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

Jon Fairhurst · June 1st, 2009, 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sean Lander

...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.

Soeren Mueller · June 2nd, 2009, 11:03 AM

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.. ;)

William Chung · June 2nd, 2009, 11:59 AM

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

Jon Fairhurst · June 2nd, 2009, 12:09 PM

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!

Chris Schuler · June 20th, 2009, 08:18 PM

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)

Logan McMillan · June 21st, 2009, 05:04 AM

Hmmm.....I don't know. I have just shot a TVC and part of a feature on it. The 30p looks great. Won't lose any sleep over 24p.

For what you pay the picture quality & lens selection blows anything else out of the water that I have shot with in the same ballpark.

I actually enjoy shooting on it more than Red as it's so small and fast to work with.

Steve Witt · June 21st, 2009, 07:40 AM

A 24p firmware update would also give me the final push needed to make the purchase. But I don't think this will sway Canon any faster because the 5D Mark II is backordered just about anywhere you search.

Tom Daigon · June 21st, 2009, 07:55 AM

With all this talk of 24p...I feel the need to champion the cause for 29.97 which is the NTSC standard at this point. 30p necesitates a conversion of both video and audio when used in conjunction with other broadcst standard video sources. The conversion slows the editorial work flow down. Video needs conversion thru compressor and audio needs either a slowdown of .1% (which is good only for short clips) or to be processed by cinema tools. A big PITA.

Jon Fairhurst · June 21st, 2009, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Daigon

With all this talk of 24p...I feel the need to champion the cause for 29.97 which is the NTSC standard at this point. 30p necesitates a conversion of both video and audio when used in conjunction with other broadcst standard video sources. The conversion slows the editorial work flow down. Video needs conversion thru compressor and audio needs either a slowdown of .1% (which is good only for short clips) or to be processed by cinema tools. A big PITA.

Agreed. The bigger problem, though, is when you try to cut the camera with 29.97 sources. We can't slow down the audio when we show a 29.97 camera. That means we either have to drop frames from the 5D2, or we have to waste time calculating when we can and can't slow the audio.

Wasting creative talent solving arbitrary technical problems is the last place artists want to spend their time. Bring on 24p, 25p - and 29.97 (please).

June 2nd, 2009, 12:09 PM	#49
Jon Fairhurst Inner Circle Join Date: May 2006 Location: Camas, WA, USA Posts: 5,513	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! __________________ Jon Fairhurst

June 21st, 2009, 07:55 AM	#53
Tom Daigon Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 170	Ntsc 29.97 With all this talk of 24p...I feel the need to champion the cause for 29.97 which is the NTSC standard at this point. 30p necesitates a conversion of both video and audio when used in conjunction with other broadcst standard video sources. The conversion slows the editorial work flow down. Video needs conversion thru compressor and audio needs either a slowdown of .1% (which is good only for short clips) or to be processed by cinema tools. A big PITA.

June 2nd, 2009, 11:03 AM	#47
Soeren Mueller Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Düsseldorf, Germany / Denver, CO Posts: 137	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.. ;)

June 2nd, 2009, 11:59 AM	#48
William Chung Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Duluth, GA Posts: 80	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

June 20th, 2009, 08:18 PM	#50
Chris Schuler New Boot Join Date: May 2009 Location: texas Posts: 8	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)

June 21st, 2009, 05:04 AM	#51
Logan McMillan Regular Crew Join Date: May 2007 Location: Christchurch, New Zealand Posts: 85	Hmmm.....I don't know. I have just shot a TVC and part of a feature on it. The 30p looks great. Won't lose any sleep over 24p. For what you pay the picture quality & lens selection blows anything else out of the water that I have shot with in the same ballpark. I actually enjoy shooting on it more than Red as it's so small and fast to work with.

June 21st, 2009, 07:40 AM	#52
Steve Witt Major Player Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: kentucky, USA Posts: 429	A 24p firmware update would also give me the final push needed to make the purchase. But I don't think this will sway Canon any faster because the 5D Mark II is backordered just about anywhere you search.