The Karma has a better system overall that gives you a GoPro 5 that can be used in a million different ways as well as the removable gimbal - to me that seems like possibly a better value. However, the Mavic has better usability and functionality in the air since it can pretty much be set to fly itself - which might mean better quality shots since many of the tracking shots are very difficult as a single operator. In the end though, I feel like you can't go wrong with either of them and nobody will ever know if you used a Mavic or a Karma.
If you can't see the difference between this camera and the Ursa mini then just stick with the Ursa Mini.
I don't think it's wrong for Canon to put all their efforts into making this one of the best cameras for photography. If they start taking out photography tech and replacing it with video tech they are going to start loosing int he photography world which is a diversion from where their main market is.
That said, I wish they would create some sort of 5D-Cinema camera that is stripped of it's photography specs and has a focus on video with photography as it's secondary function. This is probably too much to ask. They had the right idea with the 1DC but it's based off of the wrong camera line and thus way too expensive.
Keep calm and carry on. England is known for overcoming the odds.
Much of this doomsday talk is fueled by uncertainty. Just because you're lost at sea doesn't mean you're sinking. Certain named institutions and organizations might have to adapt in order to survive but that's always the nature of change.
If I had a 85" 4K TV with a ear destroying audio system I would probably pay the $50 and host friends/family to watch the movie. So basically, all I need is a $15000 theater setup. If I had that kind of money the $50 wouldn't be an issue. The idea appeals to me, the reality doesn't.