# Canon R5 - Another with Autofocus issues!



## MrPid (Feb 27, 2021)

What is everyone settings for their auto focus on the Canon R5?
I took the camera out for a field test yesterday and took what I thought was a selection of cracking images however when I got home and loaded them onto the Mac this was not the case.
I shoot mostly wildlife (roe deer) at dawn and dusk so low light performance is key.
The camera would not use its eye detection function at all and kept wanting to jump on their rear hind or the nearest tree. I put this down to the lowlight however with Roe and the big black noses and massive black eyes I thought it would have locked on easily?
I have attached a couple of unprocessed images as examples to see the issues I’m having.
Taken with a 500mm F4 IS ii with 1.4 ex iii and canon adapter, shot in fully manual mode (no auto iso).
The first image of the roe was taken from around 30m from behind cover. It was 30min before sunrise under exposed to prevent pushing the iso higher.
The deer was very still trying to look for me. I was easily able to put the centre focus point on his eye- easy shot. The camera has decided to focus on the reeds behind him and this was the same in every shot. I have taken the same shot with my 5D4 countless times and never had this issue.
these deer are very camouflaged against usual bushes an brambles and they are hard to spot. I could maybe understand it then, but with the light reeds behind why would the camera get confused? Even with its contrast based AF system?
The noise at ISO 4000 is also incredible! Reminds me of my 7Dmkii.
The second image of a squirrel (30min after sunrise) was the only image where the eye detection was keen to lock onto his eye and hold it. To me it looks like the branch just in front of his nose is the focus point though?
Auto focus micro adjustment isn’t available for the R5 otherwise that would be my first port of call.
I have never had these problems with my 5D4 or the 5D3 where their inferior AF systems performed great.
I am beginning to think I have a faulty R5? It only seems to work in perfect light. Its like my old 7Dmkii, just awful in low light and lots of noise.
Using case 1 or 2 mostly, BBF set up (with star button for eye detect).
This is not the camera I was lead to believe in all the glowing reviews. I held off on mirrorless because I feared the above issues and believed everything had been ironed out. Seriously unimpressed - Any ideas before i ditch it?


----------



## rico.29 (Feb 27, 2021)

let me guess, you are using lightroom? there is much less noise on CR3 with capture one, i don't use LR with my new canon R5 
but i think capture one apllies a filter to reduice noice and treat color of CR3, when importing photo, but it looses details in the process. LR have more noise, bad color but more details i think.
by the way, i have exactly the same AF problem with R5 and 500mm USM IS F4 V1 (with or without TC 1.4), sometimes i can't focus on anything,
i've tried many AF setting and option, but still , no AF, lens is constantly breating...


----------



## Joules (Feb 27, 2021)

Could you open your RAWs in DPP and share some screenshots that show where the camera actually put the focus? If the box is on the animal, or even the eye, it would indicate that it is not the camera failing to detect the subject but some issue with communication to the lens or the lens executing the AF command.


MrPid said:


> The first image of the roe was taken from around 30m from behind cover. It was 30min before sunrise under exposed to prevent pushing the iso higher.


Just a reminder: Raising the exposure in post instead of shooting with an ISO that yiels the desired brightness right away actually leads to more noise.

As you say you are considering ditching the body, have you had similar experiences with other lenses? Which one specifically and under which circumstances? If it is only this particular lens that gives you trouble, it may be worth checking with Canon if you can send the pair in for calibration or trouble shooting.


----------



## AlanF (Feb 27, 2021)

MrPid said:


> What is everyone settings for their auto focus on the Canon R5?
> I took the camera out for a field test yesterday and took what I thought was a selection of cracking images however when I got home and loaded them onto the Mac this was not the case.
> I shoot mostly wildlife (roe deer) at dawn and dusk so low light performance is key.
> The camera would not use its eye detection function at all and kept wanting to jump on their rear hind or the nearest tree. I put this down to the lowlight however with Roe and the big black noses and massive black eyes I thought it would have locked on easily?
> ...


The R5 doesn't have contrast based AF, it has phase detect via the dual pixel system. I have shot 100s of 1000s of bird and nature images with the 7D, 7DII, 5D3, 5DSR and 5DIV, and find that the R5 has by far the best AF and noise characteristics. Either you have a faulty copy of the R5 or you need to persevere with it and master its capabilities.


----------



## MrPid (Feb 27, 2021)

rico.29 said:


> let me guess, you are using lightroom? there is much less noise on CR3 with capture one, i don't use LR with my new canon R5
> but i think capture one apllies a filter to reduice noice and treat color of CR3, when importing photo, but it looses details in the process. LR have more noise, bad color but more details i think.
> by the way, i have exactly the same AF problem with R5 and 500mm USM IS F4 V1 (with or without TC 1.4), sometimes i can't focus on anything,
> i've tried many AF setting and option, but still , no AF, lens is constantly breating...


Yes - but converting to DNG and then importing as I'm using an old version of LR as im still miffed that they no longer support the Creative Suite I spent a fortune on in 2016.
I love capture one but the catalogue feature in lightroom is what sells it for me. If I didn't have much an enormous library I would jump over.
Im guessing the communication with older lenses isn't o great, even with the adapter.


----------



## MrPid (Feb 27, 2021)

Joules said:


> Could you open your RAWs in DPP and share some screenshots that show where the camera actually put the focus? If the box is on the animal, or even the eye, it would indicate that it is not the camera failing to detect the subject but some issue with communication to the lens or the lens executing the AF command.
> 
> Just a reminder: Raising the exposure in post instead of shooting with an ISO that yiels the desired brightness right away actually leads to more noise.
> 
> As you say you are considering ditching the body, have you had similar experiences with other lenses? Which one specifically and under which circumstances? If it is only this particular lens that gives you trouble, it may be worth checking with Canon if you can send the pair in for calibration or trouble shooting.


I have checked in DPP and it appears that the camera picked the right spots, but the lens isn't on the same page.

I have had this issue with the 100-400 IS ii and the 100mm 2.8L Macro, noisy and focus missed (without converters)


----------



## MrPid (Feb 27, 2021)

AlanF said:


> The R5 doesn't have contrast based AF, it has phase detect via the dual pixel system. I have shot 100s of 1000s of bird and nature images with the 7D, 7DII, 5D3, 5DSR and 5DIV, and find that the R5 has by far the best AF and noise characteristics. Either you have a faulty copy of the R5 or you need to persevere with it and master its capabilities.


Does the phase detect not just work with the dual pixel element? I was led to believe mirrorless prioritise contrast based AF systems? I don't use the dual pixel (never have, not even on my 5D4) as I can hold the camera still long enough to nail focus.

I also shoot filed target at competition level so holding this sort of weight very still for extended periods of time is second nature.

Likewise I have taken hundreds of thousands of images over the years with literally every body canon has produced. This is the first time I have struggled to get a sharp image. Usually my keeper rate goes up with the body upgrades, now I have about a 5% keeper rate.

I am guessing I shall be giving canon a call on Monday morning....


----------



## rico.29 (Feb 27, 2021)

AlanF said:


> The R5 doesn't have contrast based AF, it has phase detect via the dual pixel system. I have shot 100s of 1000s of bird and nature images with the 7D, 7DII, 5D3, 5DSR and 5DIV, and find that the R5 has by far the best AF and noise characteristics. Either you have a faulty copy of the R5 or you need to persevere with it and master its capabilities.


well, i really think, according to user's review, R5 has really good AF, that's why i think it's impossible R5 can't focus on still subject at close, mid or far distance, it's not the lense 'cause it works really well on my A7R3 with MC11 adapter, so i think it's the R5. Is it possible to downgrade firmware or re-install the last one?
about the deer AF zone, it's just like if the camera doesn't "see" the deer and focus on the first element in the zone you were pointing on, and the r5 focussed on the back ground. i've the same sensation with the 500mm IS v1, sometimes i point on some subject and the R5 doesn't "see" = find something to focus on.


----------



## AlanF (Feb 27, 2021)

MrPid said:


> Does the phase detect not just work with the dual pixel element? I was led to believe mirrorless prioritise contrast based AF systems? I don't use the dual pixel (never have, not even on my 5D4) as I can hold the camera still long enough to nail focus.


All other makes of mirrorless cameras use contrast detection but not Canon. Sony etc use embedded phase detect elements in the sensor to enable approximate focus and then contrast detect to nail accurate focus. They need phase detect because contrast detect per se does not tell the direction in which to move to focus (Panasonic uses a defocussing method to decide in which direction to focus). Your 5DIV uses a separate phase detect focussing system in mirror mode (which is why you need AFMA), but when you switch to Liveview it uses just the dual pixels in the sensors (and it doesn't use the AFMA setting of the lens). The R series use only the dualpixels in the sensor and don't need or use contrast to nail precise focus. 

By the way, you need good software to deal with the noise. I use DxO PL4 and it just eats up the noise. Topaz denoise is also recommended. I find LR pretty hopeless in comparison as is DPP4.


----------



## MrPid (Feb 27, 2021)

rico.29 said:


> well, i really think, according to user's review, R5 has really good AF, that's why i think it's impossible R5 can't focus on still subject at close, mid or far distance, it's not the lense 'cause it works really well on my A7R3 with MC11 adapter, so i think it's the R5. Is it possible to downgrade firmware or re-install the last one?
> about the deer AF zone, it's just like if the camera doesn't "see" the deer and focus on the first element in the zone you were pointing on, and the r5 focussed on the back ground. i've the same sensation with the 500mm IS v1, sometimes i point on some subject and the R5 doesn't "see" = find something to focus on.


The R5 came with firmware 1.1.1 installed and it was the same. I thought updating it to 1.2.0 it would be much better, sadly not.


----------



## MrPid (Feb 27, 2021)

Here is another example - single point focus which I placed squarely on the deer's face.

You can see in the 100% crop that the image is so so soft! Its like that my keeper rate has reversed, so the images I would have missed are now my accidental keepers.

It looks to me that the AF is working overtime giving the fuzzy look but turning it off doesn't seem to make a difference.

Another strange thing I noticed, the IS option in the Menu disappears when you attach an EF lens with AF. Whereas everything else that is unavailable (for whatever reason) is greyed out, so why is this not just greyed out? Why does it disappear completely?

What angers is me is knowing had I taken the 5D4 these images would be perfect. Its not like you get close to these animals very often so to have such lovely light and proximity ruined by the R5 is not cool at all.


----------



## Joules (Feb 27, 2021)

MrPid said:


> Here is another example - single point focus which I placed squarely on the deer's face.
> 
> You can see in the 100% crop that the image is so so soft! Its like that my keeper rate has reversed, so the images I would have missed are now my accidental keepers.
> 
> ...


It says you are using one shot AF. From what I have seen reported about the R5, you really want to use servo AF all the time.

Just to be sure, what type of battey are you using? I doubt that's an issue, I'm just curious.

Using servo to keep the AF engaged should be something worth investigating if you previously used one shot on DSLR.

Also, as I said, if you are concerned with noise, do NOT underexpose your images.

Maybe also worth asking: Do you have the eye AF priority set to animals? Might want to do that to ensure proper subject detection even if it apparently also works in the other modes.


----------



## MrPid (Feb 27, 2021)

Joules said:


> It says you are using one shot AF. From what I have seen reported about the R5, you really want to use servo AF all the time.
> 
> Just to be sure, what type of battey are you using? I doubt that's an issue, I'm just curious.
> 
> ...


Thats an interesting concept - previously I have experienced DSLR's hunting for alternative focus spots when using Servo on still subjects, hence I tend to reprogram the DOF button on the front to switch quickly and am always concious of which mode i'm in. I shall give this a try though.

I have two genuine Canon LP-E6NH batteries I got with the camera.

As much as I do not like to underexpose my images, being out before sunrise means very low light and I tend to stalk and shoot, rather than park up with a tripod and hope something comes my way. Again, I have used it for the past five years and the DR has allowed me to recover any issues in post processing. I was surprised to see so much noise at only 4000 iso.

Yes, the eye priority is set to animals and I have set up C1 for my Wildlife, C2 for people and C3 for aviation (which I am tentative to see the results)

I always seem to shooting at slow shutters which is what concerns me, for low light and to get nice prop blur with aviation and so far the R5 has struggled.


----------



## Joules (Feb 27, 2021)

MrPid said:


> As much as I do not like to underexpose my images, being out before sunrise means very low light and I tend to stalk and shoot, rather than park up with a tripod and hope something comes my way. Again, I have used it for the past five years and the DR has allowed me to recover any issues in post processing. I was surprised to see so much noise at only 4000 iso.


If you encounter too much noise in your images, it is not the ISO that's to blame, it always is too little light. Modern sensors do give you a great amount of freedom, but being aware that high ISO is not the culprit for high noise at all can help to adjust your expectations based on the actual source of noise: the light. Edit: Also worth noting is that if you inspect your noise at 1:1 pixel ratio, and have not used a ~ 45 MP body before, you will of course notice the noise more easily. But if noise is what you are evaluating, you can't make comparisons at 1:1 between cameras with different resolutions.

The thread as a whole still requires some work on my part that I haven't found the time or motivation for yet - But my post about noise does illustrate my point quite well I think: https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/threads/equivalency-now-with-pictures.39787/post-874838

Essentially, if you are dissatisfied with the noise in your images, rest assured, that's not the camera's fault.

AF is another thing, as that is obviously not a physical phenomenon. I have no further input on that, though I am interested in your feedback about using servo or talking to Canon in case that does not help at all.


----------



## MrPid (Feb 28, 2021)

Joules said:


> If you encounter too much noise in your images, it is not the ISO that's to blame, it always is too little light. Modern sensors do give you a great amount of freedom, but being aware that high ISO is not the culprit for high noise at all can help to adjust your expectations based on the actual source of noise: the light. Edit: Also worth noting is that if you inspect your noise at 1:1 pixel ratio, and have not used a ~ 45 MP body before, you will of course notice the noise more easily. But if noise is what you are evaluating, you can't make comparisons at 1:1 between cameras with different resolutions.
> 
> The thread as a whole still requires some work on my part that I haven't found the time or motivation for yet - But my post about noise does illustrate my point quite well I think: https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/threads/equivalency-now-with-pictures.39787/post-874838
> 
> ...



I have just tried another go at the moon this eve.

I turned off the In-Body stabilisation and turned on the Lens Drive when AF Impossible. I took a selection of shots, some with single AF point on single shot, then servo then switched to AF-Face detection (no priority) in single point and servo af.

The images produced varied results, the best was the Face detection in servo mode, which goes against everything you would believe for a static (albeit travelling at 2300mph at 250m away) subject in the sky. Having done tons of moon shots with the 5D4 it always performed best with single point, single shot.

So the best shot out of the R5 to date is the moon!


----------



## YuengLinger (Feb 28, 2021)

I was hesitant to say this before. I posted and deleted. Now I'm confident: Here we go around the mulberry bush with somebody who has posted variations of this on multiple sites with varying names. I don't like alarming "new" members, but when somebody tries to sell a retread tire as new, questions are warranted.

As in this guy:






Canon EOS R5 + any RF 35 mm = terrible back focus


Hi all! I have encountered a following problem. Brand new R5 and brand new RF 35 with or without the newest firmware produce a terrible back focus for apertures above 1.8. At aperture 4.0 the back focus is the worst, resulting in the least acceptable resolution in the point of intended focus. I...




www.canonrumors.com





Notice how the first post is innocuous, but the thread title is clickbait? Same modus operandi, in my opinion. And then it will go on for pages with "yes, but," and dozens of evasions.

Sigh...


----------



## AlanF (Feb 28, 2021)

YuengLinger said:


> I was hesitant to say this before. I posted and deleted. Now I'm confident: Here we go around the mulberry bush with somebody who has posted variations of this on multiple sites with varying names. I don't like alarming "new" members, but when somebody tries to sell a retread tire as new, questions are warranted.
> 
> As in this guy:
> 
> ...


Wasn't there someone who had multiple complaining postings about the RF 100-500mm here and on DPR with different names?


----------



## JPAZ (Feb 28, 2021)

@rico.29........If this is an issue, try the same lens and TC combination in better lighting with an inanimate object that does not have some branches or other complicating structures in front of the object. If that photo seems fine, then it is not the camera or camera lens combo that is the problem. If, however, the issue persists in that very controlled setting, then then that is meaningful. I am also relatively new to the R5 from the 5Div world and there has been a learning curve. I've got plenty of rotten images to show for that. But, when I get things right, the camera produces phenomenal work.


----------



## rico.29 (Feb 28, 2021)

JPAZ said:


> @rico.29........If this is an issue, try the same lens and TC combination in better lighting with an innominate object that does not have some branches or other complicating structures in front of the object. If that photo seems fine, then it is not the camera or camera lens combo that is the problem. If, however, the issue persists in that very controlled setting, then then that is meaningful. I am also relatively new to the R5 from the 5Div world and there has been a learning curve. I've got plenty of rotten images to show for that. But, when I get things right, the camera produces phenomenal work.


i'm quite sure the camera has a AF issu, it seems "blind" most of the time, never happens to me with other. here are 2 photo, one at 500mm with the 100-500mm RF, impossible to focus on the bush, when i come back to 100mm, the camera did not acquire focus anywhere on the background, had to point at the left to get focus and then i could focus on the background. servo, point , 1/4000s, iso 1000, f7.1, if this is "normal" for the R5, i sell it right away...


----------



## MrPid (Mar 1, 2021)

Back to the subject in hand - playing with AF settings today and again the images appear to be back focused.

The Blue tit with the focus point nailed on his head is out of focus, whereas the fat ball behind him is crystal clear.

Second pic shoes a missed focal point, having picked the front of the feeder, but the bird is now clear in focus.

Again, like I was saying, the R5 appears to only result in keepers wen the AF gets it wrong.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Mar 1, 2021)

I have no real issue with the AF on my R6 which is the same system although i have come across a couple of situations that do confuse it(most notably zebras). And that is with ef lenses and adapter(both canon and third party lenses). As for IQ. I find my 20mp R6 images to be sharper across the board than my 7d2 images and with close to 3 stops of improved noise performance(i have auto ISO limited to 6400 but if need be will push to 12800 in certain circumstances as long as I dont have to crop). So I would say it is either a defective body or as has been said before, possibly a body/lens comunnication issue.


----------



## Admin US West (Mar 1, 2021)

The arguing and bickering in this thread is unacceptable. I am removing several posts and locking the thread. Discipline will result.


----------

