Canon rumors

Check if there is any sensor dust or dead pixel ! LOL

Don, if you are getting it for stills it makes sense... but honestly I would look at the A7s II.. best camera I've ever used. And the thing takes great photos, but just 12 mp.

@rekindle

Awesome. Can't wait to hear what you think of it. Did you ever find out about motion jpeg?

4096 x 2160p / 59.94 fps (800 Mbps)

That right there is very attractive.... I might pick one of these up by the end of the year :-P

Absense of canon log and less important cost of media for 4K is a big no-no.I would justify that purchase if one needs a very good still camera as well to keep for years to come (still waiting for dr measurement).But not exclusively as a video camera.Spring will propably bring new canon models better suited for video.C200 anyone?

800Mbps is outstanding. Leaves the GH4 and Sony behind. 4K at 60 fps if wanted or needed. 30 Minutes of recording versus 3 minutes in new Nikon. Twice the frame rate of the new Nikon. Not putting down the Sony cameras at all but I don't believe they are in the same game. My Sony AX-100 and RX 10II does excellent 4K, photos suck. I travel a lot for footage and photos so I need a single camera that does both excellent. I need better weather and dust proofing. I don't need 14 pictures per second so it's a bonus. The built in gps will be nice to locate video and photo locations after the fact. Probably what the human eye can perceive the Sony and Canon can't tell the difference. The Canon is a very large camera. I don't want a dedicated video camera, it's not needed. The 5D MK II and III that I have does excellent photos and HD, they just lack 4K. The $6K is a small investment to future proof for many years. We'll see. A couple years ago I sent a high end Sony video camera back that I paid over $6K for. Just did not have the quality I wanted. Canon can't afford to have a loser in their top end dslr. If it does not live up to the hype then Panasonic (if they improve a lot more from GH4) and the Sony a7 will regain and take over the lead.

There are a group of fine quality cameras that do great for footage stock. Individual needs is really what makes the difference.

The Motion JPEG is not the old interlaced MJPEG we used to use. In 1DX MK II case each frame is an individual "photo" that makes up the video. This way you can make a high quality photo from any frame without blur or interference. When I heard MJPG I was still thinking old fashion interlaced.

P5 need to clarify and change the blanket negatives against Motion JPEG and clarify it to mean the old tape recorded interlaced Jonathan.

I thought thought the 800 mbs was was a miss print in the specs. Those files must be huge.

In April I will know for sure. There is speculation the Nikon will have to tweek their new camera before it's released to try to compete with the 1Dx MK II. If they do Canon may also do a little tweeking to make it better. A couple more months and they will both be out. Now Nikon is way behind the curve.

the 800 Mbps 4K is why it needs the CFast 2 cards to record to. A CF or SD card cannot keep up. The second CF slot is for HD recording.