movie were did also without cgi, when necessary there were tons of tricks...
today there are two thinking school : "i hate cgi and all modern tricks, i prefer to do in a old way, if some people were injuried it's a fault, but not mine, i'm in good way" and another school of "we do all in cgi be cause it's a modern way"
i came from the school of "is important what i can see on screen, did with less effort and less pain possible", other people i think are masocism lover...
to avoid mistake, i was born like director, filmaker at start of 90', i studied and did prostetic vfx, i integrate with digital vfx, i have since over 100 hours of animation (simple and character animation) over last twenty years, and i continue to think that is important what public see at end of chain, not the way to obtain that, when i can i prefer practical way be cause i know the advantage and disadvantage, and when i need i add cgi add.
if i can avoid risk to a stuntman, to an actor/actress, i'm happy to do.
recent accident occurs during "ghostland" shooting is a proof that today too much people risk itself without a real reason...
https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/movies/gorgeous-teen-star-sues-ove...
and for people not informed, never try to break a real glass, use EVER sugar glass or similar, are quite cheap to buy or to do, but never can cause to you injury like that... i'm frightned from the idea that someone told her that is safe to go under a real glass ... she may thought is a false glass and did sure that she not risk.

Apple drop the old quicktime32 framework to a new AVframework, old qt framework accep external codec, newer DON't do it... they not want that developer could add other codec on Os, be cause they are going to merge to Ios for a near future. Actually cineform is 64bit from years, the same for dnxhd/hr, but if they not have a point to connect on Os is impossible to play on Os... but... just actually you not play cineform or dnxhd or simple apple animation codec on finder, be cause you need to install codec on Os, are not native codec.
but at same time you could play and use on Adobe, Blackmagic, Edius and many other softwares... why? be cause are just embedded in software. CIneform from 2014, then you not need to read from Os... it's a false problem from years.

add later, that later to Mojade drop the support to
- Cuda acceleration
- OpenCL acceleratione
- Support to DnxHD/HR
- Support to Cineform
- Sony HDCAM-SR
- Support to other Legacy video format...
Apple told that you will could read on Os by installing codec but not from FinalCutProX
good way to support pro video user of OsX :-(

I can add some sad word, i was journalist for 15 years, and too often i saw people that too fast fabricate scoop and bad words near famous people. The simple reality not sell more copies then fire's words.... ask yourself why book sell less then gossip magazine?

to be honest, i read this list, and i thought i founded somewhere "sponsored content"
1) like other brands, but with less knowledge how to develop a good mirrorless, previous canon did only two bad mirrorless.
2) more resolution per area sensor mean more diffraction, the reason be cause sonya7s2 and gh5s are 10mpx only
3) 4k no, only UHD when other like gh5 have 4k dci, the only advantage to sony is 4:2:2 recorded internally (we must check the bitrate and matrix compression to understand if are in a good quality or not), but ever 8 bit when gh5 from 2017 offer 10bit internally in long gop or intraframe...
4) high ftp? no, like my iphone... fps per resolution gh5/gh5s offert uhd60p, FHD 180fps...
5) canon color science... yes and no, only if you record with compression or good cs are wasted from bad compression.
6) good lenses and ef compatibility (by adapter)... like other brand... or you think the zeiss lenses for sony are not so good like canon... and with adapter i use on sony, panasonic ef lenses (i do from years, i had a bmd camera with ef mount, and i shoot photo with different brand, sony, panasonic etc, and i have adapter metabone to use EF lenses on all).
7) competitive price? i think no... also without buying external recorder to have 10bit 4:2:2 and canon color science ...
may be in future canon do better, i used many cameras from them and in the future i will do again, but... i'm not payed from any brand, i pay to have every camera and vendor must give me real reason to consider (not to buy) to use it against sony/panasonic/blackmagic

to be honest, many things, ok, but never monitor or cameras....
2000$ and more of camera on 10$ clamp? do you want to risk ?
i saw too much fallen camera from cheap tripods to see fallen cameras from cheap clamps