When I was purchasing a new camera over last summer the most difficult decision was price versus codec. With the budget I had to make purchases the question was (and always is) - do I spend more on a camera with better codecs and fewer accessories (some of which I badly needed) or less on the camera - accept an OK codec, and compliment it with additional accessories.
At the time, the cameras in contention were the Canon C100 mk ii (lower cost, low codec, ability to purchase accessories), the black magic ursa mini (higher cost, robust codecs, few to no additional accessories, not super ergonomic), and the Panasonic GH5 (lower cost, robust codecs, smaller sensor, few additional accessories, but lacked some basics for my work - like on-board audio).
I ended up with the Canon c100 mkii, though I do still find myself eyeing other cameras with better codecs - specifically the FS5 & 7. Now, what I've been surprised with is how robust an uncompressed 8-bit codec actually is for run-n-gun and corporate filming (what I almost exclusively do). I use an Atomos Ninja 2 currently to capture the uncompressed signal while using the internal MP4 codec for backups.
Given how, and this is an guesstimate, most videos created today are 8-bit today (think phones and vlogging) this camera and color space actually fits right in given the price. I think there's more 8-bit cameras in the market (including phones, tablets, DSLR's, and the like) than any other bit depth camera. Now, obviously, higher bits are better - don't get me wrong - but as well all know when we think about it, an enjoyable video is not determined by the color, but the story.