# Firmware: Canon EOS R v1.6.0



## Canon Rumors Guy (Dec 5, 2019)

> As previously reported, Canon has released a firmware update for the Canon EOS R. It turns out it was released at the end of November but hasn’t yet been posted by Canon USA for whatever reason.
> *Firmware Version 1.6.0 incorporates the following enhancements and fixes:*
> 
> Support for the RF 85mm f/1.2L USM DS lens has been added.
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## YuengLinger (Dec 5, 2019)

In fact, thanks, Canon, for keeping up the good work!


----------



## djoos (Dec 5, 2019)

Begs the question: what happened to 1.5.0? As it seems we jumped from 1.4.0 to 1.6.0...


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Dec 6, 2019)

djoos said:


> Begs the question: what happened to 1.5.0? As it seems we jumped from 1.4.0 to 1.6.0...


As software developer I can guess that they spun up 1.5.0 and the testing was almost completed when they decided to include a late fix that was targeted for 1.6.0. 

Canon does not seem to like to use the 3rd digit, I personally do not like version control with only 3 digits but this is not the place for that discussion


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 6, 2019)

djoos said:


> Begs the question: what happened to 1.5.0? As it seems we jumped from 1.4.0 to 1.6.0...


I have 1.5.0. It added 3 fps in AI Servo, half a stop of DR, and 6k video. Looks like they didn’t carry those forward into 1.6.0, so I guess I’ll skip the update.


----------



## Kit. (Dec 6, 2019)

Ramage said:


> Canon does not seem to like to use the 3rd digit,


They can use it internally for release candidate builds.


----------



## djoos (Dec 6, 2019)

Semver (semantic versioning)-wise the third digit is for patches (MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH). Canon doesn’t tend (I haven’t had any patch build from Canon for the Eos R yet at least) to ship those, but seem to include them in the next minor.

Just odd that 1.5 didn’t get shipped - especially given the fact there not really a lot in 1.6.0...


----------



## HikeBike (Dec 6, 2019)

Updated with no issues, as usual.


----------



## SecureGSM (Dec 7, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> I have 1.5.0. It added 3 fps in AI Servo, half a stop of DR, and 6k video. Looks like they didn’t carry those forward into 1.6.0, so I guess I’ll skip the update.


 Nuh, they took the 1.5 of the website the moment they realised that additional 3 FPS turned R into a serious action camera eating into the 1 Series market share according to Bloggers.


----------



## Frodo (Dec 7, 2019)

My priority for a software upgrade is to improve viewfinder refresh rates when following a moving subject.


----------



## Lusik (Dec 8, 2019)

Frodo said:


> My priority for a software upgrade is to improve viewfinder refresh rates when following a moving subject.



With RF lenses you can switch on High Speed Viewfinder option on page 6 of the photography menu. It decreases the delay between each frame and makes it easier for follow a moving subject.


----------



## Viggo (Dec 8, 2019)

Lusik said:


> With RF lenses you can switch on High Speed Viewfinder option on page 6 of the photography menu. It decreases the delay between each frame and makes it easier for follow a moving subject.


Makes a real difference for sure. Just note this; you have to turn off Anti-Flickering to have it enable, there is no real message from the camera to tell you HighSpeed display is inactive.


----------



## Frodo (Dec 9, 2019)

Lusik said:


> With RF lenses you can switch on High Speed Viewfinder option on page 6 of the photography menu. It decreases the delay between each frame and makes it easier for follow a moving subject.


I wonder why this restriction exists. I can't see how having an RF lens should improve viewfinder refresh rates. I have a bunch of otherwise fully functional EF lenses.


----------



## Viggo (Dec 9, 2019)

Frodo said:


> I wonder why this restriction exists. I can't see how having an RF lens should improve viewfinder refresh rates. I have a bunch of otherwise fully functional EF lenses.


The communication with the RF mount is MUCH faster, the EF mount isn’t fast enough to transfer the data.


----------



## SecureGSM (Dec 9, 2019)

Viggo said:


> The communication with the RF mount is MUCH faster, the EF mount isn’t fast enough to transfer the data.



Hmmmmm, what electronic communications are required between the lens mount and sensor in order to read sensor at a higher refresh rate?
A Genuine question though. 

Unless it is a requirement for the lens to refocus for every sensor readout operation. This is An insane requirement if true.


----------



## koenkooi (Dec 9, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> Hmmmmm, what electronic communications are required between the lens mount and sensor in order to read sensor at a higher refresh rate?
> A Genuine question though.
> 
> Unless it is a requirement for the lens to refocus for every sensor readout operation. This is An insane requirement if true.



So let's take it to the extreme on one end: why can't the high-speed display option be turned on if there's a fully manual lens attached. Be it chipped like an MP-E or TS-E or non-chipped.
Does hi-speed mode turn itself off if I flip an RF lens switch to MF?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 9, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> Hmmmmm, what electronic communications are required between the lens mount and sensor in order to read sensor at a higher refresh rate?
> A Genuine question though.


The image data, obviously. The higher bandwidth RF mount transmits photons faster, and RF lenses have a shorter flange focal distance so the light gets to the sensor faster, enabling a faster refresh rate. It’s just physics.


----------



## mpeeps (Dec 12, 2019)

Lusik said:


> With RF lenses you can switch on High Speed Viewfinder option on page 6 of the photography menu. It decreases the delay between each frame and makes it easier for follow a moving subject.


Unfortunately, no DPAF when doing so.


----------



## Anoop143hcl (Dec 12, 2019)

I have a question. I have rf 24-105, canon 85mm 1.4 usm L , 100mm macro 2.8 usm l tamron 45mm sp 1.8 , looking to sell everything and buy rf 85mm n keep rf 24-105. I shoot potraits and people say rf lenses are sharper than ef lenses. Kindly help. Thanks


----------



## YuengLinger (Dec 18, 2019)

Being a frequent flasher, I updated. No problems.


----------



## Optics Patent (Dec 18, 2019)

Anoop143hcl said:


> I have a question. I have rf 24-105, canon 85mm 1.4 usm L , 100mm macro 2.8 usm l tamron 45mm sp 1.8 , looking to sell everything and buy rf 85mm n keep rf 24-105. I shoot potraits and people say rf lenses are sharper than ef lenses. Kindly help. Thanks


What’s the question?

My advice is to buy first and if after some time you don’t find yourself wishing for the old ones, sell them.


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Dec 18, 2019)

YuengLinger said:


> *Being a frequent flasher*, I updated. No problems.


 Hey, woah TMI


----------



## Don Haines (Dec 18, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> Hmmmmm, what electronic communications are required between the lens mount and sensor in order to read sensor at a higher refresh rate?
> A Genuine question though.
> 
> Unless it is a requirement for the lens to refocus for every sensor readout operation. This is An insane requirement if true.


The problem is more a latency problem than anything else. Higher com speeds reduce that latency.

AF is a stream of interactions between the camera and the lens. If the commands can be passed faster, then the lens can AF faster. I am just guessing as to how the actual protocol works, but it could be like this:
Camera: adjust focus +154 units
lens: done
Camera: adjust focus +17 units
lens: done
Camera: adjust focus -2 units
lens: done
(picture taken, now we start tracking)
Camera: adjust focus -1 units
lens: done
camera: adjust focus +2 units
lens: done

and this is just AF....

something similar will be happening for IS at the same time.

the faster you can communicate, the faster the response and the smoother the tracking for AF and IS.


----------



## SecureGSM (Dec 19, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> The problem is more a latency problem than anything else. Higher com speeds reduce that latency.
> 
> AF is a stream of interactions between the camera and the lens. If the commands can be passed faster, then the lens can AF faster. I am just guessing as to how the actual protocol works, but it could be like this:
> Camera: adjust focus +154 units
> ...


Yeaaaahhh.... But the sensor readout speed is not affected by mount electronics. 
Come think of it, it is all about eVF refresh rate. Still not convinced. Sorry ... ((


----------



## Don Haines (Dec 19, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> Yeaaaahhh.... But the sensor readout speed is not affected by mount electronics.
> Come think of it, it is all about eVF refresh rate. Still not convinced. Sorry ... ((


I guess I really didn’t answer the question.... let me try again....

No. sensor readout speed is not affected by mount electronics, but the latency of commands to the lens should be affected by sensor readout speed. That said, whatever the fastest video mode is, is PROBABLY the speed that the sensor is being read for data for the EVF or AF functions.

Keep in mind, this is a guess and I have no inside information


----------



## Jim Corbett (Dec 19, 2019)

Frodo said:


> I wonder why this restriction exists. I can't see how having an RF lens should improve viewfinder refresh rates. I have a bunch of otherwise fully functional EF lenses.


EF: 8 pins to transfer data from the lens to the camera
RF: 12 pins.
Ergo, the VF 'waits' less time to respond.
This is how I understand it.


----------



## Frodo (Dec 19, 2019)

Its not clear to me why the VF has to wait for the AF. Surely its just displaying readout from the sensor?


----------



## Joules (Dec 19, 2019)

Frodo said:


> Its not clear to me why the VF has to wait for the AF. Surely its just displaying readout from the sensor?


The only explanation apart from Canon being Canon and crippling some things is that the EF protocol has more overhead than the new RF protocols and the old hardware in the R can not deal with the protocol actions and serving all the frames at the same time. That, of course, does not explain why manual focus is not enough to go to the smooth setting, so it appears that there is some of the usual Canon BS at play.


----------



## koenkooi (Dec 21, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> The problem is more a latency problem than anything else. Higher com speeds reduce that latency.
> 
> AF is a stream of interactions between the camera and the lens. If the commands can be passed faster, then the lens can AF faster. I am just guessing as to how the actual protocol works, but it could be like this:
> Camera: adjust focus +154 units
> ...



The RF70-200 front focus issue makes me think that AF with EF lenses works as you describe, but that AF with RF lenses is open-loop, the camera just says "Focus to 5.71 meters", since DPAF will give you very accurate distance info.


----------



## Viggo (Mar 20, 2020)

I got a mail today saying there were updates available for the EOS R, but it only shows “two available” which is the 1.6.0 for Windows and Mac, what gives?


----------



## koenkooi (Mar 20, 2020)

Viggo said:


> I got a mail today saying there were updates available for the EOS R, but it only shows “two available” which is the 1.6.0 for Windows and Mac, what gives?



I received the same, but for the RP and M50. Also no updates


----------



## Viggo (Mar 20, 2020)

koenkooi said:


> I received the same, but for the RP and M50. Also no updates


Bummer...


----------



## Asserfelt (May 13, 2020)

Well why can't Canon give the EOS R animal tracking and 120 fps slow in 1080p or atleast give us the option to pay for it. Nikon and Sony can do why can't canon?


----------



## Joules (May 15, 2020)

Asserfelt said:


> Well why can't Canon give the EOS R animal tracking and 120 fps slow in 1080p or atleast give us the option to pay for it. Nikon and Sony can do why can't canon?


Why can't Nikon and Sony give us an R5?


----------

