hope that 25p will be added some day, either by Canon or via a firmware hack. That said, I'm looking at using the camera for an internet production, so 30p will be acceptable if there is never a 24p/25p solution. I wouldn't order the camera if I absolutely NEEDED 25p, because in my experience companies like Canon tend to look at their product lifecycle and realize that 24p/25p could be a "must have" feature in their NEXT model (and thus give users a reason to upgrade). They're certainly not having any problems moving the 5dMkII now. I'd love to be proved wrong, though!

There's been a lot of wishful thinking on the firmware hacking front, but so far I've not seen anyone with any real experience say they're actively working on it.

While I wait for my backordered camera to ship, I'm also curious to see if Nikon will announce a D800 at PMA next week with HD video...

Despite being a happy 5D Mark II owner, I sadly believe that the true realization of the camera's potential is going to come in a true video camera, not in a firmware update. It just doesn't make business sense for Canon to cannibalize their entire video product line (or at least the high end of it) with a still camera body.

I agree with you. A lot of people think of Canon as one monolithic company. And they aren't. They have a photo division. A lens division. And a consumer electronics division.

The photo division, quite frankly, is laughing at those who are trying make 5D's into movie cameras. The video division is scratching their heads wondering what the hell all this means and how it impacts that massive order of 1/3" chips they ordered from the foundry 18 months ago [/speculation]. And the lens division...is....well....doing their thing. LOL!

While I really hope Canon makes a proper full-frame video camera capable of using its full arsenal of SLR lenses, I have to stop and remind myself that my wants and needs are a very small niche compared to Canon's bigger business. And, unfortunately, that still might mean 1/3" and 1/2" sensors for another couple of years.

Now, Canon could very easily make a "loss leader" product. A camera that's expensive to produce and sells at a loss with a mall market. BUT it would be their flagship camera. The one that gets put in all the trades and on all the glossy print ads. They take loss but reap the PR rewards.

Factor in the world financial meltdown and the future of full-frame video gets even bleaker, IMHO.

I want to pose an additional question. If Canon does put out a "25p only" model of the 5D2, will people in NTSC countries buy it, instead of the existing 30p model, because 25p can be more easily converted to 24p in post?

There also may be a third possibility for new firmwares (in addition to a new 30p+25p firmware, or just a new 25p only firmware/model). Canon may offer a 25p firmware upgrade, only if you send the 5D2 back to their service center. Providing a 25p firmware as a user-installed upgrade, may allow hackers to figure out the 5D2 firmware more rapidly.

While Canon may have divisions, I can't believe that they have absolutely nothing to do with the other. In fact, this camera is clear evidence that they are working in concert. Otherwise, why would a professional camera being shot by users who are supremely aware of the benefits of manual fstops, shutter selection, and ISO, be dumbed down on the video end. Even the lack of 25p is evidence. Canon knows that if the camera had 25p, we would all shoot it in 25, and here in the states slow it down.

The 5D was clearly designed so as it might be impractical for us to manipulate- at least in the way professional are used to. The video aspects of this camera has less control than my HV20, which was designed with similar impairments. With the HV20 many of us found ways to control it nicely. Canon learned from that, and I don't think you can attribute the lack of control to poor design, lack of insight, or any other misunderstanding of the market. I think it is an understanding of the market that caused this camera to be put out here the way it was.

And I do have to laugh a bit about a line like, no professional would use this camera. With the lines of professionalism blurring ever more, and the fact that films made with and VX2100 or P170 have made it to market in the past, I think a statement like that doesn't recognize the inventiveness and imagination that is out there. I for one have climbed on the train, because the promise of "real" 35mm size imager is the "holy grail", and at this price, I have to take a flyer at trying to get control of the beast. I may be sorely dissapointed, but it won't be for lack of trying...

I want to pose an additional question. If Canon does put out a "25p only" model of the 5D2, will people in NTSC countries buy it, instead of the existing 30p model, because 25p can be more easily converted to 24p in post?

Yes, filmmakers would absolutely buy the PAL version (years ago, there were a few American feature films were shot on the PAL version of Sony's PD100 and PD150, because both the temporal and spatial resolution of PAL was better for a film-out). Personally I don't expect Canon to ever add 24p to the 5dMkII, but 25p seems like a much more realistic proposition.

I doubt they would market separate PAL and NTSC versions of the camera -- unlike their counterparts in the video division, the photo division of Canon can mass-produce one single model and sell it worldwide, which I'm sure is cheaper to do.

If Canon offers a 25p firmware update, most of us will gladly pay the fee. This is a $3,000 still camera that just happens to take gorgeous (albeit flawed) full-frame video, and another few hundred bucks for a firmware upgrade to get 24/25p does not make it any less of a bargain.

If Canon offers a 25p firmware update, most of us will gladly pay the fee. This is a $3,000 still camera that just happens to take gorgeous (albeit flawed) full-frame video, and another few hundred bucks for a firmware upgrade to get 24/25p does not make it any less of a bargain.

Competitive pressure from Nikon D90's 24p mode may help. I'd really like to see some crop video modes, both in camcorders and DSLRs, that use a smaller part of the sensor without requiring downsizing (an aid in telephoto imaging) as well as reduce rolling shutter artifacts.

I doubt they would market separate PAL and NTSC versions of the camera.I agree. Since video takes a back seat to photos, it would be odd to make separate models based on video frame rate. The current model can drive both NTSC and PAL monitors, so it's clear that they want a single model for both markets.

While Canon may have divisions, I can't believe that they have absolutely nothing to do with the other. In fact, this camera is clear evidence that they are working in concert.

I didn't say they didn't work together. I know for a fact that the video division was "slightly" involved in helping the Photo division work on the DSP chip. But that's about it. The video division had nothing to do with the design of the camera or the idea of enabling certain video functions.

And I do have to laugh a bit about a line like, no professional would use this camera.

Again, I never said that. Point to where I said no "professional" would use this camera. What I said was that Canon is amused that people are trying to turn this into a "movie" camera when that was never their intention.

What I said was that Canon is amused that people are trying to turn this into a "movie" camera when that was never their intention.

Seems like it's time for the right hand to check out what the left hand is doing over at Canon.

Filmmakers have always been a pretty resourceful bunch, especially at the lower end of budgets (the very existence of 35mm adapters being a good example). Anyone who couldn't foresee that a camera with a Vistavision-size sensor that records 1080p to CF and takes interchangeable 35mm SLR lenses -- and only retails for $2,700 -- would be aggressively used as a "movie" camera clearly knows nothing about the video market. 'Tis why they're employed in the photo division.

It's as if someone stuck a jet engine and wings on a car, and then were "amused" when people tried to make it fly. What'd they think was going to happen?!

Seems like it's time for the right hand to check out what the left hand is doing over at Canon.

Filmmakers have always been a pretty resourceful bunch, especially at the lower end of budgets (the very existence of 35mm adapters being a good example). Anyone who couldn't foresee that a camera with a Vistavision-size sensor that records 1080p to CF and takes interchangeable 35mm SLR lenses -- and only retails for $2,700 -- would be aggressively used as a "movie" camera clearly knows nothing about the video market. 'Tis why they're employed in the photo division.

It's as if someone stuck a jet engine and wings on a car, and then were "amused" when people tried to make it fly. What'd they think was going to happen?!

That's a great analogy.

I agree. Since video takes a back seat to photos, it would be odd to make separate models based on video frame rate. The current model can drive both NTSC and PAL monitors, so it's clear that they want a single model for both markets.

By the way, this raises the question. Why not capture to the CF chip, then off load by play back using HDMI cable to an HDMI capture card, using the Pal feed. Won't that get you 25p conversion out of the camera... Again, I am afraid I might be showing my technical ignorance...

By the way, this raises the question. Why not capture to the CF chip, then off load by play back using HDMI cable to an HDMI capture card, using the Pal feed. Won't that get you 25p conversion out of the camera... Again, I am afraid I might be showing my technical ignorance...While this works - and takes care of the crushed blacks and whites, proper gamma and provides audio - it doesn't necessarily do an ideal conversion to 25p. The recording was still at 30p. It will just drop every sixth frame, causing a stutter.

There are a few ways to convert frame rates, none of them perfect:
1) Drop (or repeat) frames,
2) Mix frames, when you really want one in-between,
3) Perform some intensive math that predicts motion and creates brand new images, or
4) Do a combination of all three, depending on motion and other factors.

If there's very little motion, 1 or 2 are fine. If you're looking at random, blurred stuff like a waterfall, 2 works great.

Solution 3 can look excellent when it gets it right and horrid when it gets it wrong. And it takes forever. There are, however, some very expensive hardware boxes that implement solution 4 in real time.

Funny story: they used an early prototype of one of these fantastic boxes for the Olympics a couple decades ago. For the most part, the results were great. Every once in a while, however, the gymnast's leg would come off for a moment and then re-attach itself. Back to the drawing board... ;)

I am just wondering wether the request of 25P is high enough to make canon make the move. It looks like more ppl actually asking for the full manual control over the 25/24p. As for me, I really want 25P, so I can edit my JVC and A1 footage with 5D2.

I have no idea how is the distribution of 5D2 in other Pal lands, but in New Zealand the whole country is out of stock since early Jan, and no where to buy battery. So I guess it will take some time for the 5D2 actually widely reaches the Pal Land ppl. And until then, don't think they will really care about the 25P. And for now, let's just join the NTSC ppl to demand for full manual control. 25P will follow, once 5D2 widely spreads outside US and JP.

pardon my english...

Seems like it's time for the right hand to check out what the left hand is doing over at Canon.

Filmmakers have always been a pretty resourceful bunch, especially at the lower end of budgets (the very existence of 35mm adapters being a good example). Anyone who couldn't foresee that a camera with a Vistavision-size sensor that records 1080p to CF and takes interchangeable 35mm SLR lenses -- and only retails for $2,700 -- would be aggressively used as a "movie" camera clearly knows nothing about the video market. 'Tis why they're employed in the photo division.

It's as if someone stuck a jet engine and wings on a car, and then were "amused" when people tried to make it fly. What'd they think was going to happen?!

I agree with you on principle. I just want people to get their heads out of the clouds wrt to how far backwards they expect Canon to bend just to cater to a couple hundred ultra-low budget filmmakers. Hell, I would love it if Canon did everything I asked and built everything I wanted. If they did we'd already have a full frame sensor with SLR camera mounts mated to a proper video body with full controls for half the price of RED.

I guess all I'm saying is that our community of "filmmakers" tends to take a tool NEVER intended for their purpose, like the HV20 (my god, it has 24p, what did they expect us to use it for? Idiots!), and then proceeds to bitch and moan about how it doesn't operate properly. And then proceeds to bash the manufacturer with a "tsk tsk" attitude, non-stop. It makes no sense.

I understand people want everything, they want it now, and they want to spend zero money on it. I get it. Independent filmmakers are starved beasts with zero cash who want to shoot Lawrence of Arabia.

Sometimes, though, it feels like we're a bunch of novice carpenters and we need to build a house and all the furniture inside it. But we can only afford one hammer. And then complain that the tiny little hammer we bought for assembling the furniture is inadequate to build the house itself. And then start a thread about how the folks at "Craftsman" are a bunch of idiots.

Sometimes, though, it feels like we're a bunch of novice carpenters and we need to build a house and all the furniture inside it. But we can only afford one hammer. And then complain that the tiny little hammer we bought for assembling the furniture is inadequate to build the house itself. And then start a thread about how the folks at "Craftsman" are a bunch of idiots.

Ooh, battle of the analogies!

No, you're totally right -- we bought a $3 hammer and then we mope about it not performing as well as a $400 nail gun. Or however much nail guns cost.

It's just frustrating since, in this case, our $3 hammer came with a powerful compressed air system. What a great feature, and at such a good price! Unfortunately, the hose connected to the tank only allows through 1/100th of the air the tank is capable of providing. So we sit there staring at the air tank, knowing how well we could build this house, if only we could harness the power of our miracle $3 hammer... but Craftsman (Canon) won't sell us a better hose, since they have their nail gun (video camera) market to protect.

So then we get on the nearest internet message board about hammers, and commiserate.

To continue the hammer story...

And because of the small hose, we buy the other guys nails. And our growing nail collection makes us lean toward the competition for our hammer upgrade.

It seems clear that most DSLRs will have HD video capture from here on out...perhaps Nikon - which doesn't have a video camera business - will push the capabilities further, and drag Canon along behind them.

I spoke to a Canon rep at the UK Focus on Imaging exhibition today, and asked about 24/25fps recording and manual control.

His first answer was "If I had a pound for every time somebody asked me that, I'd be a rich man".

His second, official answer, was "Canon Europe have put an urgent request in to Canon Japan to come up with a solution."

I then asked if 24/25fps was even possible via a firmware upgrade alone, or if this was limited by hardware, and he said there was no reason to believe it couldn't be done by changing the firmware. He wasn't a technician, and he couldn't say for sure about the 24/25fps possibility, so I'm not really any wiser, but certainly Canon are well-aware of these requirements.

He was also aware that people are buying Nikon lenses, and he said that would probably be the incentive to get Canon Japan to make this work.

He was also aware that people are buying Nikon lenses, and he said that would probably be the incentive to get Canon Japan to make this work.

Ah! The market is still working :) :) :) !!!!

I heard roumors about Canon implementing the manual settings in the next firmware update but, sadly, no news about the 24p/25p issue (I live in Italy).

Hi Marcello,

On this site, we don't deal in rumors -- we deal in facts.

The implementation of manual settings for HD recording in the next 5D Mk. II firmware update is not a rumor. It's
a fact. Please refer to this discussion for more information: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/canon-eos-5d-mk-ii-hd/236144-its-official-canon-usa-offers-5d2-firmware-update.html

Unfortunately it does not look like 25p is being added at this time. Hope this helps,

Generally, PAL video cameras, no matter they are con-, pro- sumer or professional are around 700 USD higher priced than the same NTSC model. And it has to do with custom taxes. All products for Europe must be that price higher - no matter where you buy them from. This is why one has to pay around 600 USD to convert an NTSC cam to PAL.

Market and custom taxes are the main reason we do not have yet a unified video system. I am pretty sure that there will be two versions of 5D2: one with 30p and 24p and the other one with 25p and around 600USD more expansive.

Still one thing: there is a big tendency among US videographers to shoot 25p and this could be a benefit for their PAL mates as would be difficult to sell those 25p cameras at an European price on the US market.

It must transform all the single ones clip before inziare to work on FCP2. They are imported on COLOR and every single one clip goes modified to 25 fps in the setting. From the way to rendering. At the end the clip will be found modified in the cartellina of rendering. I hope to me to be expressed well. Hello

Hi Max, do you realise all that happens in this process is Color throws away every sixth frame. It can look okay for scenes with limited movement, but take a look at anything moving in a predictable fashion (eg: a car driving by). You will see it jerk several times a second. Very distracting.

Using FCS2, the only way to convert properly is using Compressor. You can can get Compressor to reconstitute 5 discrete frames per second (using info from the original 6) - usually very effective but time consuming and sometimes error prone - or by slowing the footage down 20% (ie: maintaining all 30 frames over 1.2 seconds).

Compressor has tons of frame / retiming options - have a play.

As Christian said, most everything here has always been more expensive and not just by VAT (that's not sellers' fault). Fortunately this seems to be getting better. 15 years ago prices were more like x2. Now it's more like x1.2 (I talk ex-vat).

Now we have the really stupid "we made video modes 30p only" debate. My solution: buy from companies that make products with "25p inside" built-in!!! ;-D

Don't take it too personally my European friends... more than half the world's population live in 25p regions *outside* Europe.

China, India, Brazil, Argentina, Indonesia, the entire African continent, all of the Middle East, Australia, New Zealand, the ex Soviet Asian Republics... the list goes on

Every time I hear what an insult 30p is to the "European market" it brings a smile.

Don't take it too personally my European friends... more than half the world's population live in 25p regions *outside* Europe.

China, India, Brazil, Argentina, Indonesia, the entire African continent, all of the Middle East, Australia, New Zealand, the ex Soviet Asian Republics... the list goes on

Every time I hear what an insult 30p is to the "European market" it brings a smile.30fps is based on the frame rate for NTSC TV which is the standard for the Americas plus a few other nations (apologies to Japan, Philippines, South Korea, Taiwan & Burma:-) The rest of the world is PAL in some variant or other.

Another example of US technological influence is the whole 110V vs. 220/40V thing. I now have several mains adaptors that are auto-sensing auto-switching 110V/220V which is great except they are stupidly built-in to US-style mains plugs so you need an adaptor. Why on earth they weren't made with a two-pin Figure 8 C7 socket so you could plug in a regular mains lead depending on your local variation?

I doubt that Canon really intend to insult their customers but the products are designed in an NTSC 30fps country & their biggest market the US is another 30fps NTSC country. If 28fps or 32fps had been chosen then that would clearly have been insulting to all countries:-) Hey, didn't they just bring out the 500D with 20fps video?:-)

True, but the fact is that the world spins around NTSC.

I'm on PAL land and I see lot of misconceptions even on profesional products. Lot of people thinks most of aspects of NTSC could be extrapolated to PAL resulting in a very bizarre theories, official documents and bas support from certain companies.

Just an example: Matrox Rt.x2 gives PAL output thru DVI at 60Hz.

Every time I hear what an insult 30p is to the "European market" it brings a smile.

Sorry, I of course meant every 25p country... We should find a word for it, like pan-indo-euro-25p-asia... ;-DD


I doubt that Canon really intend to insult their customers but the products are designed in an NTSC 30fps country & their biggest market the US is another 30fps NTSC country. If 28fps or 32fps had been chosen then that would clearly have been insulting to all countries:-) Hey, didn't they just bring out the 500D with 20fps video?:-)

;-DDD

You're right Nigel... It seems it's not a matter of insults to customers and tv standards. They're probably just trying to give the best possible feeling of movement to the image and for that purpose, the more fps the better, so we'll probably have a 1Ds Mark IV with AMAZING AND SUPER SMOOTH 40fps!! Well... It IS smoother than 30fps ain't it?

If the rumor is in fact true, we'll have to see what the 24p mode in the 5D looks like. If a couple of months from now we have a 5D with manual controls and 24p (let's hope 25p for PAL countries, not just Europe, lol) with real cinematic motion feeling and the light capabilities and compression quality that it already has, we'll have one of the most perfect independent filmmaking tools till the day for an amazing price.

But don't worry... People will still complain about rolling shutter, aliasing and audio.

I guess the most important thing for Canon to do was stop people from buying Nikon glass.
So now they've done that. Even without releasing the firmware yet. 25p is also important but I don't think it will have the same effect on the Canon's bottom line as the manual controls did. Let's hope they are just saving the announcement for the release of the firmware so they have something else to talk about as well.

Fingers crossed.

...25p is also important but I don't think it will have the same effect on the Canon's bottom line as the manual controls did...25p could be just as important.

While manual controls might convince many video shooters to buy Canon over Nikon lenses, 25p could convince many European, Chinese and Australian videographers to buy the body and lenses. Compared to the Japan and the Americas, that's a huge potential market!

But it doesn't really matter which would have the bigger impact of the two. They will make more sales with both features than they will with just one or the other.

By the way (I hope this isn't totally off topic ;o) - if 24/25p would be implemented at some point (in a new firmware version) ... wouldn't it be possible to rise the video encoding bitrate by a good 20 percent?
Five frames a second less (coming from 30 fps) equals 20% less frames, thus 20% less data... so the remaining frames could be less compressed and still you'd get the same overall data rate. Of course it's again just speculation as we don't know if or how the data rate is "hardcoded"/locked inside one of the chips or something like that.
Just saying that this could be a welcomed side effect.. ;)

Hey Soeren.

That is what rumor speculation is saying is why 24p did not come together with this firmware. A little harder to figure the best way to deal with the data rate and such than giving manual controls

Thinking about it, I also want the highest quality encode that they can muster.

In the field, I would capture, transcode, edit, and encode. It is that final encode that gets delivered electronically, not my raw footage. With a 24p final output, I have the option to reduce the delivered file size vs. a 30p version, but that's my call.

So, yeah, 24/25p can help reduce bandwidth needs of photojournalists in the field compared to 30p. But this is unrelated to file size out of the camera. Anybody worried about bandwidth will not be delivering files straight from the camera.

That said, if the 24p quality is the same as today, I'll take it!

if the canon 5d had 24p then i would absolutely buy it this very second, without hesitation. that is the only reason i will not buy this camera until canon officially announces a firmware upgrade for it

the whole point of investing in a prosumer videocamera is to get AWAY from the video look... not to KEEP the video look (like all the 30p tv shows use). i understand there will always be a couple people out there who don't care, but for the majority of independant filmmakers we want to stay as far away from 30p as possible. 24p is what we want and what we need. if this camera had 24p it would be almost perfect (besides the obvious rolling shutter and audio downsides)