# Canon EOS R5 firmware update coming soon, RAW light to be added? [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Aug 11, 2020)

> I don’t think it comes as a surprise that Canon will be releasing firmware updates for the Canon EOS R5. I have been told that we will see an update “soon”, no date was given. As with most firmware updates, it’ll be released when it’s done.
> The source claims the following will be added to the Canon EOS R5, but cautions it may not come all at once in a single firmware update.
> 
> Addition of Cinema RAW light option to 8K recording
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## vjlex (Aug 11, 2020)

Let's hope this will kill all the talk about overheating once and for all.


----------



## StevenA (Aug 11, 2020)

Would have liked to have seen 1080p 240fps w/dpaf II on that list.


----------



## landon (Aug 11, 2020)

Similar for R6? 
4K120p (light) please


----------



## Richard Anthony (Aug 11, 2020)

vjlex said:


> Let's hope this will kill all the talk about overheating once and for all.


Not if the record times aren't extended beyond much what they are now


----------



## Kjsheldo (Aug 11, 2020)

Based on a couple tear downs it seems the overheating shutoff has more to do with software limitations than actual heat, so perhaps they’ll fix that and lengthen those record time limits.


----------



## landon (Aug 11, 2020)

If they do the bug fixes correctly, then the R5 = a7iv + a7r4 + a7siii. 
Just needs 1080-120p/240p, 1hr record limit in basic 24p recording .


----------



## alexvaltchev (Aug 11, 2020)

Is there a firmware for R6 as well with similar fixes/addons or only R5? Also, can anyone explain to me what is Cinema RAW light? I am a noob but eager to learn more. Just recently learned bRAW is Black Magic Raw )


----------



## wockawocka (Aug 11, 2020)

Instead of making it all about video, how about god damn uncompressed Mraw Canon.


----------



## alexvaltchev (Aug 11, 2020)

StevenA said:


> Would have liked to have seen 1080p 240fps w/dpaf II on that list.


That would be awesome! Is it really possible with such a high megapixel sensor?


----------



## alexvaltchev (Aug 11, 2020)

wockawocka said:


> How about god damn uncompressed Mraw Canon.


What is Mraw? Is that for video or photo?


----------



## Twinix (Aug 11, 2020)

alexvaltchev said:


> Is there a firmware for R6 as well with similar fixes/addons or only R5? Also, can anyone explain to me what is Cinema RAW light? I am a noob but eager to learn more. Just recently learned bRAW is Black Magic Raw )


I believe its the same RAW type as found in the C200.


----------



## Kjsheldo (Aug 11, 2020)

alexvaltchev said:


> Is there a firmware for R6 as well with similar fixes/addons or only R5? Also, can anyone explain to me what is Cinema RAW light? I am a noob but eager to learn more. Just recently learned bRAW is Black Magic Raw )



Cinema Raw Light is Canon's own compressed raw codec, first introduced on the C200 and now present in C500II, C300III, and 1DX Mark III. It's similar to Black Magic Raw in that it is a compressed raw codec giving you raw image quality without the giant file sizes. BM Raw has more compression options (5:1, 8:1, 12:1, etc), but Canon's is a fixed compression that works out to be around 4:1 or so. So, file sizes are still big, but not nearly as big as straight raw. Adding this would probably double or triple your record times in 8k on the R5, which would be very welcome.


----------



## filmmakerken (Aug 11, 2020)

alexvaltchev said:


> Is there a firmware for R6 as well with similar fixes/addons or only R5? Also, can anyone explain to me what is Cinema RAW light? I am a noob but eager to learn more. Just recently learned bRAW is Black Magic Raw )


read about it here -- https://www.canon-europe.com/pro/stories/cinema-raw-light/


----------



## DBounce (Aug 11, 2020)

At minimum the following should be added:

8K output over HDMI... this should be easy on the system as no compression needed and HDMI 2.0 supports 8K @30p. So no excuses not to enable it.
4K HQ @24p internal recording without recording time limits.
Non-recording operations should not impact available recording time.
Recovery time needs to be removed. Imposing a record limits is one thing, but requiring 2 hours plus to restore the camera to full functionality is frankly ridiculous. I believe these limits are artificial. And testing would seem to support this suspicion.


----------



## wanderer23 (Aug 11, 2020)

I just wet my pants harder than the r300 rumor


----------



## DBounce (Aug 11, 2020)

vjlex said:


> Let's hope this will kill all the talk about overheating once and for all.


It will certainly kill it if the problem is resolved. The recovery time is the real problem.


----------



## Stanly (Aug 11, 2020)

Eagerly waiting response on the overheating situation not being directly depended on component temperatures. Really hoping Canon gives us a workable hybrid camera as a reason to switch till the end of the year!


----------



## vignes (Aug 11, 2020)

what does _Increased record time limits (but don’t expect a huge boost),_ means?
they should fix to an appropriate state. I'm not expecting hours of continuous recording but decent enough. I'm only interested with 4kHQ.
the 4KHQ record times now is inconsistent and unpredictable... simply useless.


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 11, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


1080p/120 option was hinted by a number of CR forum members


----------



## Whowe (Aug 11, 2020)

wockawocka said:


> Instead of making it all about video, how about god damn uncompressed Mraw Canon.


I am assuming Mraw is the "Medium size RAW" format, that is uncompressed but saved in a reduced resolution (pixels).

Do you not like the quality of the compressed RAW format option? I have been quite impressed with it and it is a lot smaller file size. I think I get a better image with less loss of detail in that format than a reduced pixel size RAW. (I am just starting to shoot with this format since my other camera was 7Dii and did not have it.) 

Remember, just because it is uncompressed does not mean that Mraw does not lose information. It has to get rid of and/or combine pixels somehow to get to a smaller resolution.


----------



## neo302 (Aug 11, 2020)

DBounce said:


> It will certainly kill it if the problem is resolved. The recovery time is the real problem.


Yes! The recovery time makes no sense.


----------



## Go Wild (Aug 11, 2020)

Hope for good news! 

As a firmware wishes: 

- I would prefer cinemarawlight to 4k, but would be good to 8k either.
- For my needs I don´t really need [email protected] (Why would someone need if you have 4k120, just use 4k even for 1080 projects. 
- Would LOVE C-log3! 
- Would LOVE [email protected] could be recorded externally, but I guess with this micro hdmi it can´t be possible...
- About overheating, I didn´t have any problems yet, but yes, I must confess that the fear of overheating is always present....  So if Canon manage to get more recording time it will be great!! 

- As a global opinion, I am loving this camera! Stills are wonderful and video is amazing!


----------



## Sharlin (Aug 11, 2020)

DBounce said:


> At minimum the following should be added:
> 
> 4K HQ @24p internal recording without recording time limits.



How exactly do you propose to do that? It’s like 8K but with extra computation required to downsample into 4K


----------



## alexvaltchev (Aug 11, 2020)

Kjsheldo said:


> Cinema Raw Light is Canon's own compressed raw codec, first introduced on the C200 and now present in C500II, C300III, and 1DX Mark III. It's similar to Black Magic Raw in that it is a compressed raw codec giving you raw image quality without the giant file sizes. BM Raw has more compression options (5:1, 8:1, 12:1, etc), but Canon's is a fixed compression that works out to be around 4:1 or so. So, file sizes are still big, but not nearly as big as straight raw. Adding this would probably double or triple your record times in 8k on the R5, which would be very welcome.


4 times smaller RAW video wounds awesome, but since there will be compression wouldn't that impact heat generation and worsen the problem?


----------



## Mike the cat (Aug 11, 2020)

StevenA said:


> Would have liked to have seen 1080p 240fps w/dpaf II on that list.


I remember the speculation of 1080 240fps before the announcement, so it's a shame the R5 doesn't at least have a 1080 120fps option yet. I'm not on the hate train at all and I can't wait for my pre-order to arrive, but at the very least it'd be nice to have a fall back 120fps option when overheating hits.


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 11, 2020)

Whowe said:


> I am assuming Mraw is the "Medium size RAW" format, that is uncompressed but saved in a reduced resolution (pixels).
> [..]



The previous incarnations of MRAW and SRAW aren't really RAW: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/906367/2#8553893


----------



## Stanly (Aug 11, 2020)

Sharlin said:


> How exactly do you propose to do that? It’s like 8K but with extra computation required to downsample into 4K


That might be quite possible depending on what is the reason for rec limit. Camera can record 4+ hours of external 4K HQ, while dropping to 0 minutes during menu browsing with internal set-up.


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 11, 2020)

alexvaltchev said:


> 4 times smaller RAW video wounds awesome, but since there will be compression wouldn't that impact heat generation and worsen the problem?


4 times smaller RAW video will greatly reduces CFE bandwidth utilisation. Meaning much less heat generated. CFE overheating seems is the bigger Issue here


----------



## DBounce (Aug 11, 2020)

Funny, the biggest “bugs” on the list are all artificial: overheat warning, crippled dynamic range due to C-Log with max DR of 12 stops, recording limits, no 8K out... even though HDMI 2.0 supports 8K @30p, etc...


----------



## Sharlin (Aug 11, 2020)

wockawocka said:


> Instead of making it all about video, how about god damn uncompressed Mraw Canon.


Nobody has yet proposed how it is possible to have non-debayered downsampled RAW. Canon’s old MRAW and SRAW never were real RAW, they were already debayered and thus had little of the flexibility of real RAW when it comes to color adjustment.


----------



## gzroxas (Aug 11, 2020)

wockawocka said:


> Instead of making it all about video, how about god damn uncompressed Mraw Canon.


I will support another commenter by saying that you should try CRAW.
Numerous tests show that the raw files between RAW and CRAW are identical in degree of manipulation in photo editing tools and give the same sharpness and colors. The only differences can be seen when pushing shadows a lot at ISO 6400 and up, and it’s not a very significant difference. All this with a reduction of 40% in size. 
I don’t think you’ll miss your MRaw which, as other people have mentioned, will also require some degree of in camera manipulation and degradation


----------



## DBounce (Aug 11, 2020)

Sharlin said:


> How exactly do you propose to do that? It’s like 8K but with extra computation required to downsample into 4K


You don’t seem to get it. This camera is not shutting down due to overheating, it’s shutting down because Canon coded the firmware to make the headline features unusable. This is no mistake or oversight. It could never have passed testing if this was not deliberate.


----------



## BeenThere (Aug 11, 2020)

DBounce said:


> You don’t seem to get it. This camera is not shutting down due to overheating, it’s shutting down because Canon coded the firmware to make the headline features unusable. This is no mistake or oversight. It could never have passed testing if this was not deliberate.


Looks like you are the only one who gets it.


----------



## scyrene (Aug 11, 2020)

vjlex said:


> Let's hope this will kill all the talk about overheating once and for all.



It won't, because the talk is largely motivated by people who have a vested interest in keeping it going, whether it's a genuine issue or not.


----------



## miketcool (Aug 11, 2020)

CLog3 is great (for those who like to color grade)

I only have a few menu items or UI items to nitpick, like being able to add a few more functions to buttons, or being able to split dial customization for AV/TV/M mode. I like being able to use the back wheel for quick AF switching in AV mode. For now I’m relying on C1 to remember that so it doesn’t rob my M mode of aperture. I use top dial for exposure adjustment.

Also, I would love to get a precision focus for infinity (imagine as you slow your focus, the range expands and lets you find the actual infinity point and lock it). The last one is easiest, can we get the zoom indicator on the display or viewfinder? I’d like to know what I’m zoomed to without looking at the lens.


----------



## Baron_Karza (Aug 11, 2020)

most of these firmware updates will be out before R6 ships. And the next batch of R5 will be shipped out with it. That's what my friend working at Canon told me last week.


----------



## David_E (Aug 11, 2020)

Richard Anthony said:


> _Not if the record times aren't extended beyond much what they are now_


Those who use this camera as a _camera_ see no problem with “record times.” Works like a mule all day long in 95F ambient without a hitch.

R5 with EF 100mm macro. Looking directly into the early evening sun with soft fill from a Profoto A1X and Profoto Soft Bounce at camera left, Profoto AirRemote TTL-C.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 11, 2020)

DBounce said:


> ...it’s shutting down because Canon coded the firmware to make the headline features unusable.


----------



## lightingb (Aug 11, 2020)

Whaaaa no FullHD 120p? We need a fallback because 4k120 overheats so quickly!


----------



## Richard Anthony (Aug 11, 2020)

David_E said:


> Those who use this camera as a _camera_ see no problem with “record times.” Works like a mule all day long in 95F ambient without a hitch.
> 
> View attachment 192084


We are not talking photos though are we , no one has ever complained about the camera side of the R5 just the video issues .


----------



## vignes (Aug 11, 2020)

DBounce said:


> Funny, the biggest “bugs” on the list are all artificial: overheat warning, crippled dynamic range due to C-Log with max DR of 12 stops, recording limits, no 8K out... even though HDMI 2.0 supports 8K @30p, etc...


it's intentional...
Let me explain, they gave a bit of everything (taste platter) for those Canon users and once they taste it ... now please go buy the cine line.
think about it, those RF lens are huge investment... the users are locked in. they have no choice but to buy those RF cine's
it kind of looks like Canon is not interested with the hybrid (with more video use) market... it's either stills (1DX, R5) or pro video (Cine line).


----------



## Deleted member 384473 (Aug 11, 2020)

vjlex said:


> Let's hope this will kill all the talk about overheating once and for all.


How


----------



## Mike9129 (Aug 11, 2020)

I hope they add some kind of Raw option for 4k or 1080p

I mean, if you had 1080p available to record in RAW (24, 50 & 120fps) along with the lite raw code, I think that could cover 90% of what mostly anyone would want to do with the camera

Clog3 to bring the available dynamic range up to snuff (I think I read its stuck around 11 with clog and clog 3 should bring that up by at least 1 stop?)

throw in maybe 4k RAW as an option,

Do something about recovery times on the camera

a7siii killer right there


----------



## Deleted member 384473 (Aug 11, 2020)

wockawocka said:


> Instead of making it all about video, how about god damn uncompressed Mraw Canon.


Relax.


----------



## bbasiaga (Aug 11, 2020)

is it possible they can lower the sale price by about $1k with this firmware update? lol. I really want this camera, but I don't think its really financially feasible at this point.


----------



## canonnews (Aug 11, 2020)

Mike9129 said:


> throw in maybe 4k RAW as an option,


you going to be fine with a 1.9x crop factor (or whatever it is?)


----------



## Deleted member 384473 (Aug 11, 2020)

vignes said:


> it's intentional...
> Let me explain, they gave a bit of everything (taste platter) for those Canon users and once they taste it ... now please go buy the cine line.
> think about it, those RF lens are huge investment... the users are locked in. they have no choice but to buy those RF cine's
> it kind of looks like Canon is not interested with the hybrid (with more video use) market... it's either stills (1DX, R5) or pro video (Cine line).


Really easy to sell RF glass and lose very little. Hear that Canon???

*crickets*


----------



## IVS (Aug 11, 2020)

Baron_Karza said:


> most of these firmware updates will be out before R6 ships. And the next batch of R5 will be shipped out with it. That's what my friend working at Canon told me last week.


Did your friend happen to mention anything about the potential ALL-I firmware update for the R6 ? The R5 is a bit spicy for my pocket but and R6 I might consider if I'm motivated enough over the IPB limitations in my 90D. Many thanks in advance for your kind reply.


----------



## canonnews (Aug 11, 2020)

DBounce said:


> This camera is not shutting down due to overheating, it’s shutting down because Canon coded the firmware to make the headline features unusable.



Yes, it's to protect their full frame 8K CINI lineup. Of course. Btw, it's shutting down because of overheating.


----------



## dichterDichter (Aug 11, 2020)

it would be funny if they would let users set the temp limits. for example if you care about card temps or not.


----------



## amorse (Aug 11, 2020)

Richard Anthony said:


> We are not talking photos though are we , no one has ever complained about the camera side of the R5 just the video issues .


Here's a hot take (and completely selfish to be clear) - all the overheating concerns for video don't really bother me because all the outcomes from reaction to the issue are positive or neutral for me:

If people don't care and the camera sells fine - great, Canon goes about their business and I keep shooting photos (neutral)
If people do care about overheating and the camera misses sales marks - great, Canon considers steeper discounting early on the body and I get one for cheaper (beneficial) 
I'm ok with either of those scenarios, frankly!


----------



## Andreasb (Aug 11, 2020)

To me as a retired marketer, it seems obvious what Canon will do to deal with this is:

Announce a very tasty Cineline RF mount camera with much less recovery problems etc.
At the same time or a day after announce a "coming" firmware update for the R5 & 6 to make it a little better, but not much better so that impedes the new Cineline RF camera (and that's a mistake because it will p-s off existing users even more?)


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 11, 2020)

alexvaltchev said:


> What is Mraw? Is that for video or photo?




*M-RAW*

Introduced with the EOS 7D, and also on the EOS-1D Mark IV, M-RAW provides all the advantages of a RAW file, but in a smaller file size. Depending on the camera an M-RAW file has approximately between 55-60% of the pixel count and approximately two thirds the file size of a RAW image. Like RAW images, M-RAW images can be adjusted and processed with Canon’s Digital Photo Professional software (free in the box with the camera). Shooting M-RAW files might appeal to wedding photographers who don’t need full resolution for wedding candids, but who do want the post-production control that RAW offers. It could also be of use to sports/action photographers who will get an increase in the number of frames when shooting in bursts due to using a smaller file size. M-RAW is also worth considering if you are not planning to make prints larger than A3 size.


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 11, 2020)

Mike the cat said:


> R5 doesn't at least have a 1080 120fps option yet.




Yet?

They haven't even filled the pre-orders "yet" and the camera is barely a month past release.

Wow.


----------



## Paul Nordin (Aug 11, 2020)

Kjsheldo said:


> Cinema Raw Light is Canon's own compressed raw codec, first introduced on the C200 and now present in C500II, C300III, and 1DX Mark III. It's similar to Black Magic Raw in that it is a compressed raw codec giving you raw image quality without the giant file sizes. BM Raw has more compression options (5:1, 8:1, 12:1, etc), but Canon's is a fixed compression that works out to be around 4:1 or so. So, file sizes are still big, but not nearly as big as straight raw. Adding this would probably double or triple your record times in 8k on the R5, which would be very welcome.


In addition is what I consider to be the most important benefit of CRL: Lower bandwith/frame sizes. That will create a chain reaction of goodness, including less stress/heat on the CFexpress card.


----------



## alexvaltchev (Aug 11, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> *M-RAW*
> 
> Introduced with the EOS 7D, and also on the EOS-1D Mark IV, M-RAW provides all the advantages of a RAW file, but in smaller file size. Depending on the camera an M-RAW file has approximately between 55-60% of the pixel count and approximately two thirds the file size of a RAW image. Like RAW images, M-RAW images can be adjusted and processed with Canon’s Digital Photo Professional software (free in the box with the camera). Shooting M-RAW files might appeal to wedding photographers who don’t need a full resolution for wedding candids, but who do want the post-production control that RAW offers. It could also be of use to sports/action photographers who will get an increase in the number of frames when shooting in bursts due to using a smaller file size. M-RAW is also worth considering if you are not planning to make prints larger than A3 size.


I thought that is a CRAW, like in the EOS R camera?


----------



## RunAndGun (Aug 11, 2020)

Mike9129 said:


> I hope they add some kind of Raw option for 4k or 1080p
> 
> I mean, if you had 1080p available to record in RAW (24, 50 & 120fps) along with the lite raw code, I think that could cover 90% of what mostly anyone would want to do with the camera
> 
> ...



Only way to add RAW for 1080 or 4K would be to crop the sensor for (to) those resolutions.


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 11, 2020)

HEY STILLS SHOOTERS!


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 11, 2020)

alexvaltchev said:


> I thought that is a CRAW, like in the EOS R camera?




Straight off the Canon site my friend. You decide. I had to go and read about it myself. It's not something I can see myself wanting but it isn't about me.


----------



## Paul Nordin (Aug 11, 2020)

vignes said:


> it's intentional...
> Let me explain, they gave a bit of everything (taste platter) for those Canon users and once they taste it ... now please go buy the cine line.
> think about it, those RF lens are huge investment... the users are locked in. they have no choice but to buy those RF cine's
> it kind of looks like Canon is not interested with the hybrid (with more video use) market... it's either stills (1DX, R5) or pro video (Cine line).



I think what you are stating here is paranoia and not based on real-world testing. I have been working with the R5for 2 weeks now, and have shot several projects with it. I shoot a lot of narrative feature work and will absolutely use the R5 as a B-Cam or C-Cam. Having that little camera on set and being able to basically pull it out of my back pocket and grab 8k RAW b-roll that can cut in with Red or Arri A-Cam footage is a huge benefit to me. I don't need to use it to shoot talking head docs or youtube videos...thats ridiculous. Yes, the R5 has less DR than the A-Cams, but being able to take steps to mitigate those differences with lighting/framing care is part of why I get paid. Getting the high quality 8k Raw and 4k HQ on a small mirrorless that can also shoot with my A-Cam primes with a PL adapter is simply freeing. On top of that, I can take the R5 with the A-Cam lenses on location scouts and capture pre-production stills with the director of a quality that extremely accurately show what we need to add/change in the frame on the day of.

When you shoot 5minutes of 8k RAW and eject the CFexpress card, and its too hot to hold, it becomes quite obvious that limits are not marketing ploys to sell more cinema cams. For those of us working in serious cinema, its crazy to even consider using the R5 or any of the other hybrids as an A-Cam. There is far too much at stake cost and time wise for each setup. Cinema cams have their target use. I'm very excited though, to be able to supplement them with the R5, which opens up possibilities.


----------



## tomislavmoze (Aug 11, 2020)

I personally would like them not to address the record times except the 30 minutes limit but rather focus on shorting the recovery times. Ok would be nice if 4k60 would be able to film without the limit. 
Where the 1080p 120 disappeared it was mention by Jared Polin at the launch. He said it came straight from canon.


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 11, 2020)

Paul Nordin said:


> I think what you are stating here is paranoia and not based on real-world testing. I have been working with the R5for 2 weeks now, and have shot several projects with it. I shoot a lot of narrative feature work and will absolutely use the R5 as a B-Cam or C-Cam. Having that little camera on set and being able to basically pull it out of my back pocket and grab 8k RAW b-roll that can cut in with Red or Arri A-Cam footage is a huge benefit to me. I don't need to use it to shoot talking head docs or youtube videos...thats ridiculous. Yes, the R5 has less DR than the A-Cams, but being able to take steps to mitigate those differences with lighting/framing care is part of why I get paid. Getting the high quality 8k Raw and 4k HQ on a small mirrorless that can also shoot with my A-Cam primes with a PL adapter is simply freeing. On top of that, I can take the R5 with the A-Cam lenses on location scouts and capture pre-production stills with the director of a quality that extremely accurately show what we need to add/change in the frame on the day of.
> 
> When you shoot 5minutes of 8k RAW and eject the CFexpress card, and its too hot to hold, it becomes quite obvious that limits are not marketing ploys to sell more cinema cams. For those of us working in serious cinema, its crazy to even consider using the R5 or any of the other hybrids as an A-Cam. There is far too much at stake cost and time wise for each setup. Cinema cams have their target use. I'm very excited though, to be able to supplement them with the R5, which opens up possibilities.




That was a good read right there.


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 11, 2020)

tomislavmoze said:


> Where the 1080p 120 disappeared it was mention by Jared Polin at the launch. He said it came straight from canon.





Jared Polin SCREAMED it so it must be so. You make my point for me.


----------



## kafala (Aug 11, 2020)

Now we just need All-i on the R6 and Aperture and Shutter priority for video recording on the R6. The EOS R and R5 have those options.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 11, 2020)

StevenA said:


> Would have liked to have seen 1080p 240fps w/dpaf II on that list.



I'd be happy just to see 1080p 120fps, but sure, I'll take 240. (I suspect 120 would work on an SD card.)


----------



## xps (Aug 11, 2020)

I´d like to see more freedom in buttons customization. 
And an really small AF-spot, like in the pictogram - like the 5DIV has.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 11, 2020)

First it was, “Who needs 8k? “

Now, apparently, everyone needs it... and with unlimited recording times.


----------



## tomislavmoze (Aug 11, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> Jared Polin said it so it must be so. You make my point for me.


He was not the only one that said it, but considering we are here on the rumour site, commenting rumours a one that came from one of the bigger review channels should be noted, also I think he was quoting a canon ambassador, have to find it out it was in one of the video he made. Also I think it was mentioned here also.


----------



## wockawocka (Aug 11, 2020)

alexvaltchev said:


> What is Mraw? Is that for video or photo?



Mraw is a smaller dimensioned raw file. So instead for 45mp it would be 30mp.



Whowe said:


> I am assuming Mraw is the "Medium size RAW" format, that is uncompressed but saved in a reduced resolution (pixels).
> 
> Do you not like the quality of the compressed RAW format option? I have been quite impressed with it and it is a lot smaller file size. I think I get a better image with less loss of detail in that format than a reduced pixel size RAW. (I am just starting to shoot with this format since my other camera was 7Dii and did not have it.)
> 
> Remember, just because it is uncompressed does not mean that Mraw does not lose information. It has to get rid of and/or combine pixels somehow to get to a smaller resolution.



Kinda, but sadly Mraw was compressed with less dynamic range. The 5DSr had it but two shots of the same scene looked different and had different dynamic range between the Full raw and Mraw.

Craw doesn't address the image size in pixel dimensions and is still compressed and still ahs less dynamic range. 

Why Canon doesn't offer something that pixel bins every other pixel to reduce the size but isn't compressed is beyond me.


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 11, 2020)

tomislavmoze said:


> He was not the only one that said it, but considering we are here on the rumour site, commenting rumours a one that came from one of the bigger review channels should be noted, also I think he was quoting a canon ambassador, have to find it out it was in one of the video he made. Also I think it was mentioned here also.




Actually no. What I have read since launch is a whole lot of people getting really really upset when the RUMORS didn't turn out to be the FACTS.

That's what I see.

At my age I would have hoped to have learned a lot more than I have, but one thing that I did learn was to believe none of what you hear and only half of what you see until you get whatever it is in your own hot little hands and witness it for yourself.

But that's me.

I also learned that if it moves you should salute it and if it doesn't move you should paint it, but that's a Navy story for another time.

I feel slighted that my R5 pre-order doesn't come with a 100-500L kit lens at no extra charge. Is there a thread for that?


----------



## Mike9129 (Aug 11, 2020)

canonnews said:


> you going to be fine with a 1.9x crop factor (or whatever it is?)


Well, I'll put it to you this way

The best DP I know shoots on a C300 mii with EF glass. So effectively with thex1.7 crop for 4k raw plus the rf full frame glass, youd end up with a similar focal length to what he uses. 

Most shots in commercial settings are closeups of the subject to make it a bit more abstract or focus on the eyes/action, for which the extra reach would be welcome. 

I know you'll want your wide shots too, but the Ef-s glass is an option for the wide shot. 

I'm all for more options


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 11, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> Jared Polin said it so it must be so. You make my point for me.








キヤノン：EOS R5 ｜ 動画撮影


ミラーレスカメラEOS R5の動画撮影をご紹介しているページです。




cweb.canon.jp





Google translate:



Assuming google translate is correct, it doesn't make any hard promises.


----------



## tomislavmoze (Aug 11, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> Actually no. What I have read since launch is a whole lot of people getting really really upset when the RUMORS didn't turn out to be the FACTS.
> 
> That's what I see.
> 
> ...


man you have a problem.


----------



## Jordan23 (Aug 11, 2020)

DBounce said:


> Funny, the biggest “bugs” on the list are all artificial: overheat warning, crippled dynamic range due to C-Log with max DR of 12 stops, recording limits, no 8K out... even though HDMI 2.0 supports 8K @30p, etc...


Well, HDMI 2.0 only supports 8K30P 8-bit, 4:2:0, no HDR, and that's a huge downgrade from 8K 12 bit 4:2:2. HDMI 2.0 only supports 8K UHD ( 7680 x 4320 ) and not 8K DCI (8192 x 4320). Unless there's a HDMI 2.1 in the R5 now enabled in a future firmware update (or possible with a future hardware upgrade) there won't be 8K or 4K120P available for external recording.


----------



## sobrien (Aug 11, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> Jared Polin said it so it must be so. You make my point for me.



I’ve seen a blog (not by JP) outlining the weirdness of the 1080 120fps situation with the R5. Apparently it was mentioned in Canon documentation as an included spec at one stage but subsequently and somewhat mysteriously disappeared. More in the line of conspiracy than rumour. Either way it is an odd omission and one that would be great to see rectified.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 11, 2020)

Mike9129 said:


> I know you'll want your wide shots too, but the Ef-s glass is an option for the wide shot.


?????


----------



## karchner14 (Aug 11, 2020)

Even if they improve record times limited by heat, they still need to remove the EU 29:59 record limit!


----------



## Jordan23 (Aug 11, 2020)

canonnews said:


> you going to be fine with a 1.9x crop factor (or whatever it is?)


It's 1.6x crop. 
I wouldn't mind 5.1K RAW 12 bit 4:2:2 at all. 
I hope Canon find a way to enable 4K120P in crop-mode as well, high quality and you get the added reach for wildlife.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 11, 2020)

Paul Nordin said:


> When you shoot 5minutes of 8k RAW and eject the CFexpress card, and its too hot to hold, it becomes quite obvious that limits are not marketing ploys to sell more cinema cams. For those of us working in serious cinema, its crazy to even consider using the R5 or any of the other hybrids as an A-Cam. There is far too much at stake cost and time wise for each setup. Cinema cams have their target use. I'm very excited though, to be able to supplement them with the R5, which opens up possibilities.



And how many damn fools have tried to claim precisely that they are marketing ploys, just on this thread? Some people are so full of it.


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 11, 2020)

tomislavmoze said:


> man you have a problem.




I have many. I can make you a list. Luckily, being butt-hurt by false promises from paid YouTubers isn't one of them.


----------



## DBounce (Aug 11, 2020)

Mike9129 said:


> I hope they add some kind of Raw option for 4k or 1080p
> 
> I mean, if you had 1080p available to record in RAW (24, 50 & 120fps) along with the lite raw code, I think that could cover 90% of what mostly anyone would want to do with the camera
> 
> ...


It would have to be cropped not oversampled as raw is not processed.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 11, 2020)

Another vote/hope for additional button customization.

The "Rate" button is utterly useless to me and cannot be reassigned.


----------



## vignes (Aug 11, 2020)

Paul Nordin said:


> I think what you are stating here is paranoia and not based on real-world testing. I have been working with the R5for 2 weeks now, and have shot several projects with it. I shoot a lot of narrative feature work and will absolutely use the R5 as a B-Cam or C-Cam. Having that little camera on set and being able to basically pull it out of my back pocket and grab 8k RAW b-roll that can cut in with Red or Arri A-Cam footage is a huge benefit to me. I don't need to use it to shoot talking head docs or youtube videos...thats ridiculous. Yes, the R5 has less DR than the A-Cams, but being able to take steps to mitigate those differences with lighting/framing care is part of why I get paid. Getting the high quality 8k Raw and 4k HQ on a small mirrorless that can also shoot with my A-Cam primes with a PL adapter is simply freeing. On top of that, I can take the R5 with the A-Cam lenses on location scouts and capture pre-production stills with the director of a quality that extremely accurately show what we need to add/change in the frame on the day of.
> 
> When you shoot 5minutes of 8k RAW and eject the CFexpress card, and its too hot to hold, it becomes quite obvious that limits are not marketing ploys to sell more cinema cams. For those of us working in serious cinema, its crazy to even consider using the R5 or any of the other hybrids as an A-Cam. There is far too much at stake cost and time wise for each setup. Cinema cams have their target use. I'm very excited though, to be able to supplement them with the R5, which opens up possibilities.


this is how I read it... its an open forum and it's my opinion but look if you feel good about Canon and how they produced the R5... it's your opinion but don't start a reply like this, okay.

again... not sure why blame the CFE-B cards. Canon has used it in 1DXIII and they know the characteristics of CFE-B card. So, there is no reason to put the blame on the card and how it works.
the same card is used in different models and brands... so it's Canon inadequacies or ignorance to be blamed.


----------



## Mike9129 (Aug 11, 2020)

DBounce said:


> It would have to be cropped not oversampled as raw is not processed.


Point taken

I'm not up to date on my workings of cameras, I just know the results I want!

I wonder if they could deliver the existing 4k HQ in a prores package instead of h.265. 

Probably more processing?


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 11, 2020)

sobrien said:


> Either way it is an odd omission and one that would be great to see rectified.



I don't disagree. 

My point is how something that was mentioned by someone, somewhere, at some time somehow becomes transformed into something cited as fact, and then the outrage and complaining that follows when whatever was said whenever it was said doesn't show up in reality when the final product hits the streets.

By the way - I was over on Reddit and saw an incredible video in 4K120 of two bees flying head-on into each other in slow motion with the caption MAYDAY-MAYDAY!

Now I know what everyone wants to use their R5 for. I can't imagine the number of takes that took.


----------



## DBounce (Aug 11, 2020)

canonnews said:


> Yes, it's to protect their full frame 8K CINI lineup. Of course. Btw, it's shutting down because of overheating.


And no 8K raw over HDMI why? No technical reason not to enable that one. So why leave it out if nothing to protect?


----------



## Tyler_CR13 (Aug 11, 2020)

Hoping they increase the 7minute recording limit for high frame rates...Audio recording at high frame rates would be nice too.


----------



## Mike9129 (Aug 11, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> ?????


Which part is wrong? That sigma 18-35 1.8 is a great lens that would fix the issue with having to work with the x1.7 crop (someone mentioned x1.6 as well, so I'm not sure which is correct) for the wide shots.

More to the point, if theres a PL mount adapter for the R5 that you can mount super 35 sized glass onto, wouldnt that then work perfectly with the crop for 4k?

Do I have that wrong? Let me know, I'm my head it should...


----------



## karchner14 (Aug 11, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Another vote/hope for additional button customization.
> 
> The "Rate" button is utterly useless to me and cannot be reassigned.


I have that on my list too


----------



## Matthew19 (Aug 11, 2020)

Andreasb said:


> To me as a retired marketer, it seems obvious what Canon will do to deal with this is:
> 
> Announce a very tasty Cineline RF mount camera with much less recovery problems etc.
> At the same time or a day after announce a "coming" firmware update for the R5 & 6 to make it a little better, but not much better so that impedes the new Cineline RF camera (and that's a mistake because it will p-s off existing users even more?)



This makes sense. Canon is creating a problem and then solving it, framing the overheating as the enemy, not the company itself.


----------



## TAF (Aug 11, 2020)

landon said:


> If they do the bug fixes correctly, then the R5 = a7iv + a7r4 + a7siii.
> Just needs 1080-120p/240p, 1hr record limit in basic 24p recording .



1080/240 would be the thing that gets me to open my wallet later in the year when inventory has stabilized...

VGA/480 or faster would have me hunting for one now.


----------



## Stu_bert (Aug 11, 2020)

DBounce said:


> At minimum the following should be added:
> 
> 8K output over HDMI... this should be easy on the system as no compression needed and HDMI 2.0 supports 8K @30p. So no excuses not to enable it.
> 4K HQ @24p internal recording without recording time limits.
> ...


It does (HDMI) but it's not supported by any of the current external recorders.


DBounce said:


> Funny, the biggest “bugs” on the list are all artificial: overheat warning, crippled dynamic range due to C-Log with max DR of 12 stops, recording limits, no 8K out... even though HDMI 2.0 supports 8K @30p, etc...


Yep I said this a while back, yet no one supports it. Why? Cause probably the overhead of processing 8K is a design challenge even on an external recorder....


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 11, 2020)

vignes said:


> again... not sure why blame the CFE-B cards.




He didn't blame the cards. He cited them as a point of fact.


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 11, 2020)

Stu_bert said:


> It does (HDMI) but it's not supported by any of the
> 
> Yep I said this a while back, yet no one supports it. Why? Cause probably the overhead of processing 8K is a design challenge even on an external recorder....


Because HDMI 2.0 does not support [email protected] 10bit 4:2:2?


----------



## tomislavmoze (Aug 11, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> I have many. I can make you a list. Luckily, being butt-hurt by false promises from paid YouTubers isn't one of them.


well not sure where you got the idea I was butt-hurt, I was just asking about something that one reviewer mention (I personally don't like him but still think that he does really objective reviews). Also I knew I saw it here also https://www.canonrumors.com/feature...e-for-both-the-canon-eos-r5-and-canon-eos-r6/


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 11, 2020)

tomislavmoze said:


> well not sure where you got the idea I was butt-hurt, I was just asking about something that one reviewer mention (I personally don't like him but still think that he does really objective reviews). Also I knew I saw it here also https://www.canonrumors.com/feature...e-for-both-the-canon-eos-r5-and-canon-eos-r6/


the feature was likely removed in firmware v1.0 due to a bug or a “condition“ identified. Likely fixed now and will be included in upcoming firmware release.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 11, 2020)

Mike9129 said:


> Which part is wrong? That sigma 18-35 1.8 is a great lens that would fix the issue with having to work with the x1.7 crop (someone mentioned x1.6 as well, so I'm not sure which is correct) for the wide shots.
> 
> More to the point, if theres a PL mount adapter for the R5 that you can mount super 35 sized glass onto, wouldnt that then work perfectly with the crop for 4k?
> 
> Do I have that wrong? Let me know, I'm my head it should...


I never said you were wrong. I’m simply trying to wrap my head around why one would choose an EF-s lens to get the wide shot when there is wide EF glass. EF-s doesn’t make a lens wider and the camera crops it... making it narrower. Could be I am picturing the whole discussion wrongly. I also had no idea there was such an animal as “Super 35” sized glass. All Canon cinema super 35 sensor cameras use EF glass or something else adapted.


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 11, 2020)

tomislavmoze said:


> well not sure where you got the idea I was butt-hurt, I was just asking about something that one reviewer mention (I personally don't like him but still think that he does really objective reviews). Also I knew I saw it here also https://www.canonrumors.com/feature...e-for-both-the-canon-eos-r5-and-canon-eos-r6/



I didn't say you were butt hurt, I said I didn't get butt-hurt. You made the connection.

The point stands. People listen to YouTubers talking about this or that and the next thing you know it comes out as 'fact' somewhere.

Jared Polin might have made the claim. Granted - let's say he did. 

Did he follow up to confirm it? 

Did he let people know that this supposed rumor or point of fact that he learned through a conversation he may or may not have had with a "Canon Ambassador" wasn't showing up on the early spec sheets he was supposedly seeing?

And oh by the way, who was the "Canon Ambassador" and was he stating a fact or just talking smack over his fourth tequila shooter of the night?

Did Polin just as readily let the viewers know that it wasn't going to happen at launch?

Nope. Spit it and forget it. 

Like most YouTubers, he put it out there and the eager (mostly very young) masses grabbed it hung on to it like a dog with it's favorite toy.

Fast-forward to reality and it isn't there and all of a sudden it's a promise broken. Not that there was ever really a promise made in the first place.

When someone mentions a YouTuber as a point of reference for a 'fact' I'm very, very skeptical if not dismissive.


----------



## Stu_bert (Aug 11, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> Because HDMI 2.0 does not support [email protected] 10bit 4:2:2?


Yep I said that also in my earlier posts....

Only recorder I could find which supports any 8K is the Atomos Neon and I don't believe the module has been released. Most of the recorders I looked at, stopped at 4k60p

HDMI supports 4K120, again, 4:2:0 only, and the only Sony camera which does 4k120 to the Ninja sends it as 4k60p....

So no RAW support, no 8k support, no 120 support for external. And maybe that's cause there hasn't been a need, or maybe cause it's difficult to design. Probably why Canon either dropped the feature(s) or design it to work internal with the associated heat implications.


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 11, 2020)

Stu_bert said:


> Yep I said that also in my earlier posts....
> 
> Only recorder I could find which supports any 8K is the Atomos Neon and I don't believe the module has been released. Most of the recorders I looked at, stopped at 4k60p
> 
> ...




No response just wanted to say I like your signature.


----------



## Mike the cat (Aug 11, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> Yet?
> 
> They haven't even filled the pre-orders "yet" and the camera is barely a month past release.
> 
> Wow.



Yikes, no need to clutch your pearls friend; why so defensive? Yes 'yet': as in I acknowledge they likely will add it and that I was surprised it wasn't implemented on release, as were others. Like I said; I'm not on the hate train (tried to make that abundantly clear to prevent exactly your response). Read a little closer and redirect your outrage at people who are actually throwing their toys out of the pram. There are plenty of them here.

I'm all about the stills but would like to dabble in video making, so this will be the perfect hybrid camera for me when it arrives, especially once they add 1080 120fps (which they haven't implemented YET). That said, enjoy your R5 when it arrives if it hasn't already. I know I will .


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 11, 2020)

Mike the cat said:


> clutch your pearls friend




How did you know.? Good response and point taken.


----------



## Stu_bert (Aug 11, 2020)

Plus, CFExpress - maybe it just gets hot cause that's it's only option to manage the heat generated other than throttling I/O.... It may well be how it is designed - you want the speed, you have to accept the thermal implications and it gets hot. Uses metal to help dissipate the heat quicker. I have not read anyone suggesting CFX in a reader stops working, just that it gets damned hot. 

Is it the main culprit for the overheat CFE? Could be. I originally thought it was encoding & downsampling and I/O. Maybe the CFE does the most. Yet I have not heaard that the UHS II are too hot to touch, and yet they don't affect the recording times much. And the only difference between the 24HQ (overheats internally) and the normal 24p is the downsampling - the bit-rates are the same I believe.

Unless someone has a way to measure the internal heat of each component while they are testing each of the modes, not sure how we can prove it definitively.

Btw, if Cinerawlight is maybe 1/4 of Raw, then it is still in the ballpark of 8K IPB ie 650Mbps, and I thought all the 8k modes overheat?


----------



## Mike9129 (Aug 11, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I never said you were wrong. I’m simply trying to wrap my head around why one would choose an EF-s lens to get the wide shot when there is wide EF glass. EF-s doesn’t make a lens wider and the camera crops it... making it narrower. Could be I am picturing the whole discussion wrongly. I also had no idea there was such an animal as “Super 35” sized glass. All Canon cinema super 35 sensor cameras use EF glass.


It's just if you had to use a lens to get the most out of the sensor crop. Efs has a smaller image circle that would cover the 1.7 times crop perfectly if we had 4k raw.

If you use EF glass on the super 35 sensors your focal length changes (x1.6 or x1.7 times, it's been a while since I was in the aps-c game so I cant remember)

Basically it comes down to that if you use a 1.7 times crop on a full frame sensor, you end up with a effective (used) sensor size the same as an aps-c/super35 camera has natively. So glass that fits that mount natively would not have any crop when using 4k raw (with crop) on the R5' FF sensor.

That's what I was getting at.

As far as I'm aware, there is PL glass that has image circles to suit the aps-c/super35 sized sensors, which would work really nicely on the R5 if it had 4k that needed the crop.


----------



## alexvaltchev (Aug 11, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Another vote/hope for additional button customization.
> 
> The "Rate" button is utterly useless to me and cannot be reassigned.


true that! I was hoping for backlit buttons as well, so we can easily see them in the dark but well, maybe in EOS R5 mark II


----------



## Stu_bert (Aug 11, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> No response just wanted to say I like your signature.


thank you.


----------



## Stu_bert (Aug 11, 2020)

alexvaltchev said:


> true that! I was hoping for backlit buttons as well, so we can easily see them in the dark but well, maybe in EOS R5 mark II


Can't you just use a torch / back of smartphone and not want things that increase the thermal envelope? Joke !!!!


----------



## marathonman (Aug 11, 2020)

Paul Nordin said:


> I think what you are stating here is paranoia and not based on real-world testing. I have been working with the R5for 2 weeks now, and have shot several projects with it. I shoot a lot of narrative feature work and will absolutely use the R5 as a B-Cam or C-Cam. Having that little camera on set and being able to basically pull it out of my back pocket and grab 8k RAW b-roll that can cut in with Red or Arri A-Cam footage is a huge benefit to me. I don't need to use it to shoot talking head docs or youtube videos...thats ridiculous. Yes, the R5 has less DR than the A-Cams, but being able to take steps to mitigate those differences with lighting/framing care is part of why I get paid. Getting the high quality 8k Raw and 4k HQ on a small mirrorless that can also shoot with my A-Cam primes with a PL adapter is simply freeing. On top of that, I can take the R5 with the A-Cam lenses on location scouts and capture pre-production stills with the director of a quality that extremely accurately show what we need to add/change in the frame on the day of.
> 
> When you shoot 5minutes of 8k RAW and eject the CFexpress card, and its too hot to hold, it becomes quite obvious that limits are not marketing ploys to sell more cinema cams. For those of us working in serious cinema, its crazy to even consider using the R5 or any of the other hybrids as an A-Cam. There is far too much at stake cost and time wise for each setup. Cinema cams have their target use. I'm very excited though, to be able to supplement them with the R5, which opens up possibilities.


1940 adage:  "Those who can, do. Those who can't teach."
2020 adage: "Those who can, do. Those who can't, post incessantly about overheating on forums trying desperately to sound important"

;-)


----------



## lightingb (Aug 11, 2020)

sobrien said:


> I’ve seen a blog (not by JP) outlining the weirdness of the 1080 120fps situation with the R5. Apparently it was mentioned in Canon documentation as an included spec at one stage but subsequently and somewhat mysteriously disappeared. More in the line of conspiracy than rumour. Either way it is an odd omission and one that would be great to see rectified.


Was it on the Canon Community forum? I wrote that. I documented it because it was listed in multiple places as a feature. Then it was pulled after the camera was announced. 

All the images attached are directly from official canon USA websites.


----------



## marathonman (Aug 11, 2020)

DBounce said:


> And no 8K raw over HDMI why? No technical reason not to enable that one. So why leave it out if nothing to protect?


Maybe they didn't want to include 8K RAW over HDMI because they will have other products, better suited to that task and therefore are investing their engineering efforts there.


----------



## tomislavmoze (Aug 11, 2020)

lightingb said:


> Was it on the Canon Community forum? I wrote that. I documented it because it was listed in multiple places as a feature. Then it was pulled after the camera was announced.
> 
> All the images attached are directly from official canon USA websites.


thank you for this, so I guess they had some problems and will return the option...Would love that my R5 is able to do it.


----------



## Whowe (Aug 11, 2020)

Stu_bert said:


> Yep I said that also in my earlier posts....
> 
> Only recorder I could find which supports any 8K is the Atomos Neon and I don't believe the module has been released. Most of the recorders I looked at, stopped at 4k60p
> 
> ...


Could they add 4.2.0 outputs as future additional record options? Maybe match the additional output options to the technical limitations of external recorders so they do become options...


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 11, 2020)

Mike9129 said:


> It's just if you had to use a lens to get the most out of the sensor crop. Efs has a smaller image circle that would cover the 1.7 times crop perfectly if we had 4k raw.
> 
> If you use EF glass on the super 35 sensors your focal length changes (x1.6 or x1.7 times, it's been a while since I was in the aps-c game so I cant remember)
> 
> ...


But, whether using a ff lens or not... there’s still a crop. My understanding is that an EFs lens with 50mm printed on it is 50mm IF that lens is not cropped by the sensor. The FOV is actually 50mm x 1.6 = 80mm on a crop sensor. So, in my opinion, the FF lens vs crop is moot for getting the wide shot. The sensor will crop the FF image circle, so one is cropped either way. I guess what I am not seeing is how in the world choosing an efs lens helps in any possible way. I don’t believe it will make the shot wider.


----------



## Fast351 (Aug 11, 2020)

I'm just sitting here waiting to get my pre-ordered R6 so I can post here bitching about heat in video modes.

(Not really, I will be way too busy enjoying my new camera to spend a lot of time here).


----------



## Stu_bert (Aug 11, 2020)

Whowe said:


> Could they add 4.2.0 outputs as future additional record options? Maybe match the additional output options to the technical limitations of external recorders so they do become options...


Maybe. 

HDMI 4k60p uncompressed is in the region of 12.5Gbps. 4k120 / 8K modes are double that. I just don't know if the current generation of recorders can process double the data and not face issues of their own.

Plus, the recorder vendors will use it as an opportunity, not a negative. _"No sir, our Ninja V doesnt support 8K as when we conceived the line, we wanted to optimise it around 4k recording. If we had considered 8k at the time, the costs would have been significantly higher. But don't fear, we have the Ninha VI coming out in 2021 and you will be able to do 8K on that Sir"_ - all ficticious you understand, I am not quoting anyone.


----------



## Inspired (Aug 11, 2020)

... 4k60 without limits


----------



## Mike the cat (Aug 11, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> How did you know.? Good response and point taken.



I appreciate you taking the time to respond and no hard feelings of course. R5 gang rise up brotha


----------



## cornieleous (Aug 11, 2020)

Paul Nordin said:


> I think what you are stating here is paranoia and not based on real-world testing. I have been working with the R5for 2 weeks now, and have shot several projects with it. I shoot a lot of narrative feature work and will absolutely use the R5 as a B-Cam or C-Cam. Having that little camera on set and being able to basically pull it out of my back pocket and grab 8k RAW b-roll that can cut in with Red or Arri A-Cam footage is a huge benefit to me. I don't need to use it to shoot talking head docs or youtube videos...thats ridiculous. Yes, the R5 has less DR than the A-Cams, but being able to take steps to mitigate those differences with lighting/framing care is part of why I get paid. Getting the high quality 8k Raw and 4k HQ on a small mirrorless that can also shoot with my A-Cam primes with a PL adapter is simply freeing. On top of that, I can take the R5 with the A-Cam lenses on location scouts and capture pre-production stills with the director of a quality that extremely accurately show what we need to add/change in the frame on the day of.
> 
> When you shoot 5minutes of 8k RAW and eject the CFexpress card, and its too hot to hold, it becomes quite obvious that limits are not marketing ploys to sell more cinema cams. For those of us working in serious cinema, its crazy to even consider using the R5 or any of the other hybrids as an A-Cam. There is far too much at stake cost and time wise for each setup. Cinema cams have their target use. I'm very excited though, to be able to supplement them with the R5, which opens up possibilities.



Now don't go being reasonable or citing real world experience. If I want to waste $10000 dollars in memory cards, computers, etc to process 8K wedding or cat videos or hours of 4K120, I expect my 3900 dollar mirrorless camera to deliver infinite recording time. I don't have money for a dedicated video camera even though I'm a videographer and can buy one for the same price. 

Seriously though, all these perpetual victims don't take kindly to logic and reason. They are not here for a fix, or they would be emailing Canon or making constructive criticisms rather than bashing Canon. They'd rather parrot the same chant over and over and over and over: Cripple hammer, *******, garbage, unusable, lawsuit, etc. Rather than going and buying the much better Brand X that does it all perfectly, here they are moaning and whining endlessly about how bad Canon is. People who want to change things and who are effective, don't go about it this way, so at this point I consider this all a bunch of troll noise.


----------



## Dragon (Aug 11, 2020)

alexvaltchev said:


> I thought that is a CRAW, like in the EOS R camera?


Yes, it has CRAW which is a mildly compressed version of the actual raw image. MRAW and SRAW were formats used in earlier cameras to save card space. They are effectively de-Bayered, downsampled TIFF files that were (in the case of MRAW) about the same size as a CRAW file but with much less information in the file. Frankly MRAW is obsolete at this point.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Aug 11, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> First it was, “Who needs 8k? “
> 
> Now, apparently, everyone needs it... and with unlimited recording times.



I don't think people have issue with the limited 8K or 4K120. The problem is recovery time. So you shoot 10 minutes of 4K120P and then next time you want to use it you only have 5 minutes for example. Or maybe just 3 if you use the camera in the meantime. Same situation with 4K60 or 4K HQ. 
So you cannot depend on it because you don't know how long the camera will let you shoot when you need it.


----------



## cornieleous (Aug 11, 2020)

SteveC said:


> And how many damn fools have tried to claim precisely that they are marketing ploys, just on this thread? Some people are so full of it.


Obviously Canon is intentionally heating up their camera to sell cinema cameras like the new one that will only cost 500 more than R5. IMAGINE the incredible profits!!!!Canon must be making AT LEAST a few thousand extra in exchange for pissing off their stills market.  (Obvious sarcasm is obvious)

These people are certainly entertaining at least. Most destructive bunch of "victims" who are outraged at a product they don't own that I have ever seen. I wonder what camera they use today and how they are not outraged at it, and are getting by without 4K60 and up?


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 11, 2020)

blackcoffee17 said:


> I don't think people have issue with the limited 8K or 4K120. The problem is recovery time. So you shoot 10 minutes of 4K120P and then next time you want to use it you only have 5 minutes for example. Or maybe just 3 if you use the camera in the meantime. Same situation with 4K60 or 4K HQ.
> So you cannot depend on it because you don't know how long the camera will let you shoot when you need it.


To me, it is people complaining they can't use a feature as much as they say they'd like to without doing something to make it more appropriate. Some of them don't have the camera, never had the camera, never intended to buy the camera. Honestly, an external recorder seems to be the biggest and best work around, except for 8k. I know, people don't want to use external recorders, I guess, but all the complaining seems to be dumpster fires of the Id.





__





Canon EOS R5 records 4 hours of 4KHQ 30p to an external recorder, with a couple of simple tweaks


Wayne from No Life Digital has posted a video to his YouTube channel showing how he got the Canon EOS R5 to record 4 hours of 4KHQ 30p video to an Atomos Ninja V before the camera overheated. Simply by removing the memory cards from the camera while recording externally lead to a big boost in...




www.canonrumors.com


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 11, 2020)

blackcoffee17 said:


> I don't think people have issue with the limited 8K or 4K120. The problem is recovery time. So you shoot 10 minutes of 4K120P and then next time you want to use it you only have 5 minutes for example. Or maybe just 3 if you use the camera in the meantime. Same situation with 4K60 or 4K HQ.
> So you cannot depend on it because you don't know how long the camera will let you shoot when you need it.


But you do know how long you can shoot when you switch to a thermally limited mode. It shows you right on the screen, just like I have battery display or a shot counter.

If you need 10mis of 8K and the Camera shows you have 5 mins well you need to either let the Camera cool off or switch to a mode that is not limited.

It has been well establish that if you shoot x amount of 4K 60 and y 8K 30 etc... and move thru the menus the total time will be impacted. How much the mode is impacted relies a lot on a variety of factors that luckily we do need to worry about because AGAIN the conservative time remaining is *on screen*. We are a highly intelligent species (debatable) that should be able to learn there are limitations and how to work with those limitations.

How the limitation are imposed is COMPLETELY irrelevant because they exist. The cool thing is a lot of us have not had to adapt or evolve our shooting style cause the R5 just works for us.


----------



## Mike9129 (Aug 11, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> But, whether using a ff lens or not... there’s still a crop. My understanding is that an EFs lens with 50mm printed on it is 50mm IF that lens is not cropped by the sensor. The FOV is actually 50mm x 1.6 = 80mm on a crop sensor. So, in my opinion, the FF lens vs crop is moot for getting the wide shot. The sensor will crop the FF image circle, so one is cropped either way. I guess what I am not seeing is how in the world choosing an efs lens helps in any possible way. I don’t believe it will make the shot wider.



So, usually you cant put an apsc lens on a ff camera because the image circle isnt big enough.

But if the sensor is cropped to use the same size as an apsc sensor then it will work. 

A 50mm FF lens on an apsc sensor would be cropped by 1.6, so you end up with a 85ish mm equivalent. 

A 50mm efs lens on an apsc sensor should have the same focal length has a 50mm lens on a FF sensor. 

Where you'll find the difference is in the way the aperture works. Afaik, f2.8 on FF isnt equivalent to f2.8 on apsc, it still applies a crop to that. So to get the f2.8 FF equivalent on the apsc sensor, youd need a lense 1.6 times faster. 

So that same EF 50mm f2.8 would be both longer and slower on an apsc sensor (roughly 85mm f3.something). This wouldnt apply to efs lenses on the apsc sensor because you're not losing any of their image circle.

Long story short, I think having the option would be good


----------



## NorskHest (Aug 11, 2020)

Mike9129 said:


> I hope they add some kind of Raw option for 4k or 1080p
> 
> I mean, if you had 1080p available to record in RAW (24, 50 & 120fps) along with the lite raw code, I think that could cover 90% of what mostly anyone would want to do with the camera
> 
> ...


Raw lite at 4k120 would be fantastic. H265 is not a good codec to use. I’d rather pay more for storage than deal with that codec


----------



## RayValdez360 (Aug 11, 2020)

vjlex said:


> Let's hope this will kill all the talk about overheating once and for all.


its a rumor and it doesnt address overheating.


----------



## mariosk1gr (Aug 11, 2020)

What I cannot understand is why they have rated R5 with 8k raw at 12 stops of DR. Probably cause of C-Log which provides 12 stops only. BUT Raw is a container and when you import it on Davinci Resolve then you can apply on it a clog2 curve. Isn’t that 15 stops of DR? or am I missing something here?


----------



## RayValdez360 (Aug 11, 2020)

blackcoffee17 said:


> I don't think people have issue with the limited 8K or 4K120. The problem is recovery time. So you shoot 10 minutes of 4K120P and then next time you want to use it you only have 5 minutes for example. Or maybe just 3 if you use the camera in the meantime. Same situation with 4K60 or 4K HQ.
> So you cannot depend on it because you don't know how long the camera will let you shoot when you need it.


It's stupid. like who would even sit there with a stop watch to find out how long its been. at least have a timer on the camera.


----------



## AEWest (Aug 11, 2020)

Stu_bert said:


> It does (HDMI) but it's not supported by any of the current external recorders.
> 
> Yep I said this a while back, yet no one supports it. Why? Cause probably the overhead of processing 8K is a design challenge even on an external recorder....


I wonder if there is a chance that Canon comes out with its own external recorder to solve some of these issues rather than waiting for a 3rd party solution?


----------



## HotPixels (Aug 11, 2020)

blackcoffee17 said:


> I don't think people have issue with the limited 8K or 4K120. The problem is recovery time. So you shoot 10 minutes of 4K120P and then next time you want to use it you only have 5 minutes for example. Or maybe just 3 if you use the camera in the meantime. Same situation with 4K60 or 4K HQ.
> So you cannot depend on it because you don't know how long the camera will let you shoot when you need it.


What people seem to either don't know or don't admit is that when you hit that 8K limit you can just switch to more standard 4K mode. 

Here's one guy that used 8K for a wedding:






He wrote: 
"This weekend I had the chance to film some wedding footage in 8K on the Canon EOS R5. The footage that this camera produces is absolutely mind blowing. The skin tones are accurate and flattering, and the autofocus is spot on. The camera is a pure dream to use. Will it overheat when you're shooting in 8K. Well yes, kind of. The camera itself doesn't really get hot. It seems like it's a gimp-hammer addition. Hopefully it can be remedied in a firmware update. Not to worry, anytime it "overheated", just turn it to 4K mode and continue as usual."

So yes it has gone from "who needs 8K" to "we all need 8K for every second of footage"...


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 11, 2020)

RayValdez360 said:


> It's stupid. like who would even sit there with a stop watch to find out how long its been. at least have a timer on the camera.


Yeah if Canon could add something like this


that would be awesome


----------



## Baron_Karza (Aug 11, 2020)

You can download firmware version 1.70 for the EOS R and all of the lens firmware updates from Canon Canada’s website, as the Canon USA website is still down due to a recent hack.

R Link
Lenses Firmware Link


----------



## Baron_Karza (Aug 11, 2020)

Baron_Karza said:


> You can download firmware version 1.70 for the EOS R and all of the lens firmware updates from Canon Canada’s website, as the Canon USA website is still down due to a recent hack.
> 
> R Link
> Lenses Firmware Link




Canon has released new firmware updates for its EOS R camera and a handful of its RF-mount lenses. The updates bring support for Canon’s latest lenses to the EOS R and improve compatibility between the in-lens stabilization and in-body stabilization of the EOS R5 and R6 with RF-mount lenses.

Firmware version 1.7.0 for the Canon EOS R adds support for Canon’s RF 600mm F11 STM, 800mm F11 STM, RF 1.4x teleconverter, RF 2x teleconverter and the new LP-E6NH Battery Pack. No further bug fixes were addressed in this firmware update, but Canon does say the using the EOS R’s multifunction bar in playback mode has been improved.

------

Canon has also released updated firmware for seven of its IS-capable RF-mount lenses so they will better work alongside the sensor-shift image stabilization inside Canon’s new R5 and R6 mirrorless cameras. Below are the lenses getting the new update:


RF 15–35mm f/2.8L IS USM
RF 24–70mm f/2.8L IS USM
RF 24–105mm f/4–7.1 IS STM
RF 24–105mm f/4L IS USM
RF 24–240mm f/4–6.3 IS USM
RF 35mm f/1.8 IS Macro STM
RF 70–200mm f/2.8L IS USM


----------



## SteveC (Aug 11, 2020)

Ramage said:


> Yeah if Canon could add something like this
> View attachment 192096
> 
> that would be awesome



I think he meant a timer to tell him how long was left in the cooloff phase.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Aug 11, 2020)

mariosk1gr said:


> What I cannot understand is why they have rated R5 with 8k raw at 12 stops of DR. Probably cause of C-Log which provides 12 stops only. BUT Raw is a container and when you import it on Davinci Resolve then you can apply on it a clog2 curve. Isn’t that 15 stops of DR? or am I missing something here?


its raw so the DR is greater.


Ramage said:


> Yeah if Canon could add something like this
> View attachment 192096
> 
> that would be awesome


oh that what that is. i see why the manual is 500 pages. is that timer consistent and realtime or do the numbers go up and down.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Aug 11, 2020)

Jared Polin's latest video on the AF performance is a nice change to the current negative reviews. Warms the heart for any stills shooters out there.


----------



## goldenhusky (Aug 11, 2020)

Hope this does no go down like the rumored 5D4 firmware shortly after it was released


----------



## toodamnice (Aug 11, 2020)

goldenhusky said:


> Hope this does no go down like the rumored 5D4 firmware shortly after it was released



What happened?


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 11, 2020)

Mike9129 said:


> So, usually you cant put an apsc lens on a ff camera because the image circle isnt big enough.
> 
> But if the sensor is cropped to use the same size as an apsc sensor then it will work.
> 
> ...


Nope. F2.8 is F2.8 regardless FF or aps-c. Your exposure does not change if you cropped the frame..


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 11, 2020)

RayValdez360 said:


> its raw so the DR is greater.
> 
> oh that what that is. i see why the manual is 500 pages. is that timer consistent and realtime or do the numbers go up and down.


The manual is 500 pages because the first 499 pages cover connecting your phone to the Camera  

The timer seems to be pretty conservative


----------



## yestostills (Aug 11, 2020)

From reading some tech specs, the R5 lacks in heat sinks, has a processing board over top of the main processor that traps heat and no fan. This is a technological problem that no firmware is going to solve. This issues will continue to plague The R5 until they do a physical redesign. This is what happens when there isn't enough beta testing because you're in such a rush to outdo the competition. Completely short sighted. 
I hope that Canon has the sense to come out with a high pixel, wide dynamic range photo centric camera for the rest of us in the industry.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 11, 2020)

Mike9129 said:


> A 50mm efs lens on an apsc sensor should have the same focal length has a 50mm lens on a FF sensor.


Same focal length (lens), not the same field of view (crop sensor). You are wrong on this.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 11, 2020)

yestostills said:


> From reading some tech specs, the R5 lacks in heat sinks, has a processing board over top of the main processor that traps heat and no fan. This is a technological problem that no firmware is going to solve. This issues will continue to plague The R5 until they do a physical redesign. This is what happens when there isn't enough beta testing because you're in such a rush to outdo the competition. Completely short sighted.
> I hope that Canon has the sense to come out with a high pixel, wide dynamic range photo centric camera for the rest of us in the industry.


The R5 *is* a photocentric, high megapixel, wide dynamic range camera.


----------



## mppix (Aug 11, 2020)

DBounce said:


> At minimum the following should be added:
> 
> 8K output over HDMI... this should be easy on the system as no compression needed and HDMI 2.0 supports 8K @30p. So no excuses not to enable it.



Is this true?? 
AFAIK HDMI 2.0 supports 4K60. For 4K120 or 8K30 you need HDMI2.1


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 11, 2020)

yestostills said:


> From reading some tech specs, the R5 lacks in heat sinks, has a processing board over top of the main processor that traps heat and no fan. This is a technological problem that no firmware is going to solve. This issues will continue to plague The R5 until they do a physical redesign. This is what happens when there isn't enough beta testing because you're in such a rush to outdo the competition. Completely short sighted.
> I hope that Canon has the sense to come out with a high pixel, wide dynamic range photo centric camera for the rest of us in the industry.


EVT, DVT, and PVT was run on this hardware for sure, Canon does not need our help with designing hardware....


----------



## RayValdez360 (Aug 11, 2020)

yestostills said:


> From reading some tech specs, the R5 lacks in heat sinks, has a processing board over top of the main processor that traps heat and no fan. This is a technological problem that no firmware is going to solve. This issues will continue to plague The R5 until they do a physical redesign. This is what happens when there isn't enough beta testing because you're in such a rush to outdo the competition. Completely short sighted.
> I hope that Canon has the sense to come out with a high pixel, wide dynamic range photo centric camera for the rest of us in the industry.


How do yall act liek the video futures hurt you. just dont use them. yall been whining about video ever since I been on here. Its not hard to use a camera just for photos and completely ignore the video.


----------



## mppix (Aug 11, 2020)

tomislavmoze said:


> I personally would like them not to address the record times except the 30 minutes limit but rather focus on shorting the recovery times. Ok would be nice if 4k60 would be able to film without the limit.
> Where the 1080p 120 disappeared it was mention by Jared Polin at the launch. He said it came straight from canon.



Recovery times are purely passive, i.e. how fast the internals can move the heat to the outside. 
This is a HW limitation and Cannot really be addressed with firmware (except for maybe allowing higher internal temperatures in general).


----------



## Skux (Aug 11, 2020)

"Fixed a bug where the camera overheated. The camera now records for unlimited time in all video modes. We apologise for the inconvenience this has caused for video creators wanting to utilise the camera to its full potential."


----------



## DBounce (Aug 11, 2020)

mppix said:


> Is this true??
> AFAIK HDMI 2.0 supports 4K60. For 4K120 or 8K30 you need HDMI2.1


HDMI 2.0 supports up to [email protected] 8 bit. But it’s not actually documented anywhere which standard the R5 has. Even after speaking with Canon tech support I could not learn weather it is 2.0 or 2.1. So it remains a mystery as to which spec is supported.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 11, 2020)

yestostills said:


> From reading some tech specs, the R5 lacks in heat sinks, has a processing board over top of the main processor that traps heat and no fan. This is a technological problem that no firmware is going to solve. This issues will continue to plague The R5 until they do a physical redesign. This is what happens when there isn't enough beta testing because you're in such a rush to outdo the competition. Completely short sighted.
> I hope that Canon has the sense to come out with a high pixel, wide dynamic range photo centric camera for the rest of us in the industry.



This is exactly what you have, as built. You can shoot photos all day, and it's excellent at it to boot. If anything the heat sink issues make it LESS of a video camera than it might seem--which seems to be what you want, so I'm not sure what you think you're complaining about.


----------



## DBounce (Aug 11, 2020)

mppix said:


> Recovery times are purely passive, i.e. how fast the internals can move the heat to the outside.
> This is a HW limitation and Cannot really be addressed with firmware (except for maybe allowing higher internal temperatures in general).


And you know this how? Because it sounds like an assumption, whereas in testing there seems to be something other than heat dissipation driving recovery times. Indeed, it seems that regardless of temperature the recovery times remain constant.


----------



## GastonShutters (Aug 11, 2020)

DBounce said:


> At minimum the following should be added:
> 
> 8K output over HDMI... this should be easy on the system as no compression needed and HDMI 2.0 supports 8K @30p. So no excuses not to enable it.
> 4K HQ @24p internal recording without recording time limits.
> ...


I don't think HDMI 2.0 can support 8K (Not a video expert) and does Atomos make any recorder that can record more than 4K 60? I know they are working to record at 4k 120 for the A7SIII


----------



## GastonShutters (Aug 11, 2020)

vignes said:


> what does _Increased record time limits (but don’t expect a huge boost),_ means?
> they should fix to an appropriate state. I'm not expecting hours of continuous recording but decent enough. I'm only interested with 4kHQ.
> the 4KHQ record times now is inconsistent and unpredictable... simply useless.


From all the tests the camera and sensor are not the main source of limitations. Perhaps with this new firmware they can tone down the heating issues. I think that if anyone is shooting in 8k or 4K 60 you better off with an external recorder, cheaper media for more storage and non of the heat issues.


----------



## Besisika (Aug 11, 2020)

canonnews said:


> you going to be fine with a 1.9x crop factor (or whatever it is?)


I am, most probably in the minority, but I will take 1.9x crop factor. They won't go for it though, given what Youtubers would do to them.


----------



## dcm (Aug 11, 2020)

Stu_bert said:


> Yep I said that also in my earlier posts....
> 
> Only recorder I could find which supports any 8K is the Atomos Neon and I don't believe the module has been released. Most of the recorders I looked at, stopped at 4k60p
> 
> ...



Hmm, so it appears Canon's internal recording is a bit ahead of the dedicated external recorders, even with its limitations. I imagine the folks building external recorders won't be rolling them out until they solve the overheating issues so you can have unlimited recording. It will be interesting to see how long that takes and what measures they have to take.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 11, 2020)

dcm said:


> Hmm, so it appears Canon's internal recording is a bit ahead of the dedicated external recorders, even with its limitations. I imagine the folks building external recorders won't be rolling them out until they solve the overheating issues so you can have unlimited recording. It will be interesting to see how long that takes and what measures they have to take.



There's always the possibility of a Cray-2 Waterfall for cooling.



https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5a/Cray2.jpeg/220px-Cray2.jpeg


----------



## cornieleous (Aug 11, 2020)

yestostills said:


> From reading some tech specs, the R5 lacks in heat sinks, has a processing board over top of the main processor that traps heat and no fan. This is a technological problem that no firmware is going to solve. This issues will continue to plague The R5 until they do a physical redesign. This is what happens when there isn't enough beta testing because you're in such a rush to outdo the competition. Completely short sighted.
> I hope that Canon has the sense to come out with a high pixel, wide dynamic range photo centric camera for the rest of us in the industry.


Perhaps you should have beta tested your post longer because it seems like you are just taking a jab at the R5 for no reason and from a position of being uninformed. You made no thorough or credible arguments and seem to not realize the R5 is already what you hope Canon has the sense to come out with. Canon are not the ones being completely short sighted here.

The R5 _already _has no issues with photos with incredible noise and DR performance. It does quality detailed stills and basic 4k video all day long without any problems, with a great workflow better than any past Canon and arguably competitor offerings. Do you even have the camera or just another on the hype train bashing? Have you bothered to go see the sensor measurements? Have you listened to anyone who actually has the camera and is getting great results? What is your background in electronics design? Do you also have experience in mechanical engineering with specific focus on 3D thermal analyses? Your understanding of how heat sinks work is flawed if you think they can be kept in a tiny enclosure without adequate ambient airflow, and this body could never hold a fan. Adding all that garbage would ruin an already great stills camera and defeat half its features. Your claim that a processing board 'over' (it is behind it) the processor is some clear flaw is ridiculous. How do you know the PCB doesn't have a massive copper fill to move heat? Have you seen the PCB layer breakout? Without a 3D thermal analysis on an entire device this complex, one which considers component power dissipation, material thermal resistivity, ambient conditions, etc. and does that in all operating modes, none of this speculation means a thing. 

The R5 is a powerhouse in a tiny body, obviously it can generate some heat in the high throughput video modes. So what? No other camera this size can even come close because no one has tried. The options are remove features or realize it is a great tool with limitations many will find acceptable. The R5 is what Canon intended all along, a mirrorless 5D5 replacement STILLS camera with limited very high quality video that offers incredible value for SOME people and others should go buy something better suited to their work. The only thing that continues to plague the R5 are the people who have no idea what it was designed for and think it is somehow fatally flawed.


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 11, 2020)

Fast351 said:


> I'm just sitting here waiting to get my pre-ordered R6 so I can post here bitching about heat in video modes.
> 
> (Not really, I will be way too busy enjoying my new camera to spend a lot of time here).


 
I’ll stop by often to post good sample images unlike all the other ungrateful cretins who cut in line ahead of me.


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 11, 2020)

Mike the cat said:


> I appreciate you taking the time to respond and no hard feelings of course. R5 gang rise up brotha



When you’re right, you’re right.

I had a double shot of Ensure this morning and was feeling a little feisty I guess. I changed the tennis balls on my walker and I’m better now.

I also put my pearls under my shirt so we won’t be having that discussion again.


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 11, 2020)

NorskHest said:


> Raw lite at 4k120 would be fantastic. H265 is not a good codec to use. I’d rather pay more for storage than deal with that codec



And you can always compress to H265 if that suits later...


----------



## mkamelg (Aug 11, 2020)

https://www.direstudio.com/shuttercount/whatsnew/en/



> *Version 4.5*
> 
> New features:
> 
> ...



So an firmware update would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## Andy Westwood (Aug 11, 2020)

The best firmware update so far for the EOS R Series was when Canon released version 1.4.0 for the EOS R it was like using a new camera the eye AF and AF in general was so much improved in one simple upload.

Let’s hope Canon continue this, supporting their customers with not only minor fixes but real leap forwards in usability.


----------



## Baron_Karza (Aug 11, 2020)

cornieleous said:


> Perhaps you should have beta tested your post longer because it seems like you are just taking a jab at the R5 for no reason and from a position of being uninformed. You made no thorough or credible arguments and seem to not realize the R5 is already what you hope Canon has the sense to come out with. Canon are not the ones being completely short sighted here.
> 
> The R5 _already _has no issues with photos with incredible noise and DR performance. It does quality detailed stills and basic 4k video all day long without any problems, with a great workflow better than any past Canon and arguably competitor offerings. Do you even have the camera or just another on the hype train bashing? Have you bothered to go see the sensor measurements? Have you listened to anyone who actually has the camera and is getting great results? What is your background in electronics design? Do you also have experience in mechanical engineering with specific focus on 3D thermal analyses? Your understanding of how heat sinks work is flawed if you think they can be kept in a tiny enclosure without adequate ambient airflow, and this body could never hold a fan. Adding all that garbage would ruin an already great stills camera and defeat half its features. Your claim that a processing board 'over' (it is behind it) the processor is some clear flaw is ridiculous. How do you know the PCB doesn't have a massive copper fill to move heat? Have you seen the PCB layer breakout? Without a 3D thermal analysis on an entire device this complex, one which considers component power dissipation, material thermal resistivity, ambient conditions, etc. and does that in all operating modes, none of this speculation means a thing.
> 
> The R5 is a powerhouse in a tiny body, obviously it can generate some heat in the high throughput video modes. So what? No other camera this size can even come close because no one has tried. The options are remove features or realize it is a great tool with limitations many will find acceptable. The R5 is what Canon intended all along, a mirrorless 5D5 replacement STILLS camera with limited very high quality video that offers incredible value for SOME people and others should go buy something better suited to their work. The only thing that continues to plague the R5 are the people who have no idea what it was designed for and think it is somehow fatally flawed.



I agree with most of what you wrote but you can't fault people for this one thing. 

This is Canon's fault that all this confusion was created. 

But people who now are informed with all the different types of scenarios the heating issues causes, should no longer be confused if this is the camera for them. The thing is, there are so many scenarios due to so many variables, that it is hard to know 100% for sure if this is the camera for everyone considering it. 

As of now, I will probably get the R6.


----------



## nikkito (Aug 11, 2020)

I hope they will add the possibility of taking photos with it.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 11, 2020)

Paul Nordin said:


> In addition is what I consider to be the most important benefit of CRL: Lower bandwith/frame sizes. That will create a chain reaction of goodness, including less stress/heat on the CFexpress card.


WIll this mean that CRlite will be able to record on the USH-II SD card?


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 11, 2020)

Jordan23 said:


> Well, HDMI 2.0 only supports 8K30P 8-bit, 4:2:0, no HDR, and that's a huge downgrade from 8K 12 bit 4:2:2. HDMI 2.0 only supports 8K UHD ( 7680 x 4320 ) and not 8K DCI (8192 x 4320). Unless there's a HDMI 2.1 in the R5 now enabled in a future firmware update (or possible with a future hardware upgrade) there won't be 8K or 4K120P available for external recording.


According to Max Yuryev, 4:2:0 and 4:4:4 hardware codecs exist today but 4:2:2 don't (except for the iPad Pro). Having the option of 4:2:0 may be beneficial for work streams even though it is poorer quality. I'm waiting to upgrade my old macbook pro to a new one when they switch to Arm processors which should have this hardware codec in them. I don't want to hang onto a new macbook pro for years when it can't process the video efficiently.
Separately, I also believe that there won't be able HDMI2.1 certified cables available until the end of the year. Your current cables may work but aren't certified. It would be really bleeding edge to have a HDMI2.1 port on the R5 when you can't officially connect to it. Doesn't sound like Canon - does it?


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 12, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> To me, it is people complaining they can't use a feature as much as they say they'd like to without doing something to make it more appropriate. Some of them don't have the camera, never had the camera, never intended to buy the camera. Honestly, an external recorder seems to be the biggest and best work around, except for 8k. I know, people don't want to use external recorders, I guess, but all the complaining seems to be dumpster fires of the Id.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Replicating Wayne's results appears to be problematic but PAL vs NTSC times does appear to be signifcantly different
I don't have an external recorder and cannot test my R5 but the setup details are important


----------



## mppix (Aug 12, 2020)

DBounce said:


> HDMI 2.0 supports up to [email protected] 8 bit. But it’s not actually documented anywhere which standard the R5 has. Even after speaking with Canon tech support I could not learn weather it is 2.0 or 2.1. So it remains a mystery as to which spec is supported.



Canon has always been slow in adopting new HDMI standards (see 5Div). R5 is almost certainly HDMI2.0 since the advanced_user_manual states that HDMI-output of 8K-movies yields 4K-movies.

Hence, I don't think we'll see 8K HDMI output unless they decide to implement 8bit 420 in general. That code may have other use cases too as most modern GPU will happily de/encode 8bit 420 but not 10bit 422








Video Encode and Decode GPU Support Matrix


Find the related video encoding and decoding support for all NVIDIA GPU products.




developer.nvidia.com





Do you prefer 8K 8bit 420 or 4K 10bit 422?


----------



## ashmadux (Aug 12, 2020)

vjlex said:


> Let's hope this will kill all the talk about overheating once and for all.



it wont. 

Lord knows that extra angry guy at eoshd will keep the hits coming, petapixel will pick up on it, and dpreview will eventually have something to say too. that guys has problems.
_
"im actually a filmmaker, those guys (dpreview's jordan) are not! they dont know anything, only i do! disagree with me and ill boot you from my blog comments!" *_

Annnnnnnd this story's rat wheel will begun spinning again for another 3 weeks.

* That last part is not made up... he actively threatens to remove users that dont lap up his crisis-level anger at canon. It's pathetic.


----------



## Otara (Aug 12, 2020)

I love my R5, but the recovery times are a bit too mystical and seem oddly long. I dont find it directly impacts me so much as it seems - weird. 

Finding out there is an ignore function has made the threads much easier to read. Personal attacks, ALL CAPS and more than one exclamation mark are a pretty good starting point for consideration.


----------



## Aregal (Aug 12, 2020)

miketcool said:


> CLog3 is great (for those who like to color grade)
> 
> I only have a few menu items or UI items to nitpick, like being able to add a few more functions to buttons, or being able to split dial customization for AV/TV/M mode. I like being able to use the back wheel for quick AF switching in AV mode. For now I’m relying on C1 to remember that so it doesn’t rob my M mode of aperture. I use top dial for exposure adjustment.
> 
> Also, I would love to get a precision focus for infinity (imagine as you slow your focus, the range expands and lets you find the actual infinity point and lock it). The last one is easiest, can we get the zoom indicator on the display or viewfinder? I’d like to know what I’m zoomed to without looking at the lens.


Canon Log 3 was touted as the “Goldilocks” Canon log because it required minimal grading yet retained a good amount of DR over Canon Log 1. Canon Log 2 is the super flat log Canon Made.


----------



## mppix (Aug 12, 2020)

DBounce said:


> And you know this how? Because it sounds like an assumption, whereas in testing there seems to be something other than heat dissipation driving recovery times. Indeed, it seems that regardless of temperature the recovery times remain constant.



This is of course not an exact science but I'll give it a try:

Let us assume that when electronic devices are off, the firmware is not active (and no internal heat is generated)*.

Then, the constant recovery time is physics: temperatures reach equilibrium with an exponential function with time constant Tau (first order approximation that is quite accurate for a passive cool-down case). You need ~5*Tau to reach equilibrium independent form the initial and final temperature. From independent cool-down measurements, the R5's Tau is somewhere between 15-30 min.
This does 2 things: it prevents the camera from heating up when used and prevents the camera from cooling down afterwards.

It may be possible to do better calculations to improve cool-down marginally. However, it makes absolutely no sense to expect a significantly faster cool-down. For that, one would need a better heat transfer (resulting in a smaller Tau). If the internals can take higher temperatures, they may be able to reach operating points closes to equilibrium (I think this is how Sony fixes overheating). Unfortunately, evidence suggests that the R5 is quite far from thermal equilibrium. To reach equilibrium, the internal temperature (difference vs. external) would need to be increased in excess of 37%. I'd be surprised if they have that design margin.

* This hypothesis may not be true in general. However, I would suggest it is true for the extent and purpose of this discussion since batteries don't drain within hours or days when electronic devices are permanently off.


----------



## DBounce (Aug 12, 2020)

*THE R5 DOES NOT OVERHEAT - FEATURE LOCKOUT IS DELIBERATE *

It’s official... the high quality modes are locked out due to a firmware cripple... The R5 does not overheat at all. It a deliberate cripple by Canon to protect their cinema line... nothing more.

Here is a detailed test using temperature readings stored as metadata in the EXIF of the jpeg stills. An intervalometer was used to automatically take a stills image every 5 minutes to plot the internal camera temperature while idle until the automatic feature lockout activated. The finding showed a steady constant temperature of 46c. No raise in temperature precipitated the activation of the lockout.

Canon you are officially busted!!!


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1293339067170643969


----------



## mppix (Aug 12, 2020)

NorskHest said:


> Raw lite at 4k120 would be fantastic. H265 is not a good codec to use. I’d rather pay more for storage than deal with that codec



I hear this quite a bit but always wondered why. Can you explain?

Initially, I always thought this was due to computation power but most GPUs today support h255 encode/decode (except for 4:2:2 chroma subsampling that lacks support independent from codec and bitrate)








Video Encode and Decode GPU Support Matrix


Find the related video encoding and decoding support for all NVIDIA GPU products.




developer.nvidia.com





Then, I'd prefer AV1 (no license fees baked in) but that actually has less support.


----------



## syder (Aug 12, 2020)

Mike9129 said:


> Which part is wrong? That sigma 18-35 1.8 is a great lens that would fix the issue with having to work with the x1.7 crop (someone mentioned x1.6 as well, so I'm not sure which is correct) for the wide shots.
> 
> More to the point, if theres a PL mount adapter for the R5 that you can mount super 35 sized glass onto, wouldnt that then work perfectly with the crop for 4k?
> 
> Do I have that wrong? Let me know, I'm my head it should...



S35 is a 1.4x crop. It's not the same size or shape as a Canon APS-C 1.6x crop sensor. 

For example the 7D has a 22.3 x 14.9mm sensor while the C300iii has a 26.2 x 13.8 sensor.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 12, 2020)

DBounce said:


> *THE R5 DOES NOT OVERHEAT - FEATURE LOCKOUT IS DELIBERATE *
> 
> It’s official... the high quality modes are locked out due to a firmware cripple... The R5 does not overheat at all. It a deliberate cripple by Canon to protect their cinema line... nothing more.
> 
> ...


Yeah, okay.


----------



## mppix (Aug 12, 2020)

DBounce said:


> *THE R5 DOES NOT OVERHEAT - FEATURE LOCKOUT IS DELIBERATE *
> 
> It’s official... the high quality modes are locked out due to a firmware cripple... The R5 does not overheat at all. It a deliberate cripple by Canon to protect their cinema line... nothing more.
> 
> ...



(1) eoshd is a drama queen 
(2) interesting
(3) unfortunately pointless unless they can match their findings with a 3D thermal CFD model of the camera and know exactly where the thermal sensor is (it is usually not in the hot spot)


----------



## DBounce (Aug 12, 2020)

mppix said:


> (1) eoshd is a drama queen
> (2) interesting
> (3) unfortunately pointless unless they can match their findings with a 3D thermal CFD model of the camera and know exactly where the thermal sensor is (it is usually not in the hot spot)



The readings track closely to the flir imagery from a couple days ago. There will be dozens of videos on YouTube and articles over the next few days. 
Silly rabbit ... looks like you backed the wrong horse:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1293339067170643969


----------



## SteveC (Aug 12, 2020)

nikkito said:


> I hope they will add the possibility of taking photos with it.



Oh, you can take pictures with it. 

You just can't take pictures without simultaneously hearing the din of people kvetching about the video modes (either unhappy that they're there, or that they don't work well enough).;


----------



## mppix (Aug 12, 2020)

DBounce said:


> The readings track closely to the flir imagery from a couple days ago. There will be dozens of videos on YouTube and articles over the next few days.
> Silly rabbit ... looks like you backed the wrong horse:
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1293339067170643969



(1) I'm not backing any horse. I'm trying to explain to a (possibly brainwashed) person why the things likely are the way they are.
(2) If you think that any company has 10x margin in their competitive product, you lack common sense; especially if you are talking about the company that just released the arguably best stills camera and topped it of with some 8K video
(3) Unsoliceted tip for life: don't cite social media in a tech talk if they don't refer to sound evidence; you could as well cite the president of the united states


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 12, 2020)

DBounce said:


> *THE R5 DOES NOT OVERHEAT - FEATURE LOCKOUT IS DELIBERATE *
> 
> It’s official... the high quality modes are locked out due to a firmware cripple... The R5 does not overheat at all. It a deliberate cripple by Canon to protect their cinema line... nothing more.
> 
> ...


Hmm (and without actually viewing EOSHD because I refuse to give them clicks), taking stills doesn't seem to make much of a difference to high end video recording times. Not sure how 1 shot/5 minutes pushes the thermal generation. When he comes up with articulate solutions rather than problems, then I might be more interested. Even if Canon is protecting the new Cine R range, why is that not an appropriate market segmentation tool? Canon has released specs and stated its limitations. Buy it (and I did) or don't. New firmware will be appreciated of course but should not be expected to be 2x or more for the recording times.


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Aug 12, 2020)

clog3 will almost give an additional 2 stops DR and put it close to the A7sIII. It's not the record times that are a problem so much as the ridiculous cool down times. Hopefully they can allow for more recording time too after a briefer shut down.


----------



## cornieleous (Aug 12, 2020)

mppix said:


> (1) eoshd is a drama queen
> (2) interesting
> (3) unfortunately pointless unless they can match their findings with a 3D thermal CFD model of the camera and know exactly where the thermal sensor is (it is usually not in the hot spot)


Exactly. This is so pathetic how many non engineers who know absolutely jack about electronics or thermodynamics think they are know it alls the second their youtube talking heads tell them to start barking. Many of the youtube "reviewers" could not write a decent test procedure to save their lives. Familiarity with a field doesn't make you an engineer, just like having angry preconceived notions doesn't make a valid fact. I see no rigor presented with all this drama. I see no careful logic, and all for what? To get clicks and feel important for the youtubers, and to feel superior for their followers and whiners who no matter what, will never shut up and go buy the competition if Canon is so awful. What a sad way to be. How can these people live in this victim frame of mind? Go buy something you love and make great art!

I'm know I'm going to enjoy being out with the R5 away from the internet for a few. I enjoyed Canon Rumors for a time as a way to be informed on goings on, but it really seems half full of angry people who don't actually make any content but sit around raging about gear they don't own, using second hand information and irrational emotional thinking. Over it for now...


----------



## Otara (Aug 12, 2020)

I think there's something potentially in those findings, but as always the eagerness to claim knowledge of the reasons or motivations is where things get silly, whether its claims of Canons purity or evilness.

Things will become clearer in time.


----------



## snappy604 (Aug 12, 2020)

personally I think it's cool Canon is addressing some of the short comings so quickly.. now if they could get some inventory..


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 12, 2020)

DBounce said:


> *THE R5 DOES NOT OVERHEAT - FEATURE LOCKOUT IS DELIBERATE *
> 
> It’s official... the high quality modes are locked out due to a firmware cripple... The R5 does not overheat at all. It a deliberate cripple by Canon to protect their cinema line... nothing more.
> 
> ...





I'll wait for conspiracies to be confirmed by experts who don't live to hear the sound of their own hysterics..

The ax that guy is grinding is so big Paul Bunyan can't lift it.


----------



## jam05 (Aug 12, 2020)

Kjsheldo said:


> Based on a couple tear downs it seems the overheating shutoff has more to do with software limitations than actual heat, so perhaps they’ll fix that and lengthen those record time limits.


the firmware thresholds are due to heat


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 12, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Yeah, okay.




No.. Clearly you misread. 

They're "officially busted" and are " demanding that Canon come clean on what they have done..."

That's some serious .


----------



## jam05 (Aug 12, 2020)

jam05 said:


> the firmware thresholds are due to heat. The cards get hot and so does the camera. I measure the camera with an imaging device and the cards. The camera can get well above 130 F. Temps that my PC cpu doesnt even reach.


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 12, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Oh, you can take pictures with it.
> 
> You just can't take pictures without simultaneously hearing the din of people kvetching about the video modes (either unhappy that they're there, or that they don't work well enough).;




Could someone help me? I can't find the "stills mode" button.


----------



## jam05 (Aug 12, 2020)

vignes said:


> what does _Increased record time limits (but don’t expect a huge boost),_ means?
> they should fix to an appropriate state. I'm not expecting hours of continuous recording but decent enough. I'm only interested with 4kHQ.
> the 4KHQ record times now is inconsistent and unpredictable... simply useless.


They arent unpredictable at all. I get the same exact time. Maybe use a thermometer.


----------



## DBounce (Aug 12, 2020)

mppix said:


> (1) I'm not backing any horse. I'm trying to explain to a (possibly brainwashed) person why the things likely are the way they are.
> (2) If you think that any company has 10x margin in their competitive product, you lack common sense; especially if you are talking about the company that just released the arguably best stills camera and topped it of with some 8K video
> (3) Unsoliceted tip for life: don't cite social media in a tech talk if they don't refer to sound evidence; you could as well cite the president of the united states





David - Sydney said:


> Hmm (and without actually viewing EOSHD because I refuse to give them clicks), taking stills doesn't seem to make much of a difference to high end video recording times. Not sure how 1 shot/5 minutes pushes the thermal generation. When he comes up with articulate solutions rather than problems, then I might be more interested. Even if Canon is protecting the new Cine R range, why is that not an appropriate market segmentation tool? Canon has released specs and stated its limitations. Buy it (and I did) or don't. New firmware will be appreciated of course but should not be expected to be 2x or more for the recording times.


Here’s a thought: why not limit the camera with a real thermal limit? I’m sure none would have issue with that. But crippling to protect their cinema line is just a pos move. And I say that as an owner of Canon cinema cameras. Moves like this will see canon going out of business. When the R5 was released it was a “number one” seller on BH websites... after the cripple debacle it’s since been reduced to just “top seller” status. Do knew what took its place? The Sony A7S3. There are already used models of the R5 in stock. This is harming Canon. 
Now I understand that stills shooter might not care much about video. But don’t you want a camera that can actually perform without artificial limits? This position really shouldn’t need defending. I didn’t like it when apple was purposely decreasing battery life on their older phones... this is no different. It’s an artificial limit. Sold like it’s to protect the camera, even though in truth, that is a lie.

Are so many here actually supporting being deceived?


----------



## jam05 (Aug 12, 2020)

when Im finished with my chart and measuring temps I will know exactly what temps the warning comes on in each mode. Cards inserted and out. Looks like they may change the cooldown timer and maybe the warning threshold. I doubt it by much.


----------



## jam05 (Aug 12, 2020)

DBounce said:


> Here’s a thought: why not limit the camera with a real thermal limit? I’m sure none would have issue with that. But crippling to protect their cinema line is just a pos move. And I say that as an owner of Canon cinema cameras. Moves like this will see canon going out of business. When the R5 was released it was a “number one” seller on BH websites... after the cripple debacle it’s since been reduced to just “top seller” status. Do knew what took its place? The Sony A7S3. There are already used models of the R5 in stock. This is harming Canon.
> Now I understand that stills shooter might not care much about video. But don’t you want a camera that can actually perform without artificial limits? This position really shouldn’t need defending. I didn’t like it when apple was purposely decreasing battery life on their older phones... this is no different. It’s an artificial limit. Sold like it’s to protect the camera, even though in truth, that is a lie.
> 
> Are so many here actually supporting being deceived?


It does have a thermal limit. Its 104 F. Period.


----------



## jam05 (Aug 12, 2020)

jam05 said:


> It does have a thermal limit. Its 104 F. Period.


All the other crap you wrote is BS. I measured the camera with a Fluke IR imaging device and the device an cards can reach temps above 130 F. Real temps measured with test equipment. NOT icon times and stopwatch. Temperature of the camera.


----------



## jam05 (Aug 12, 2020)

jam05 said:


> All the other crap you wrote is BS. I measured the camera with a Fluke IR imaging device and the device an cards can reach temps above 130 F. Real temps measured with test equipment. NOT icon times and stopwatch. Temperature of the camera. The warning comes on just prior to the operating limit of 104 F.


----------



## Shaun Gibbs (Aug 12, 2020)

Skux said:


> "Fixed a bug where the camera overheated. The camera now records for unlimited time in all video modes. We apologise for the inconvenience this has caused for video creators wanting to utilise the camera to its full potential."



*phenomenon


----------



## NorskHest (Aug 12, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> And you can always compress to H265 if that suits later...


I could but I won’t. H265 and soon to be h266 are part of the heat problem


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 12, 2020)

DBounce said:


> Here’s a thought: why not limit the camera with a real thermal limit? I’m sure none would have issue with that. But crippling to protect their cinema line is just a pos move. And I say that as an owner of Canon cinema cameras. Moves like this will see canon going out of business. When the R5 was released it was a “number one” seller on BH websites... after the cripple debacle it’s since been reduced to just “top seller” status. Do knew what took its place? The Sony A7S3. There are already used models of the R5 in stock. This is harming Canon.
> Now I understand that stills shooter might not care much about video. But don’t you want a camera that can actually perform without artificial limits? This position really shouldn’t need defending. I didn’t like it when apple was purposely decreasing battery life on their older phones... this is no different. It’s an artificial limit. Sold like it’s to protect the camera, even though in truth, that is a lie.
> 
> Are so many here actually supporting being deceived?




Aside from the drama queen over at EOS HD ranting conspiracy theories, no one has suggested or proven anyone is being deceived about anything. If you put your eggs in that hysteria basket bully for you.

If Sony's handy-cam is currently outselling the R5 at B&H, so what? That could change tomorrow and then back again two days later. Did B&H release a memo describing the specifics of the change in sales status of these two items, or do you just "know"?... As far as I know there is no such thing as a "cripple debacle" and never in my life has something being the number one seller or top seller at B&H or anywhere else influenced my buying decision. YMMV.

If the Sony is what you want, buy it. It's a mediocre stills camera that I find completely uninteresting. The R5 is a stellar stills camera - like it was designed to be - unless you listen to the ax-grinder over at brand-x and then you get " So in my opinion the EOS R5 is probably unsuitable as a stills camera ...."

Show me where these used Canon R5s are being sold please - link me - B&H shows zero as of right now and when I Googled "Used R5s" the search came back as YGTBFKM... 

I'd love to pick up a "used R5" while I wait for my preorder to be filled.


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 12, 2020)

NorskHest said:


> I could but I won’t. H265 and soon to be h266 are part of the heat problem




I use it to compress ripped Blu-Rays.


----------



## Ben Sparrow (Aug 12, 2020)

alexvaltchev said:


> Is there a firmware for R6 as well with similar fixes/addons or only R5? Also, can anyone explain to me what is Cinema RAW light? I am a noob but eager to learn more. Just recently learned bRAW is Black Magic Raw )



It is a light (smaller in size) version of a RAW file. And because it is uncompressed, the camera's processor doesn't have to compress each frame meaning that even thought it'll take more space to store those files, the camera should have less trouble with over heating issues because it doesn't compress each frame. This not only could resolve overheating problems, but will add billions of colors to the file for you to grade in post (assuming is 12 bit like the C200 for example). Savvy?


----------



## Kit. (Aug 12, 2020)

DBounce said:


> When the R5 was released it was a “number one” seller on BH websites... after the cripple debacle it’s since been reduced to just “top seller” status.


Has B&H already shipped all their day one preorders of R5?


----------



## Stu_bert (Aug 12, 2020)

NorskHest said:


> I could but I won’t. H265 and soon to be h266 are part of the heat problem


They likely are based on SW, but I've not seen any statistical analysis on how much / well hardware implementations help...

Since the R5 supports h264 and h265, then it would be interesting to know why some modes are h264 which is cheaper in effort than h265 (and still supports 10bit and 4:2:2). h265 creates smaller files for the same quality, thus lower i/o and provide improved capacity, but I'd love to know if the higher i/o from h264 is offset by the lower encode effort / cost.


----------



## Stu_bert (Aug 12, 2020)

dcm said:


> Hmm, so it appears Canon's internal recording is a bit ahead of the dedicated external recorders, even with its limitations. I imagine the folks building external recorders won't be rolling them out until they solve the overheating issues so you can have unlimited recording. It will be interesting to see how long that takes and what measures they have to take.


Yep, I think to offer what they decided to offer required a lot of design / trade-offs / component iterations till they got to where they are with the R5/R6.


----------



## zonefocus (Aug 12, 2020)

I don't expect any firmware update to fix the heat limits on the R5. Everyone is talking about this like it needs a “fix”. I think this stems from some of the theories floating around that the camera is not getting hot. However, reports are that the _cards_ _are_ _getting_ _hot_. 

Has anyone considered that releasing the camera with these limits is not an oversight? There is no way that Canons testing missed the overheat and recovery times. Think about the camera in the lab; they record some video to run a test. Then do a little more. They would have seen the reduced recovery times on day one of testing. This would have been reported up the line and then a management decision made.

I don't buy the argument it is to trick anyone into buying more expensive gear. The full-time full-length production filmmaker is not banking on an 80/20 hybrid camera replacing their cinema cameras. 

So my theory is that The limits are there to protect hardware around the cards. Those limits are there intentionally. To me, it seems like they made a trade-off between using high-speed cards to accommodate high frame rate stills, and recording / cool downtimes. As a stills camera that would have been fine. 

They reasoned that a wedding pro/documentarian/editorial pro/long-form journo/ hybrid portrait 5-series shooter, who has to turn around a bucket load of editing is not going to want to deal with HOURS of hi-res footage. Not to mention terabytes of video data from shooting 8k or oversampled 4K all damn day. Companies who do that have entire production lines with tons of gear and don't bank on a mirrorless DSLR to be the primary workhorse!

I think the Big C reasoned that the 8k video primarily would be used sparingly to compliment an 80% stills 5-series shooter.

But then, on a different floor, someone in the marketeering team, working to a different beat and living in a social media-driven bubble, or worse still, a state of delusion, decided to go hell for leather on spruiking the 8k video, and the rest is history. 

The Engineers ran for cover. And here we are.


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 12, 2020)

zonefocus said:


> I don't expect any firmware update to fix the heat limits on the R5. Everyone is talking about this like it needs a “fix”. I think this stems from some of the theories floating around that the camera is not getting hot. However, reports are that the _cards_ _are_ _getting_ _hot_.
> 
> Has anyone considered that releasing the camera with these limits is not an oversight? There is no way that Canons testing missed the overheat and recovery times. Think about the camera in the lab; they record some video to run a test. Then do a little more. They would have seen the reduced recovery times on day one of testing. This would have been reported up the line and then a management decision made.
> 
> ...



Would you say that the following is a bit more accurate statement? 

But then, on a different floor, a* former* member of the marketing team, working to a different beat and living in a social media-driven bubble, or worse still, a state of delusion, decided to go hell for leather on spruiking the 8k video, and the rest is history.


----------



## Otara (Aug 12, 2020)

zonefocus said:


> I don't expect any firmware update to fix the heat limits on the R5. Everyone is talking about this like it needs a “fix”. I think this stems from some of the theories floating around that the camera is not getting hot. However, reports are that the _cards_ _are_ _getting_ _hot_.
> 
> Has anyone considered that releasing the camera with these limits is not an oversight?



The debate seems to be more over whether its for nefarious purposes or not, rather than it being an oversight as such.

My impression with my R5 was that the card didn't seem to be particularly hot when some limits were happening, and that cooling efforts to the camera or the card seemed to make little or no difference to recovery times.

Which doesn't mean that it cant be due to card temps sometimes, only that there seem to be times when it isnt, which is somewhat puzzling.


----------



## Osama (Aug 12, 2020)

If the CFexpress is the problem, why the CFexpress card does not overheat when shooting in 4K 30p non HQ mode? I shot for hours in this mode to both CF and SD cards without an issue. Both HQ and non HQ modes got the same bit rate as per the manual. 

Besides, both the CFexpress and SD cards return to room temperature in a matter of minutes. The camera, however, doesn't seem to be affected; it doesn't care even if I inserted a new, unused card. It won't work. 


I believe that this theory is misleading.


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 12, 2020)

Osama said:


> If the CFexpress is the problem, why the CFexpress card does not overheat when shooting in 4K 30p non HQ mode? I shot for hours in this mode to both CF and SD cards without an issue. Both HQ and non HQ modes got the same bit rate as per the manual.
> 
> Besides, both the CFexpress and SD cards return to room temperature in a matter of minutes. The camera, however, doesn't seem to be affected; it doesn't care even if I inserted a new, unused card. It won't work.
> 
> ...



I don't think the pre-overheating warning is being triggered by a single source. If you record 4k *and* have the digic downsample *and* use CFe the warning triggers in 25 minutes. The big questions are:

What are the inputs for the algorithm that triggers the warning?
What are the inputs for the algorithm that provides the estimate during recovery?
Not having cards in the slots could indeed slow down the heat build up or it could just break the algo. Or both  There's a report on fredmiranda that putting the R5 in a freezer makes it recover after completely after 25 minutes instead of 2 hours, so the notion of it being "a simple timer" doesn't seem to hold up either.

I think Canon put in very conservative limits and making them less conservative will be a political decision for Canon and will never approach the actual limit of the hardware. You just know that someone will try filming 8k all-I for hours around noon in Death Valley and scream on twitter about actual overheating causing actual damage if Canon pulls a Sony.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Aug 12, 2020)

I give up, I tried to upload some images I took today, my 1st attempt at using the R5 & high FPS on our trainee guide dog free running. Apparently the image is too large for the server, it's only about 21mb so not massive. I dont want to reduce the size as it defeats the object. Anyone know how to upload larger files?

Anywhooo, I was pleased with the results, at F2.8, 2000sec, ISO 200 , 70mm using the RF 70-200mm, the eyes were pin sharp and this is a black Labrador with very dark, almost black eyes. I tried this with the R and couldn't get any images in focus. Result!!


----------



## mpmark (Aug 12, 2020)

Thats nice and all for whoever actaully owns the camera, I'm still waiting!


----------



## freejay (Aug 12, 2020)

Skux said:


> "Fixed a bug where the camera overheated. The camera now records for unlimited time in all video modes. We apologise for the inconvenience this has caused for video creators wanting to utilise the camera to its full potential."


"We simply did this by ignoring the laws of physics"...


----------



## freejay (Aug 12, 2020)

Yeah, crippled on purpose to keep their Cinema line running? Rumors suggest that there will be two new Cinema cameras and one significantly cheaper than the R5. How are they going to make more money, if people choose to take the cheap cinema camera instead of the R5?


----------



## Maru (Aug 12, 2020)

They need to focus on the website... its ridiculous that the website is down for more than a week and they dont care

Never seen a website down for so long on current digital world for even smaller companies... dont know if we can trust them when they cant even take care of their own website


----------



## Baron_Karza (Aug 12, 2020)

Maru said:


> They need to focus on the website... its ridiculous that the website is down for more than a week and they dont care
> 
> Never seen a website down for so long on current digital world for even smaller companies... dont know if we can trust them when they cant even take care of their own website



What exactly do they need to do to get it back up?


----------



## Kiton (Aug 12, 2020)

vjlex said:


> Let's hope this will kill all the talk about overheating once and for all.




 Never, then there would be nothing to bitch about!!


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 12, 2020)

Baron_Karza said:


> What exactly do they need to do to get it back up?



According to the interwebs: launch a new CINE cam. That is supposed to right every wrong!


----------



## Mike9129 (Aug 12, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> I give up, I tried to upload some images I took today, my 1st attempt at using the R5 & high FPS on our trainee guide dog free running. Apparently the image is too large for the server, it's only about 21mb so not massive. I dont want to reduce the size as it defeats the object. Anyone know how to upload larger files?
> 
> Anywhooo, I was pleased with the results, at F2.8, 2000sec, ISO 200 , 70mm using the RF 70-200mm, the eyes were pin sharp and this is a black Labrador with very dark, almost black eyes. I tried this with the R and couldn't get any images in focus. Result!!



Im currently waiting for my RF 70-200 to turn up.
Its gonna be great going by what you and others have said!


----------



## mppix (Aug 12, 2020)

Stu_bert said:


> They likely are based on SW, but I've not seen any statistical analysis on how much / well hardware implementations help...
> 
> Since the R5 supports h264 and h265, then it would be interesting to know why some modes are h264 which is cheaper in effort than h265 (and still supports 10bit and 4:2:2). h265 creates smaller files for the same quality, thus lower i/o and provide improved capacity, but I'd love to know if the higher i/o from h264 is offset by the lower encode effort / cost.



H265 was designed to achieve about half the data rate of H264 with similar apparent quality.

Real-time SW encoding of 8K30 or 4K120 is currently not feasible for anything but the most powerful CPUs (with 225W+ power envelope)








64-Core AMD EPYC Rome Achieves World's First Real-Time 8K HEVC Encoding


On Friday, Beamr Imaging claims to have achieved the world's first real-time 8K HEVC encoding by using a single EPYC 7742, AMD's flagship server CPU based on its new Rome architecture.




www.tomshardware.com




Hence, it is safe to assume that microprocessors such as DIGIC X (estimated 5-10W power envelope based on battery run-time) need and have HW encoding.


----------



## freejay (Aug 12, 2020)

Maru said:


> They need to focus on the website... its ridiculous that the website is down for more than a week and they dont care
> 
> Never seen a website down for so long on current digital world for even smaller companies... dont know if we can trust them when they cant even take care of their own website


As I understand it they are under attack by cyber criminals. This might take weeks to get the servers up and running again.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Aug 12, 2020)

Mike9129 said:


> Im currently waiting for my RF 70-200 to turn up.
> Its gonna be great going by what you and others have said!


it's certainly a big step up from the EOS R. I've just finished off a zoom 1 to 1 with a Canon rep arranged for me by the retailer I purchased the camera from. it was really good to be able to ask questions about things like card management, what the different case settings do, registering settings etc and the different settings for video which from using the R I never really used that much.

it's simple things like this that make you want to go back to a retailer.


----------



## Mike9129 (Aug 12, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> it's certainly a big step up from the EOS R. I've just finished off a zoom 1 to 1 with a Canon rep arranged for me by the retailer I purchased the camera from. it was really good to be able to ask questions about things like card management, what the different case settings do, registering settings etc and the different settings for video which from using the R I never really used that much.
> 
> it's simple things like this that make you want to go back to a retailer.


Yeah! I was lucky that I got my R5 in the first batch so I've been enjoying using it!

I think its lost on some people that the EOS R has fantastic image quality, like really really good. Its problem is that it's a bit sluggish to use, not as snappy as I'd have liked.

The R5 on the other hand has taken that image quality up a notch and it's really snappy to boot (kinda pun kinda intended! )

Cant wait to get that 70-200 in front of it!

You have your hands on the camera too so?


----------



## Dragon (Aug 12, 2020)

The humorous part of all the U-Tubers bitching about the 8k record time is that not one has made a single comment about the 8k video quality. I suspect that is because not one of them has any means to view 8k video. They are not happy with how long the camera will record in a format they can't use. Pretty funny when you think about it.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Aug 12, 2020)

Mike9129 said:


> Yeah! I was lucky that I got my R5 in the first batch so I've been enjoying using it!
> 
> I think its lost on some people that the EOS R has fantastic image quality, like really really good. Its problem is that it's a bit sluggish to use, not as snappy as I'd have liked.
> 
> ...


Yup, I had no issues with the image quality of the R, great for landscapes and subjects that don't move a lot but really wasn't ideal for fast moving subjects which is where the R5 really steps up.

I purchased the RF70-200mm in April and to be honest it's hardly been off the R and R5. The RF 24-105 F4 has been consigned to the camera bag for a little while until I can do more city visits where the extra width and flexibility will come into it's own.

to make it even better, I just submitted a claim to Canon for a lens reward that I found out was available with the R5 and the 70-200MM & they've just confirmed £255 will be winging its way to my account in the next week or so. Happy days lol.


----------



## nchoh (Aug 12, 2020)

tomislavmoze said:


> I personally would like them not to address the record times except the 30 minutes limit but rather focus on shorting the recovery times. Ok would be nice if 4k60 would be able to film without the limit.
> Where the 1080p 120 disappeared it was mention by Jared Polin at the launch. He said it came straight from canon.



Unfortunately the recovery times are pretty much fixed based on the mechanical layout. The only possibility is that if Canon is really working on the cooling adapter and if the have actually built in heat pipes to where the cooling adapter is supposed to connect to. This would help in both reducing heat build up and cooling time.

On the other hand, if I am correct, the heat generation might be reduced with more efficient coding.


----------



## Maru (Aug 12, 2020)

freejay said:


> As I understand it they are under attack by cyber criminals. This might take weeks to get the servers up and running again.


HMM...i understand that thing but still its really bad that company like Canon taking so long to fix it


----------



## SteveC (Aug 12, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Another vote/hope for additional button customization.
> 
> The "Rate" button is utterly useless to me and cannot be reassigned.



But in a cruel irony, I noticed last night that other buttons CAN be assigned to the Rate function, in case you need TWO rate buttons.


----------



## spomeniks (Aug 12, 2020)

CLog 3 on this camera would be absolutely incredible, but does anyone else get the feeling that if this were coming right after launch they would have mentioned something about it already? Kind of a highlight feature


----------



## Maru (Aug 12, 2020)

R5 is too costly...we need a R1


----------



## nchoh (Aug 12, 2020)

Osama said:


> If the CFexpress is the problem, why the CFexpress card does not overheat when shooting in 4K 30p non HQ mode? I shot for hours in this mode to both CF and SD cards without an issue. Both HQ and non HQ modes got the same bit rate as per the manual.
> 
> Besides, both the CFexpress and SD cards return to room temperature in a matter of minutes. The camera, however, doesn't seem to be affected; it doesn't care even if I inserted a new, unused card. It won't work.
> 
> ...



Go watch the tear down video. Notice that the CFE card slot is very close to the CPU and on the same board. The CPU is transmitting heat to the CFE card. So if you run a cooler recording mode, less heat is generated and the card stays cooler. Most CPUs have a thermostat built in, which is likely where the temperature is being measured from. Putting in a cooler card does not matter.


----------



## Stu_bert (Aug 12, 2020)

mppix said:


> H265 was designed to achieve about half the data rate of H264 with similar apparent quality.
> 
> Real-time SW encoding of 8K30 or 4K120 is currently not feasible for anything but the most powerful CPUs (with 225W+ power envelope)
> 
> ...


Thanks, I do agree. What I don't know (sorry if I didn't explain well), is how well hardware encoding works in terms of compute required and therefore heat etc?

As you rightly post, 8K real time in sw? Yep if you have stupid hardware. But a tiny Digic chip can do x265 8k30 in realtime. I'm just curious as to how much power the x265 and x264 takes and whether they are the same or not (in terms of HW compute effort), or if they mirror software where x264 is quicker (and thus could be a possible trade off - quicker encode effort - less heat vs more i/o and additional heat)...


----------



## Stu_bert (Aug 12, 2020)

Maru said:


> HMM...i understand that thing but still its really bad that company like Canon taking so long to fix it


Their data has been encrypted by the hackers, and they are being held to ransom to either pay or to lose that data. What isn't known, is when the files were encrypted, and what backups of that data Canon has, aside from the fact the hackers I believe have their data....

Not quite straight forward...


----------



## PhotoRN86 (Aug 12, 2020)

Mike9129 said:


> I hope they add some kind of Raw option for 4k or 1080p
> 
> I mean, if you had 1080p available to record in RAW (24, 50 & 120fps) along with the lite raw code, I think that could cover 90% of what mostly anyone would want to do with the camera
> 
> ...




I miss Magic Lantern Raw days, those 1080p Raw videos people have made are stilll beautiful


----------



## Sporgon (Aug 12, 2020)

wanderer23 said:


> I just wet my pants harder than the r300 rumor


"You should go out and find yourself a girlfriend mate". Quote, Captain Jack Sparrow


----------



## Stu_bert (Aug 12, 2020)

Osama said:


> If the CFexpress is the problem, why the CFexpress card does not overheat when shooting in 4K 30p non HQ mode? I shot for hours in this mode to both CF and SD cards without an issue. Both HQ and non HQ modes got the same bit rate as per the manual.
> 
> Besides, both the CFexpress and SD cards return to room temperature in a matter of minutes. The camera, however, doesn't seem to be affected; it doesn't care even if I inserted a new, unused card. It won't work.
> 
> ...


The HQ modes sample from a higher resolution, but output at 4K - that downsampling requires Digic processing.

Non HQ modes - no sampling, less data (vs 60FPS or higher modes). Hence your 4k30p is ok - you're taxing Digic less and the I/O less.

Essentially when we go to the higher processing - be that FPS, Resolution (8k), Downsampling, some combinations are pushing parts (multiple parts) collectively to go over whatever thermal limit has been defined and you get the problem.

We expect Digic to have a temp sensor (most processors of some shape or form do), not sure about the (image) sensor - probably does, then there's CFE Cards (Delkin does, assume others do also). And then there's the PCIe bus which CFE uses. So we maybe have 3 or 4 temp sensors, and the higher processing could trigger any of those into hitting their thermal limit and you get the warning....

How the menu / screen / switch on operation fairs in all this - no clue - best guess is that is a bug and can be fixed. The rest of the system, tweaked sure to give a bit more headroom. Then other modes e.g. Raw Lite, will have less i/o, and hopefully less processing - that may be an option for some. I'd like to see them do 4K Raw and 120fps in HD as others have suggested as at least it will give options....


----------



## sanj (Aug 12, 2020)

Kjsheldo said:


> Cinema Raw Light is Canon's own compressed raw codec, first introduced on the C200 and now present in C500II, C300III, and 1DX Mark III. It's similar to Black Magic Raw in that it is a compressed raw codec giving you raw image quality without the giant file sizes. BM Raw has more compression options (5:1, 8:1, 12:1, etc), but Canon's is a fixed compression that works out to be around 4:1 or so. So, file sizes are still big, but not nearly as big as straight raw. Adding this would probably double or triple your record times in 8k on the R5, which would be very welcome.


Would the quality be compromised in RAW light?


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 12, 2020)

Maru said:


> They need to focus on the website... its ridiculous that the website is down for more than a week and they dont care
> 
> Never seen a website down for so long on current digital world for even smaller companies... dont know if we can trust them when they cant even take care of their own website


Yes. I lay awake at night and worry about exactly this.


----------



## Baron_Karza (Aug 12, 2020)

Maru said:


> HMM...i understand that thing but still its really bad that company like Canon taking so long to fix it


So again, exactly what do they need to do to bring it back up? And how long does that take to happen?


----------



## Dantana (Aug 12, 2020)

Baron_Karza said:


> So again, exactly what do they need to do to bring it back up? And how long does that take to happen?


I'm not sure there is a straightforward answer to that. I read that it was a ransomware attack, so it would all depend on how that was done, what was being demanded, etc.


----------



## Baron_Karza (Aug 12, 2020)

Dantana said:


> I'm not sure there is a straightforward answer to that. I read that it was a ransomware attack, so it would all depend on how that was done, what was being demanded, etc.



You're right!

So when I read things like: "its really bad that company like Canon *taking so long to fix it*", I know they don't have any idea about what is really going and and if they did, they really don't understand all the IT effort involved in not just bring it back up, but also all the certifications, security improvements and testing required to make sure it doesn't happen again. It's not like they just need to push a button on a server.


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 12, 2020)

Baron_Karza said:


> You're right!
> 
> So when I read things like: "its really bad that company like Canon *taking so long to fix it*", I know they don't have any idea about what is really going and and if they did, they really don't understand all the IT effort involved in not just bring it back up, but also all the certifications, security improvements and testing required to make sure it doesn't happen again. It's not like they just need to push a button on a server.


Spot on. 

Canon is going to first try and crack it by paying anyone but the MAZE group to see if their hackers are better then MAZE's. While that is going on Canon is doing an audit of all the possible data involved to see if they can simply restore with off site back-ups. 

The most critical things are: 

How did they (MAZE) get access?
Are they still in the system. 
It makes no sense to restore from backup if they can just get in again or are still in.


----------



## mppix (Aug 12, 2020)

Stu_bert said:


> Thanks, I do agree. What I don't know (sorry if I didn't explain well), is how well hardware encoding works in terms of compute required and therefore heat etc?
> 
> As you rightly post, 8K real time in sw? Yep if you have stupid hardware. But a tiny Digic chip can do x265 8k30 in realtime. I'm just curious as to how much power the x265 and x264 takes and whether they are the same or not (in terms of HW compute effort), or if they mirror software where x264 is quicker (and thus could be a possible trade off - quicker encode effort - less heat vs more i/o and additional heat)...



Good question. In HW GPU encoding (I use nvenc), I never noticed a relevant difference between h264/h265 encoding, which seems to be confirmed by








Premiere Pro 14.2 H.264 and H.265 Hardware Encoding Performance


In the 14.2 version of Premiere Pro, Adobe has added support for GPU-based H264/H.265 (HEVC) hardware encoding with both NVIDIA and AMD GPUs. How well does this feature work, and how much faster is it than the previous hardware encoding that utilized Intel Quicksync?




www.pugetsystems.com




This does not mean much for microcontrollers where you count fractions of watts. However, encoding may be quite efficient (or at least not be the bottleneck) as 8K RAW vs 8K h265 have similar recording times in the R5.


----------



## mppix (Aug 12, 2020)

Stu_bert said:


> The HQ modes sample from a higher resolution, but output at 4K - that downsampling requires Digic processing.
> 
> Non HQ modes - no sampling, less data (vs 60FPS or higher modes). Hence your 4k30p is ok - you're taxing Digic less and the I/O less.



Do you happen to know how non-HQ samples? Is it some form of pixel-binning or line-skipping?


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 12, 2020)

mppix said:


> Do you happen to know how non-HQ samples? Is it some form of pixel-binning or line-skipping?


@mppix it has been said to be a bit of hybrid of both pixel-binning and line-skipping but only Canon knows for sure at this point.


----------



## adrian_bacon (Aug 12, 2020)

vjlex said:


> Let's hope this will kill all the talk about overheating once and for all.



for the users that want to shoot full frame in the higher quality modes, yes, canon at a minimum needs to fix the recovery times. That being said, if you’re on a shoot with a C-300 mark 2 or mark 3 as your A camera, and want use the R5 as a B camera, it does shoot oversampled 4K in 1.6 crop and doesn’t seem to have any record limits outside of the 30 minute per clip that canon has always done. given that it’s oversampled,, it’ll probably look better than the footage from the C300 which isn’t oversampled. If you do that, you’ll have roughly the same effective sensor size between the two and can use the same lenses.


----------



## mppix (Aug 12, 2020)

Ramage said:


> @mppix it has been said to be a bit of hybrid of both pixel-binning and line-skipping but only Canon knows for sure at this point.


How do you actually do pixel binning with CMOS sensors? Is there any ILC manufacturer that does this?
I can only think of the following two ways:
- Quad-bayer sensor (like smartphone cameras): combine adjacent analog photo sites (this would need a complete rewrite of Canon's internal demosaic + image processing tools)
- Oversampling/combine digital readout of photo-sites (likely HQ mode)
- Mystical circuit that takes the analog average of two non-adjacent pixels after amplification and before ADC. This is possible in theory but you'd need to read 4 lines in parallel and "fuse" nonaligned pixels. I have no idea if this is even close to feasible but if implemented well it should perform similar to down-sampling digital photosite values digitally
- Line skipping: discard half of the info (non HQ modes?)


----------



## Shaun Gibbs (Aug 12, 2020)

Mike9129 said:


> Im currently waiting for my RF 70-200 to turn up.
> Its gonna be great going by what you and others have said!




It is indeed super super sharp.


----------



## Inspired (Aug 12, 2020)

1. Realistically I'd like to see the 30 minute maximum recording time gone. 

2. Try to squeeze 4k60 into not having over heating issues like the 4k30 mode. 

3. Fix all the bugs 

4. I'm willing to take lesser powered cards if it would help with the overheating. 

I believe these are realistic goals Canon can actually reach if they try.


----------



## maduhbee (Aug 12, 2020)

DBounce said:


> At minimum the following should be added:
> 
> 8K output over HDMI... this should be easy on the system as no compression needed and HDMI 2.0 supports 8K @30p. So no excuses not to enable it.
> 4K HQ @24p internal recording without recording time limits.
> ...



I Thought HDMI 2.0 (a/b) only supports up to 4K60 w/HDR? 18Gbps max, while 2.1 is the one with 8K delivery? (48Gbps)


----------



## Otara (Aug 12, 2020)

koenkooi said:


> Not having cards in the slots could indeed slow down the heat build up or it could just break the algo. Or both  There's a report on fredmiranda that putting the R5 in a freezer makes it recover after completely after 25 minutes instead of 2 hours, so the notion of it being "a simple timer" doesn't seem to hold up either.



Thats very interesting info.


----------



## PN5X5 (Aug 12, 2020)

Worst rollout that I can remember..


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Aug 12, 2020)

adrian_bacon said:


> for the users that want to shoot full frame in the higher quality modes, yes, canon at a minimum needs to fix the recovery times. That being said, if you’re on a shoot with a C-300 mark 2 or mark 3 as your A camera, and want use the R5 as a B camera, it does shoot oversampled 4K in 1.6 crop and doesn’t seem to have any record limits outside of the 30 minute per clip that canon has always done. given that it’s oversampled,, it’ll probably look better than the footage from the C300 which isn’t oversampled. If you do that, you’ll have roughly the same effective sensor size between the two and can use the same lenses.


For sure, this is probably the best way to work with the C300 and R5. I'm not sure why the 1.6x crop oversampled mode is always overlooked. It's very useful IMO


----------



## Otara (Aug 12, 2020)

Chris.Chapterten said:


> For sure, this is probably the best way to work with the C300 and R5. I'm not sure why the 1.6x crop oversampled mode is always overlooked. It's very useful IMO



Absolutely, its a bonus for me, with wildlife, and lets me use my 10-18mm EF-S for WA, very light.


----------



## mppix (Aug 12, 2020)

maduhbee said:


> I Thought HDMI 2.0 (a/b) only supports up to 4K60 w/HDR? 18Gbps max, while 2.1 is the one with 8K delivery? (48Gbps)


Me too; apparently there is an 8bit 8K30 mode..


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 12, 2020)

PN5X5 said:


> Worst rollout that I can remember..


I guess you were not around for the EOS R, or the 1Dx MkIII or the RP...

The Canon release work flow is as follows:

Camera is Highly anticipated - Much speculation, tons of rumors, lot of hype.
Camera Releases and sells well - But the specs "suck..." 1.8 crop, no dual card slots, they are all back ordered, the lens are to expensive, 20MP is not enough, you do not need 8k, it gets to hot, DSLR's are dead...
Talking heads on youtube and other places spend all their time talking about what the Camera is not. Things like "Worst rollout ever" are posted on forums, idiots threaten to sue Canon for telling them the truth.
More and more people get the Camera and actually f'n use it. Slowly the talking heads create videos like "The EOS R is better than you think" "The EOS R... I was wrong!!!" "Why Canon sued me for slander" ok that last one has not happened yet but I think we all know who I am talking about. 
Canon simply cannot win, they are the target if the are conservative, they are the target if they are innovative. But hey they make great glass... But it is too expensive...


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 13, 2020)

mppix said:


> Me too; apparently there is an 8bit 8K30 mode..


I think the new Atomos Neon https://www.dpreview.com/news/25065...ers-will-have-8k-60p-prores-raw-module-option with the Master Control Module will support 8K.

Will add a bit of cost for 8K recording though. I cannot seem to find a price for the Master Control Module


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 13, 2020)

Mike9129 said:


> Yeah! I was lucky that I got my R5 in the first batch so I've been enjoying using it!



From all of us kneecapped on the wait list for our cameras I would like to say...

POST IMAGES! DOIT! DOIT! STOP BEING A BOGART!


----------



## Maru (Aug 13, 2020)

Ramage said:


> Spot on.
> 
> Canon is going to first try and crack it by paying anyone but the MAZE group to see if their hackers are better then MAZE's. While that is going on Canon is doing an audit of all the possible data involved to see if they can simply restore with off site back-ups.
> 
> ...


Ranked in fortune 500 and getting hit by hackers and being down for weeks is not a good sign for the company itself in front of consumers ... we understand that its bad but then again they should give something on their website with an ETA ..just saying go to Cananda and then saying only drivers..its bad for their image ...very bad


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 13, 2020)

Maru said:


> Ranked in fortune 500 and getting hit by hackers and being down for weeks is not a good sign for the company itself in front of consumers ... we understand that its bad but then again they should give something on their website with an ETA ..just saying go to *Canada* and then saying only drivers..its bad for their image ...very bad


Yep, being down for 6 days is bad. Like Garmin I am sure Canon will recover.


----------



## Maru (Aug 13, 2020)

Ramage said:


> Yep, being down for 6 days is bad. Like Garmin I am sure Canon will recover.


Yeah I hope so too...


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 13, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> From all of us kneecapped on the wait list for our cameras I would like to say...
> 
> POST IMAGES! DOIT! DOIT! STOP BEING A BOGART!


Full image details at

__
https://flic.kr/p/2jtacmL
Just need some more DR


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 13, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> Full image details at
> 
> __
> https://flic.kr/p/2jtacmL
> ...



Very nice and your Flickr is impressive as well. Thank you!


----------



## Baron_Karza (Aug 13, 2020)

Is that the Corona Virus? 




David - Sydney said:


> Full image details at
> 
> __
> https://flic.kr/p/2jtacmL
> ...


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 13, 2020)

Baron_Karza said:


> Is that the Corona Virus?


well, I guess that the magnetic field could be influenced by the recent 5G towers being installed. I did get the ferrofluid from Bill Gates' website. I would not recommend injecting it.


----------



## Paul Nordin (Aug 13, 2020)

Mike9129 said:


> Which part is wrong? That sigma 18-35 1.8 is a great lens that would fix the issue with having to work with the x1.7 crop (someone mentioned x1.6 as well, so I'm not sure which is correct) for the wide shots.
> 
> More to the point, if theres a PL mount adapter for the R5 that you can mount super 35 sized glass onto, wouldnt that then work perfectly with the crop for 4k?
> 
> Do I have that wrong? Let me know, I'm my head it should...



Mike, the PL mount can easily cover the FF of the R5. its the lenses not the mount that need to support FF. I worked with the Laowa Zero-D 12mm Cine lens using a PL Adapter last weekend on my R5...Zero vignetting.


----------



## Sean C (Aug 13, 2020)

mppix said:


> Good question. In HW GPU encoding (I use nvenc), I never noticed a relevant difference between h264/h265 encoding, which seems to be confirmed by <chart snipped>
> This does not mean much for microcontrollers where you count fractions of watts. However, encoding may be quite efficient (or at least not be the bottleneck) as 8K RAW vs 8K h265 have similar recording times in the R5.


There you're seeing the advantage of a massively parallel processor with (at least some) dedicated hardware specialized for those codecs and a large power budget. Modern desktop Nvidia cards are stronger than a Cray.
We don't know how optimized Canon engineers had time to make the H265 hardware codec support, or if it's having to lean on the general purpose CPU (much slower/less efficient) - or how many transistors could be dedicated. They add power dissipation (heat) and design time, but efficiency can lower it so even if you have all the time you need for dev work it's a trade off.

Hopefully there are some efficiency gains the firmware guys can find. It would be normal for the release firmware priorities to be features and quashing bugs not performance (so long as it was 'enough'), so there is reason to be optimistic about at least modest gains.


----------



## Nathan Phillips (Aug 13, 2020)

So something I just came across...

Did a test of my two R5’s with identical settings at 4K60 full sensor All-I via external recording only. One camera had cards in it and one didn’t. Still only recording externally keep in mind. I also had both with battery grips attached.

Both cameras shot over 2 hours continuous and the camera never exceeded 110 Degrees F. Room temp was 75 degrees F. Only issue I had was the camera dying after both batteries in each camera died.
No settings were made to reserve power either.

So I’m thinking the battery grip helps.


----------



## MinoltaSRT101 (Aug 13, 2020)

Mike9129 said:


> Im currently waiting for my RF 70-200 to turn up.
> Its gonna be great going by what you and others have said!


I'm renting an RF 70-200 to try out on my R5 this weekend. I've been using the EF adapter with the Tamron 70-200, Tamron 150-600 & Canon EF 24-105 F4. It has been phenomenal (I only shoot stills & couldn't care less about the video nonsense)! Looking forward to see if RF glass could possibly be an improvement over what I've been seeing with my current lenses.


----------



## Nathan Phillips (Aug 13, 2020)

Nathan Phillips said:


> So something I just came across...
> 
> Did a test of my two R5’s with identical settings at 4K60 full sensor All-I via external recording only. One camera had cards in it and one didn’t. Still only recording externally keep in mind. I also had both with battery grips attached.
> 
> ...


----------



## Stu_bert (Aug 13, 2020)

thanks - very helpful information...


----------



## Otara (Aug 13, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> From all of us kneecapped on the wait list for our cameras I would like to say...
> 
> POST IMAGES! DOIT! DOIT! STOP BEING A BOGART!



We're in lockdown due to CoVid, currently the pictures I can take feel like getting a new computer and only being able to do minesweeper on it.


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 13, 2020)

Otara said:


> We're in lockdown due to CoVid, currently the pictures I can take feel like getting a new computer and only being able to do minesweeper on it.



I shoot wildlife so I can find subjects all over the place. Went out today as a matter of fact. Probably saw three people all day. The advantages of living on a small island.


----------



## adrian_bacon (Aug 13, 2020)

Chris.Chapterten said:


> For sure, this is probably the best way to work with the C300 and R5. I'm not sure why the 1.6x crop oversampled mode is always overlooked. It's very useful IMO



That’s because some people have a tendency to hyper lock on the leaves and branches instead of looking at the forest. You can see that happening right now over at another site... Instead of looking at the forest and some of the practical ways the R5 could be used in various scenarios with a super 35 sized A-Cam (like a C-300 Mk III), they’re hyper locked on trying to show/prove how it can’t be used that way because canon is somehow lying to and defrauding their customers. It’s actually pretty comical to watch. That’s not to say Canon doesn’t have a few things about the R5 that they need to address, because they do, but given that they’re probably internally dealing with a COVID-19 crisis in terms of man power and having to adapt the way they work while trying to get this out the door, I’m not surprised that it hasn’t gone as smoothly as we’d expect.

All that being said, if you’re on a shoot with a super 35 sized A cam (Like a C300 Mk III) it doesn’t make a lot of sense to have a full frame B cam with a different set of glass just for it. I’d rather have one complete set of glass for super 35 with maybe a couple duplicate copies of common focal lengths, put the R5 in oversampled crop mode and just be done with it and get on with getting my stuff shot. Every production is going to be different, but some of this is just practical common sense.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Aug 13, 2020)

Dragon said:


> The humorous part of all the U-Tubers bitching about the 8k record time is that not one has made a single comment about the 8k video quality. I suspect that is because not one of them has any means to view 8k video. They are not happy with how long the camera will record in a format they can't use. Pretty funny when you think about it.



Most of the videos i've seen complaining about high speed and high quality 4K modes, very few about 8K. And you don't need 8K monitor to enjoy the benefits of the 8K


----------



## Mike9129 (Aug 13, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> From all of us kneecapped on the wait list for our cameras I would like to say...
> 
> POST IMAGES! DOIT! DOIT! STOP BEING A BOGART!


Unfortunately, like another person said, it's a but like buying a new car and then discovering that the bridge outside your house has been washed away overnight so you're stuck at home and cant drive it anywhere to test it out!

Ive only taken it to the beach so far as opposed to doing anything much productive with it! Take a look on Instagram @carthymichaelmc the 2 beach pics were taken with it in raw and converted with the canon dng converter.


----------



## adrian_bacon (Aug 13, 2020)

Dragon said:


> The humorous part of all the U-Tubers bitching about the 8k record time is that not one has made a single comment about the 8k video quality. I suspect that is because not one of them has any means to view 8k video. They are not happy with how long the camera will record in a format they can't use. Pretty funny when you think about it.



Well, the dirty little secret of the YouTube community is that it's really just them spouting off specsmanship stuff. Many of them don't even record in 4K. They record in 1080, and scale it up to 4K for the YouTube upload. There has been numerous tests done on YouTube that shows that actually recording in 4k makes very little to no difference in the image quality you see on YouTube for the vast majority of devices that are used to watch YouTube content.

Combine that with the fact that if you're recording full frame with a reasonably large aperture (like f/2.8 or f/2), a significant number of your shots are going to have a pretty large chunk of your frame not even in focus because your depth of field is barely large enough to keep your face in focus. In that scenario, how much resolution do you actually need? Turns out, not nearly as much as you'd think, and recording in 1080 with a 4K upscale for YouTube nets a picture that is indistinguishable from one actually recorded and uploaded in 4K for the vast majority of YouTube viewers. 

If you're pushing out multiple YouTube videos a week, this actually makes a pretty significant difference to how much you have to spend to store and edit your footage.

That doesn't mean that recording in 4K or even 8K doesn't have value, it's just that depending on your intended delivery platform, it may be unnecessary.


----------



## Baron_Karza (Aug 13, 2020)

Mike9129 said:


> Unfortunately, like another person said, it's a but like buying a new car and then discovering that the bridge outside your house has been washed away overnight so you're stuck at home and cant drive it anywhere to test it out!
> 
> Ive only taken it to the beach so far as opposed to doing anything much productive with it! Take a look on Instagram @carthymichaelmc the 2 beach pics were taken with it in raw and converted with the canon dng converter.



Nice!
Looks like you not only crossed that bridge, but left the planet Earth for Tatooine!


----------



## wanderer23 (Aug 13, 2020)

Sorry I"m not the most familiar with CR in general. Has CR2 been pretty reliable in the past? I'd be absoultely thrilled if this list of things ends up true.


----------



## Dragon (Aug 13, 2020)

blackcoffee17 said:


> Most of the videos i've seen complaining about high speed and high quality 4K modes, very few about 8K. And you don't need 8K monitor to enjoy the benefits of the 8K


Other than using the 8k footage as a source to pan around in for a 4k output, just how are you going to enjoy the benefits of 8k without an 8k monitor?


----------



## Dragon (Aug 13, 2020)

Maru said:


> Ranked in fortune 500 and getting hit by hackers and being down for weeks is not a good sign for the company itself in front of consumers ... we understand that its bad but then again they should give something on their website with an ETA ..just saying go to Cananda and then saying only drivers..its bad for their image ...very bad


Often there is a defined limit to what you can say without triggering the hackers. Sadly, the governments of the world (including ours) have done little to make the price for this kind of hacking untenable. Some are even complicit. I am for public hanging, or at least public flaying. Expectation of extreme pain is a useful deterrent.


----------



## Baron_Karza (Aug 13, 2020)

wanderer23 said:


> Sorry I"m not the most familiar with CR in general. Has CR2 been pretty reliable in the past? I'd be absoultely thrilled if this list of things ends up true.



From the "CR Rating System" left navigation bar:

_Hello readers.

This is a rumors site, not everything you read here should be taken as fact unless we say so!

Below is an explanation of our ratings for posts of the rumor genre.

[CR0] – Basically a joke
We don’t post these types of things very often, unless we see other sites posting something that is completely untrue and will never happen.

[CR1] – Plausible information, but from an unconfirmed source
This is information we deem as “possible”. However, the information comes from an unknown or anonymous source, so we cannot confirm its authenticity.

[CR2] – Good information from a known source
Even known sources that have been correct in the past may not provide perfect information from time to time. This rating means there’s a strong possibility that the information has some truth to it, but it may be incomplete and/or misinterpreted information.

[CR3] – Fact
We use this rating when we’re sure what we’re posting is a fact.

Have fun here at Canon Rumors, but don’t make any crazy buying decisions based on anything that isn’t rated [CR3]. We do our best to give you the most accurate information possible, but it’s really hard to be correct 100% of the time.

Thank-you for reading the site and not taking things too seriously.

Cheers,
Craig_


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Aug 13, 2020)

Dragon said:


> Other than using the 8k footage as a source to pan around in for a 4k output, just how are you going to enjoy the benefits of 8k without an 8k monitor?



Pan, zoom, crop, stabilise 4K footage, resize in post (ok, you can use oversampled 4K for that) or shoot short action sequences and grab frames from it.


----------



## Paul Nordin (Aug 13, 2020)

Dragon said:


> Other than using the 8k footage as a source to pan around in for a 4k output, just how are you going to enjoy the benefits of 8k without an 8k monitor?


This is the same argument that people used when SD moved to HD, and HD moved to 4k. The bottom line is, shooting 8k now is a cutting/bleeding edge act. But the push for more quality (even if only a perception, not reality) is inevitable. And I can say the reality of taking 8k footage into post to work with it is painful, and awesome at the same time...even if I'm mastering to 4k.


----------



## Dragon (Aug 13, 2020)

blackcoffee17 said:


> Pan, zoom, crop, stabilise 4K footage, resize in post (ok, you can use oversampled 4K for that) or shoot short action sequences and grab frames from it.


Grabbing frames is very useful, but that is something for the stills guys. I have seen very little mention of any of this by the whiny U-tubers.


----------



## Dragon (Aug 13, 2020)

Paul Nordin said:


> This is the same argument that people used when SD moved to HD, and HD moved to 4k. The bottom line is, shooting 8k now is a cutting/bleeding edge act. But the push for more quality (even if only a perception, not reality) is inevitable. And I can say the reality of taking 8k footage into post to work with it is painful, and awesome at the same time...even if I'm mastering to 4k.


I didn't mean to imply that 8k wasn't useful, just that the U-Tube whiners have done nothing to point out its utility.


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 13, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> From all of us kneecapped on the wait list for our cameras I would like to say...
> 
> POST IMAGES! DOIT! DOIT! STOP BEING A BOGART!


How much I recovered from this is impressive - Not perfect but impressive. And eye auto focus works on statues 




Some more random shots


----------



## jam05 (Aug 13, 2020)

DBounce said:


> It will certainly kill it if the problem is resolved. The recovery time is the real problem.


Recovery time is based on the devices actual temperature. It would be silly to think that a camera sitting in the sun in Miami Florida would have the same recovery time as one sitting in the Alps.


----------



## DBounce (Aug 13, 2020)

jam05 said:


> Recovery time is based on the devices actual temperature. It would be silly to think that a camera sitting in the sun in Miami Florida would have the same recovery time as one sitting in the Alps.


Is it? Because there is more than a little evidence to suggest temperature might have little to do with it in the case of the R5.


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 13, 2020)

DBounce said:


> Is it? Because there is more than a little evidence to suggest temperature might have little to do with it in the case of the R5.


Oh you mean the crap the EOSHD is throwing around... 

Seems it was debunked




__





R5 artificial time limit


https://www.eoshd.com/news/chinese-user-modifies-canon-eos-r5-to-improve-heat-management-but-finds-artificial-firmware-time-limit/Title edited to r...



www.fredmiranda.com


----------



## dkaupp (Aug 13, 2020)

I know this won't happen but it would be nice to separate the 'photography' updates from the 'video' dates. Give the still photographers the option without having to update all the video crap.


----------



## dkaupp (Aug 13, 2020)

vjlex said:


> Let's hope this will kill all the talk about overheating once and for all.


What do u expect for $3800? If you or anyone is serious about making 'movies', get a C300 or 500! Tired of every complaining about 'overheating' or this and that!


----------



## dkaupp (Aug 13, 2020)

wockawocka said:


> Instead of making it all about video, how about god damn uncompressed Mraw Canon.


Yea......What do u expect for $3800? If anyone is serious about making 'movies', get a C300 or 500! Tired of every complaining about 'overheating' or this and that!


----------



## Baron_Karza (Aug 13, 2020)

I expect firmware might help with overheating.


----------



## dkaupp (Aug 13, 2020)

Baron_Karza said:


> I expect firmware might help with overheating.


It's a 'hardware' issue, not a 'firmware' issue. Whenever u have a container that produces heat, you have to have a vent for the heat to escape and a 'fan' to help it dissipate the heat and keep the container cool or at least cooler........think of a home attic......they all have a vent at the very least.....most also have a fan. Common sense, science......not 'firmware'!


----------



## Jethro (Aug 13, 2020)

dkaupp said:


> It's a 'hardware' issue, not a 'firmware' issue. Whenever u have a container that produces heat, you have to have a vent for the heat to escape and a 'fan' to help it dissipate the heat and keep the container cool or at least cooler........think of a home attic......they all have a vent at the very least.....most also have a fan. Common sense, science......not 'firmware'!


I don't think anyone (apart maybe from the Canon techs labouring away as we speak) know that for certain. The fact that there is a difference in shooting times without CFE cards implies there may be firmware tweaks possible. This may be answered when the promised firmware update drops.


----------



## Jethro (Aug 13, 2020)

dkaupp said:


> I know this won't happen but it would be nice to separate the 'photography' updates from the 'video' dates. Give the still photographers the option without having to update all the video crap.


Why? Do you think it would be saving on 'disk space'?


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 13, 2020)

Ramage said:


> How much I recovered from this is impressive - Not perfect but impressive. And eye auto focus works on statues
> View attachment 192125
> 
> View attachment 192126
> ...




These are really nice (love the Black-Eyed Susans(?) but the rest are excellent as well. The first thing I thought when I saw the recovered highlights in the first images was I'M SAVED!


----------



## dkaupp (Aug 13, 2020)

Jethro said:


> Why? Do you think it would be saving on 'disk space'?


No


----------



## dkaupp (Aug 13, 2020)

Jethro said:


> I don't think anyone (apart maybe from the Canon techs labouring away as we speak) know that for certain. The fact that there is a difference in shooting times without CFE cards implies there may be firmware tweaks possible. This may be answered when the promised firmware update drops.


A great review was posted about a week ago on CR. The reputable person who gave it stated he took the CF and SD cards out and used external recording. He stated it made no difference.......just saying.


----------



## WriteLight (Aug 13, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> These are really nice (love the Black-Eyed Susans(?) but the rest are excellent as well. The first thing I thought when I saw the recovered highlights in the first images was I'M SAVED!


Even with the histogram up I am still overexposing - I think because of the flippy screen brightness - but even so there isn't anything I haven't been able to recover. But man, I'm going to have to get a PC upgrade. I did some star trails during the Perseids but processing the 300 files...took...awhile.


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 14, 2020)

WriteLight said:


> Even with the histogram up I am still overexposing - I think because of the flippy screen brightness - but even so there isn't anything I haven't been able to recover. But man, I'm going to have to get a PC upgrade. I did some star trails during the Perseids but processing the 300 files...took...awhile.


I overexposed that shot to try something. 

I tend to shoot on a tripod a lot and exposure stack if I am not using grad filters. The plan was to take 2 shots and stack them handheld and see how the IBIS handled it but I got distracted by the mosquitos eating my LEGS... and my wife fumigating me with deep woods off (extra deet).


----------



## analoggrotto (Aug 14, 2020)

Ramage said:


> Oh you mean the crap the EOSHD is throwing around...
> 
> Seems it was debunked
> 
> ...



Has EOSHD lost its mind?

Roger Cicala has a really good post in that thread:

_Sometimes we do teardowns when things break, other times when we're ready to make our in-house repair outlines. The latter happens when 1) Aaron and I have time and 2) the item is available in quantities that allow us to pull one out of stock for a couple of days. With the R5, which currently has a long waiting list of people wanting it as soon as we get a copy in stock, it's going to be a month probably. Depends on how quickly we get our orders filled. 

I really don't have any opinion on all the discussion otherwise, I'm not a software person. I would add, though, that my limited experience with throwing heat sink paste and runs over hot spots, has never been the panacea that some people think it's going to be. I'm not trying to say that first gen engineering (this is sort of first gen, with IBIS, a new sensor, and a CPU that hasn't been in a mirrorless body before) is the best at all. But I am saying there's a lot more to heat flow in an enclosed, small body with several heat sources (sensors and IBIS get hot and weren't even considered in that limited teardown) than what's being considered here._


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 14, 2020)

WriteLight said:


> Even with the histogram up I am still overexposing - I think because of the flippy screen brightness - but even so there isn't anything I haven't been able to recover. But man, I'm going to have to get a PC upgrade. I did some star trails during the Perseids but processing the 300 files...took...awhile.



I shoot viewfinder 99.9 percent of the time. Unless there is a shot that demands tilty/flippy..

What kind of PC are you running?


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 14, 2020)

DBounce said:


> Is it? Because there is more than a little evidence to suggest temperature might have little to do with it in the case of the R5.




Still waiting for you to link me to those used R5s man.


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 14, 2020)

Ramage said:


> Oh you mean the crap the EOSHD is throwing around...
> 
> Seems it was debunked
> 
> ...



Knew that entire "test" was garbage about three lines in. He needs to get outside his bubble...


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 14, 2020)

DBounce said:


> Is it? Because there is more than a little evidence to suggest temperature might have little to do with it in the case of the R5.



Please link to "evidence..." Please and thank you in advance.


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 14, 2020)

Jethro said:


> firmware tweaks possible.




Tweaks? Sure. They've hinted at possible minor gains.

Turning the R5 into a Cine Camera with firmware? I don't see it.


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 14, 2020)

I am going to try and stay away from these threads because I feel like I am learning nothing new and the sides have gone to their respective corners and come out swinging and it seems no facts/opinions are going to change anyone's position. 

My last take on all of this is my R5 has overheated exactly zero times in my real world use. I have not tried to get it to overheat or tried not to get it to overheat I am simply using the Camera. I have not even seen the overheat symbol...

A big thank you to everyone on this site and across the internet that has tested the overheating and confirm the validity of the issue means I do not have to.


----------



## vjlex (Aug 14, 2020)

dkaupp said:


> What do u expect for $3800? If you or anyone is serious about making 'movies', get a C300 or 500! Tired of every complaining about 'overheating' or this and that!


not sure who you're addressing or why you quoted me, but you have no idea what you're talking about. but then again, you know what they say about people when they assume.

for the record, I'm tired of people complaining about the issue too. but i'm also tired of people assuming they know where people stand on an issue by reading into a simple comment and projecting.


----------



## WriteLight (Aug 14, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> I shoot viewfinder 99.9 percent of the time. Unless there is a shot that demands tilty/flippy..
> 
> What kind of PC are you running?


I do both...right now I'm running everything through my Lenovo Thinkpad 590 (i7 8th Gen, SSD, 24GB of RAM, weak video card), which can get the job done most of the time, but I think it's time for a dedicated photo/video edit build. Wished ya lived nearby so I could come drop off the R5 for you to play with for a weekend!


----------



## mppix (Aug 14, 2020)

Sean C said:


> There you're seeing the advantage of a massively parallel processor with (at least some) dedicated hardware specialized for those codecs and a large power budget. Modern desktop Nvidia cards are stronger than a Cray.


So true.



Sean C said:


> We don't know how optimized Canon engineers had time to make the H265 hardware codec support, or if it's having to lean on the general purpose CPU (much slower/less efficient) - or how many transistors could be dedicated. They add power dissipation (heat) and design time, but efficiency can lower it so even if you have all the time you need for dev work it's a trade off.


I think they had to spend a lot of time on this. It is probably one of the Digic X's crown jewels (encode 8K30 10-bit 422 on a microprocessor with a few Watt thermal envelope).
Software encoding of 8K in real-time is only possible with the highest-end CPU, e.g. 64core Threadripper (~280W thermal envelope).
Just 1-2years ago, real-time encoding of 8K footage was considered so demanding that Apple used it to demonstrate the power of their latest Mac Pro + accelerator card.


----------



## mppix (Aug 14, 2020)

Paul Nordin said:


> This is the same argument that people used when SD moved to HD, and HD moved to 4k. The bottom line is, shooting 8k now is a cutting/bleeding edge act. But the push for more quality (even if only a perception, not reality) is inevitable. And I can say the reality of taking 8k footage into post to work with it is painful, and awesome at the same time...even if I'm mastering to 4k.



Fully agree but I'd expect that 8K will be mainly a production tool and 4K mastering will remain "standard" for quite some time. 

Resolution is really getting to a point of diminishing returns. Unless screen sizes increase dramatically (at equal viewing distances), I don't see many tangible benefits of 8K in practice. I think "picture quality" of future screens will depend more on (local) contrast ratio and (wide) color rendition than resolution. I tried something like this in a shop recently and find it quite to the point:





The other thing is that increasing the resolution works only well for static scenes unless we also increase the fps. The bokeh/smear produced by a moving subjects (measured in mm on the sensor) depends only on the fps, shutter angle, and velocity of the subject (not resolution). See, e.g.


----------



## nchoh (Aug 14, 2020)

Heat generation mainly from Digic processor
Heat generation from Digic processor is variable - depends if you are using it heavily such as shooting 8K video

Heat dissipation = HW issue, 2 levels;

 Heat dissipation from Digic processor - any heat sink?
 Heat dissipation from camera - sealed body? body material? External temperature?

Overheating = Heat generation - Heat dissipation.

Hope this helps clear the air.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 14, 2020)

WriteLight said:


> Even with the histogram up I am still overexposing - I think because of the flippy screen brightness - but even so there isn't anything I haven't been able to recover. But man, I'm going to have to get a PC upgrade. I did some star trails during the Perseids but processing the 300 files...took...awhile.


I am wondering if CRAW is a better option for star trails as noise reduction is not as critical epsecially at lower ISO. Milky Way shot/s panorama is a different story though and I would use normal RAW for that (and stack).


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 14, 2020)

Ramage said:


> I am going to try and stay away from these threads because I feel like I am learning nothing new and the sides have gone to their respective corners and come out swinging and it seems no facts/opinions are going to change anyone's position.
> 
> My last take on all of this is my R5 has overheated exactly zero times in my real world use. I have not tried to get it to overheat or tried not to get it to overheat I am simply using the Camera. I have not even seen the overheat symbol...
> 
> A big thank you to everyone on this site and across the internet that has tested the overheating and confirm the validity of the issue means I do not have to.


I'm not a video guy but I have a R5 now and have been following the discussions. One thing that I have appreciated is learning more about the different video modes and what you can and can't easily do with them so definitely a learning experience for me and how I can use R5 video in the future. One thing for sure is that I am not upgrading my macbook pro until it can handle 4:2:2 codecs in hardware a la iPad Pro.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 14, 2020)

WriteLight said:


> I do both...right now I'm running everything through my Lenovo Thinkpad 590 (i7 8th Gen, SSD, 24GB of RAM, weak video card), which can get the job done most of the time, but I think it's time for a dedicated photo/video edit build.


Photo edit build is okay if a little slow for me at the moment. I was going to update to a new macbook pro (plus some on the options list) but after watching Max's video




I will wait for the first ARM model rather than the current Intel-based version. I will have it for a long time to come 
Hopefully later this year or early next year.


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 14, 2020)

WriteLight said:


> I do both...right now I'm running everything through my Lenovo Thinkpad 590 (i7 8th Gen, SSD, 24GB of RAM, weak video card), which can get the job done most of the time, but I think it's time for a dedicated photo/video edit build. Wished ya lived nearby so I could come drop off the R5 for you to play with for a weekend!



What a GUY! Thanks so much for that. I can’t wait for mine to get here.

I often use my Surface Book II which is pretty stout, but the heavy lifting is done on my PC - like you say, it’s purpose built. I can’t imagine doing all my processing on a laptop - I just don’t have the patience.


----------



## adrian_bacon (Aug 14, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> What a GUY! Thanks so much for that. I can’t wait for mine to get here.
> 
> I often use my Surface Book II which is pretty stout, but the heavy lifting is done on my PC - like you say, it’s purpose built. I can’t imagine doing all my processing on a laptop - I just don’t have the patience.



I use a MacBook Pro with an external AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 video card over the thunderbolt connection. In Premiere Pro it makes very short work of things. If you're going to do any significant amount of video, it's worth it to spend a little money and get good hardware acceleration.


----------



## Aregal (Aug 14, 2020)

Ramage said:


> I am going to try and stay away from these threads because I feel like I am learning nothing new and the sides have gone to their respective corners and come out swinging and it seems no facts/opinions are going to change anyone's position.
> 
> My last take on all of this is my R5 has overheated exactly zero times in my real world use. I have not tried to get it to overheat or tried not to get it to overheat I am simply using the Camera. I have not even seen the overheat symbol...
> 
> A big thank you to everyone on this site and across the internet that has tested the overheating and confirm the validity of the issue means I do not have to.


I habe literally had the same experience. I had a 2hrs shoot outdoors, shooting 4K120; No overheating or warning and it was 96F 80% humidity.


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 14, 2020)

Aregal said:


> I habe literally had the same experience. I had a 2hrs shoot outdoors, shooting 4K120; No overheating or warning and it was 96F 80% humidity.


genuine question: with battery grip or no battery grip attached? it makes quite a difference according to number of reports.






Canon EOS R5 firmware update coming soon, RAW light to be added? [CR2]


Yep, being down for 6 days is bad. Like Garmin I am sure Canon will recover. Yeah I hope so too...




www.canonrumors.com


----------



## yeahright (Aug 14, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> These are really nice (love the Black-Eyed Susans(?) but the rest are excellent as well. The first thing I thought when I saw the recovered highlights in the first images was I'M SAVED!


but ... ehm ... the highlights in the clouds *are* blown-out, so no recovery there (second photo).


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 14, 2020)

yeahright said:


> but ... ehm ... the highlights in the clouds *are* blown-out, so no recovery there (second photo).



It got better though after the recovery. But still blown out in large areas. But in general, speaking of dynamic range, you never want to blow the highlights up. Even on Phase One. You squeeze the DR from the shadows and never from the highlights. Expose to the right but the histogram mustn't be clipped on the right.


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 14, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> It got better though after the recovery. But still blown out in large areas. But in general, speaking of dynamic range, you never want to blow the highlights up. Even on Phase One. You squeeze the DR from the shadows and never from the highlights. Expose to the right but the histogram mustn't be clipped on the right.


Canon files are very strong from a highlights recovery perspective traditionally Containing at least 2/3 of a stop margin to play with blown highlights. I am reading some reports that R5 is limited to 1/3 of a stop approx. highlights recovery margin instead. Take this with a grain of salt as this info has not been confirmed by reputable sources yet.


----------



## yeahright (Aug 14, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> Canon files are very strong from a highlights recovery perspective traditionally Containing at least 2/3 of a stop margin to play with blown highlights. I am reading some reports that R5 is limited to 1/3 of a stop approx. highlights recovery margin instead. Take this with a grain of salt as this info has not been confirmed by reputable sources yet.


2/3 or 1/3 stop highlight recovery margin with respect to what? the in-camera (=JPG) histogram?


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 14, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> Canon files are very strong from a highlights recovery perspective traditionally



If you're about raw files, it may be a bit misleading statement; they can be neither strong nor weak. This recovery depends on the initial conversion to jpeg or to interim format when displayed in an editor. If the initial/default conversion is conservative and cuts a lot of highlights, you'll see a lot of 'recovery' when editing raw files. But it's all about initial digital conversion - how much of the full DR gets squeezed into the jpegs.


----------



## SaharshD (Aug 14, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> Aside from the drama queen over at EOS HD ranting conspiracy theories, no one has suggested or proven anyone is being deceived about anything. If you put your eggs in that hysteria basket bully for you.
> 
> If Sony's handy-cam is currently outselling the R5 at B&H, so what? That could change tomorrow and then back again two days later. Did B&H release a memo describing the specifics of the change in sales status of these two items, or do you just "know"?... As far as I know there is no such thing as a "cripple debacle" and never in my life has something being the number one seller or top seller at B&H or anywhere else influenced my buying decision. YMMV.
> 
> ...


----------



## BeenThere (Aug 14, 2020)

The Canon bashing campaign is not having any effect and it is driving the trolls and U-Tube shills crazy. The Canon R5 is sold out everywhere and overall Canon global camera sales are crushing their so called competitors.


----------



## fingerstein (Aug 14, 2020)

I would like to see unlimited recording limit. Oh, and a add a heatsink, please!


----------



## WriteLight (Aug 14, 2020)

adrian_bacon said:


> I use a MacBook Pro with an external AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 video card over the thunderbolt connection. In Premiere Pro it makes very short work of things. If you're going to do any significant amount of video, it's worth it to spend a little money and get good hardware acceleration.


That may be my next attempt at things - to use my thunderbolt to still keep the portability of the laptop but get the processing done externally.


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 14, 2020)

yeahright said:


> but ... ehm ... the highlights in the clouds *are* blown-out, so no recovery there (second photo).




Yes, but you get my point don’t you?

Given what he started with I thought the result was pretty impressive. For those of us who occasionally ‘miss a setting‘ when chasing a target it‘s good to know that our opportunity to salvage our mistake is there - especially if the mistake isn’t so severe..


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Aug 14, 2020)

Ramage said:


> How much I recovered from this is impressive - Not perfect but impressive. And eye auto focus works on statues
> View attachment 192125
> 
> View attachment 192126
> ...


Good to see these, I tried uploading some images the other day after importing RAW to the DNG converter then into Lightroom and exporting as JPEG and uploading from the MacBook Pro photos but the site said the files were too big (about 21mb) so I Couldn't upload them without reducing the size. what size were these?


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 14, 2020)

adrian_bacon said:


> I use a MacBook Pro with an external AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 video card over the thunderbolt connection. In Premiere Pro it makes very short work of things. If you're going to do any significant amount of video, it's worth it to spend a little money and get good hardware acceleration.



I need real estate brother. These old eyes.. Main display is a BENQ PD3200U 32” 4K surrounded by 2 BENQ PD2700Q 27” 2K. PC is a i9 9900K @ 5.1Ghz, 512NVMe OS drive, 2TB NVMe work drive, 10TB storage w/2 10TB external backups, EVGA 2080Ti FTW3 video, and 64GB memory.

It’ll run anything well and pushes video and photos pretty well. Depending on how things go I may end up with an AMD next time, but for now the 9900K is doing fine. It’s another expensive hobby.


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 14, 2020)

WriteLight said:


> That may be my next attempt at things - to use my thunderbolt to still keep the portability of the laptop but get the processing done externally.



Don’t the external video cards have to be plugged into the wall though?


----------



## Colorado (Aug 14, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> I need real estate brother. These old eyes.. Main display is a BENQ PD3200U 32” 4K surrounded by 2 BENQ PD2700Q 27” 2K.


Since you mentioned old eyes... For work (coding, not photography and gaming I switched to a 55" LG OLED TV. It is hung on the wall and I moved my desk back so the screen is about 3 feet from my eyes if I sitting with proper posture. At that distance farsightedness is not a factor (for me at least) so no reading glasses are necessary. I still need to work on calibrating it for photo editing. It may or may not work for you but I thought I'd mention it.

I do laugh every time someone says "4K doesn't matter!" The difference between 4K and 1080 on a 55" monitor viewed at 3 feet is very noticeable. To be fair, the deep color and OLED display also makes a huge difference.


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 14, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> Good to see these, I tried uploading some images the other day after importing RAW to the DNG converter then into Lightroom and exporting as JPEG and uploading from the MacBook Pro photos but the site said the files were too big (about 21mb) so I Couldn't upload them without reducing the size. what size were these?


I have been using the same work flow (I need R5 support in LR) when exporting as JPEG's I set the size to 1080.


----------



## Mike9129 (Aug 14, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> I need real estate brother. These old eyes.. Main display is a BENQ PD3200U 32” 4K surrounded by 2 BENQ PD2700Q 27” 2K. PC is a i9 9900K @ 5.1Ghz, 512NVMe OS drive, 2TB NVMe work drive, 10TB storage w/2 10TB external backups, EVGA 2080Ti FTW3 video, and 64GB memory.
> 
> It’ll run anything well and pushes video and photos pretty well. Depending on how things go I may end up with an AMD next time, but for now the 9900K is doing fine. It’s another expensive hobby.


Thats a hell of a setup

What do you make of the BenQ monitors?
Im using whats technically a gaming monitor, but is a great 4k IPS panel besides that.
Im kinda in the market to switch it out for either a pair of 27-32" monitors tho.


----------



## adrian_bacon (Aug 14, 2020)

WriteLight said:


> That may be my next attempt at things - to use my thunderbolt to still keep the portability of the laptop but get the processing done externally.



it works really well. You can un plug the laptop and basically get a laptop, but then when you get back to the office, one cable plugs in and you have all your monitors and a massive amount video rendering firepower, and that one cable charges your battery. I do a lot of video editing, and it’s ideal for that.


----------



## adrian_bacon (Aug 14, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> Don’t the external video cards have to be plugged into the wall though?



yes. This is for an edit suite with multiple 4K monitors and a stack of storage


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 14, 2020)

adrian_bacon said:


> yes. This is for an edit suite with multiple 4K monitors and a stack of storage




Is all the processing still within the laptop?


----------



## adrian_bacon (Aug 14, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> I need real estate brother. These old eyes.. Main display is a BENQ PD3200U 32” 4K surrounded by 2 BENQ PD2700Q 27” 2K. PC is a i9 9900K @ 5.1Ghz, 512NVMe OS drive, 2TB NVMe work drive, 10TB storage w/2 10TB external backups, EVGA 2080Ti FTW3 video, and 64GB memory.
> 
> It’ll run anything well and pushes video and photos pretty well. Depending on how things go I may end up with an AMD next time, but for now the 9900K is doing fine. It’s another expensive hobby.



I hear ya. I’m the same way. Super beefy video card with a pile of monitors attached to it and a stack of storage. I just like being able to unplug and take the MacBook Pro with me so when I’m out and about, I still have a decent computer.


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 14, 2020)

Mike9129 said:


> Thats a hell of a setup
> 
> What do you make of the BenQ monitors?
> Im using whats technically a gaming monitor, but is a great 4k IPS panel besides that.
> Im kinda in the market to switch it out for either a pair of 27-32" monitors tho.




The 32 is beyond excellent, the 27s are very good. The 32 is shared with my mac setup so I can share keyboard/mouse between the two systems (press two buttons to switch back and forth) It's one of the extra features I really appreciate. It was color calibrated out of the box but I put a Spyder on it and it was true - no adjustment required. I was shocked.

I'd previously had the twin 27s so when I got the 32 I ordered stands and set up the panels. It's overkill for me but I love it anyway. Main editing is in the 32 4K, on the left I keep the DxO loupe panel with RAW thumbnails, and on the right I keep my export folder. For video it's the same except for the programs used.

It's also great for gaming. I'm primarily a FPS guy but the 60Hz is fine. I'm not trying to kill the world, just have a good time. Twenty years ago maybe, but it's true what they say about reflexes and age.

I've owned Asus and Dells in the past and I put the BENQs at the same level (for the 27s) and above for the 32 4K. It's a sight to behold IMO.


----------



## adrian_bacon (Aug 14, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> Is all the processing still within the laptop?



for photos and video? I use Adobe LR and Premiere/After Effects which supports using the external video card to accelerate things. I’m sure some things happen on the laptop, but most of it happens on the video card. With my particular current set up, I can edit a multi-cam in 4K with a full stack of effects with no previews or proxies, and when it comes time to render it out to a file, it does it way faster than real time. If I had just my laptop, that doesn’t happen.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Aug 14, 2020)

Ramage said:


> I have been using the same work flow (I need R5 support in LR) when exporting as JPEG's I set the size to 1080.
> View attachment 192141


Thanks


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 14, 2020)

I really like this guys approach - How can I make it work, not how does it not work.


----------



## adrian_bacon (Aug 14, 2020)

Ramage said:


> I really like this guys approach - How can I make it work, not how does it not work.



exactly. a Lot of people make a lot of hard and fast rules about what will and won’t work without actually checking to see if it actually makes a difference in the end product. On paper, or in theory, it might be better, but more often than not, in real life with the end result delivered to a client, the difference was negligible at best, or, that hard and fast rule was valid 10 years ago when all the captured video was 8 bit 4:2:0 at 24Mbps And our computers chugged when dealing with it, but don’t chug any more.

it often pays to revisit and re-evaluate things whenever something changes As there just may be something that suddenly makes your life easier. At least do it when you get a new camera or a new editing computer. It’s amazing how many people don’t do that. It really does pay to spend a little time up front mapping out best use scenarios and settings for a given camera and workflow for your type of work instead of just blindly requiring things like All-I encoding.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 15, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> Given what he started with I thought the result was pretty impressive. For those of us who occasionally ‘miss a setting‘ when chasing a target it‘s good to know that our opportunity to salvage our mistake is there - especially if the mistake isn’t so severe..



In terms of raw file processing, and given the exposures are the same, you don't get any improvement in highlight recovery compared to the previous cameras. Improvements in dynamic range go to the shadows.


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 15, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> In terms of raw file processing, and given the exposures are the same, you don't get any improvement in highlight recovery compared to the previous cameras. Improvements in dynamic range go to the shadows.


I am reserving judgement until I can have my normal workflow restored. The DNG converter may give the same results that the fully integrated LR/PS results give but that remains to be seen by me. 

Even if the dynamic range is crazy good I will likely continue to shoot the same way when I am not 100% confident in the shadows or the highlights. Safety shot 1 for shadows safety shot 2 for highlights


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 15, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> you don't get any improvement in highlight recovery compared to the previous cameras



Which previous cameras?

Without having my camera in my hand to do a side by side, it would appear that from this rough experiment that it did a tremendous job. I'm going by what my eyes are telling me and my very limited experience. You obviously know more.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 15, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> Which previous cameras?



Previous-gen Canon or other brand camera with 14-bit sensor ADC.



Bert63 said:


> Without having my camera in my hand to do a side by side, it would appear that from this rough experiment that it did a tremendous job. I'm going by what my eyes are telling me and my very limited experience. You obviously know more.



It doesn't matter if the camera is in your hand or not. It's how modern digital sensors work and how digital conversions work. There's no 'highlights recovery' as such, if we're talking about raw files. Different cameras may generate different views in EVF and LiveView and different jpegs which gives an _illusion_ of greater or smaller highlights recovery. The illusion comes from how the camera maps its raw 14-bit range into 8-bit jpeg that you initially see in preview.

But given the same exposures, you'll be getting roughly the same amount of information in the highlights from different cameras so you don't get any significant gain in so called highlights recovery.
If you go from 14-bit to 16-bit sensor, you get more information in highlights, but the R5 still has a 14-bit sensor.

More interesting reading is here


White Level Study



And you can see where the highlight clipping occurs in different cameras here https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PTC.htm (it's the sharp drop of the curve near 14 stops).

From the practical point what matters is signal-to-noise ratio in the shadows, and the shadows is where the dynamic range improvements are noticeable the most.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 15, 2020)

Ramage said:


> Even if the dynamic range is crazy good I will likely continue to shoot the same way when I am not 100% confident in the shadows or the highlights. Safety shot 1 for shadows safety shot 2 for highlights



When I shoot action, I rely on in-camera metering and compensate if needed (in M mode most of the time). For portraits and/or with controlled light, it's also manual shooting and I'm trying to get a good looking exposure in the camera preview.

Otherwise (for landscapes, where it matters the most) I use histogram and ETTR and never 'expose for highlights' - this term creates a lot of confusion and misconceptions and is, in fact, a bad practice. Exposure for highlight may only be justified if you're in a great hurry.


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 15, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Previous-gen Canon or other brand camera with 14-bit sensor ADC.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think @Bert63 was simply trying to be nice about the shots I posted. I know they are snap shots at best and I am OK with that. 

Was not my intention to start a debate on highlight recovery.


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 15, 2020)

Ramage said:


> I think @Bert63 was simply trying to be nice about the shots I posted. I know they are snap shots at best and I am OK with that.
> 
> Was not my intention to start a debate on highlight recovery.



Mine either.

I appreciated you posting the examples very much. The rest came as bit of a surprise.


----------



## jam05 (Aug 15, 2020)

What I really want is to be able to save my settings to the card is in my other Canon camera. I have sent a letter to Canon support and called them. Hope to get this. Can't even do it from any of the apps. Can't share the R5 with anyone until I can save my settings.


----------



## derpderp (Aug 15, 2020)

bbasiaga said:


> is it possible they can lower the sale price by about $1k with this firmware update? lol. I really want this camera, but I don't think its really financially feasible at this point.



lol if you cant afford it then don't buy it.


----------



## Baron_Karza (Aug 15, 2020)

derpderp said:


> lol if you cant afford it then don't buy it.



if they lower the price like he asked for, then he could afford to buy it. duh


----------



## Baron_Karza (Aug 15, 2020)

dkaupp said:


> It's a 'hardware' issue, not a 'firmware' issue. Whenever u have a container that produces heat, you have to have a vent for the heat to escape and a 'fan' to help it dissipate the heat and keep the container cool or at least cooler........think of a home attic......they all have a vent at the very least.....most also have a fan. Common sense, science......not 'firmware'!



what do you think causes the camera to flash an overheating warning light and then shut down the camera from recording? A little tiny man inside it pulls a switch? If all the physical sensors are working correctly but for some reason the camera stops recording at *cooler* temps than designed to stop at (or start back up again after cooling down), then *firmware* _could_ be the issue.


----------



## adrian_bacon (Aug 15, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Previous-gen Canon or other brand camera with 14-bit sensor ADC



I'm not entirely sure Canon is using a 14 bit ADC. Their raw file might be 14 bit, but I've been mapping out their sensor response for the last couple of generations of their cameras (starting with the 80D) and even though it's raw, there appears to be a bit of a toe where exposure gently rolls off a little before settling into the noise floor. There's a couple of extra stops of visible information down there, though it's really noisy. The same goes for the upper end. The sensor stops being linear at ~10,000, and there's more tonal information encoded all the way up to 16383 that isn't linear. It appears that the ADC might actually be 16 bit and they're smooshing it into a 14 bit container.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Aug 15, 2020)

I promise that I'm not just picking you tube clips that are positive, this one is someone I have started to follow as she is quite funny and honest with no frills.

In this video, she is completely honest that she is a stills shooter and doesn't compare any other brand as she is Canon through and through. There are no lists of specs or technical details, just an honest review of using the R5 in her job over a week. she's also used the ability to transfer images via wifi that seems to be useful.


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 15, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> If you're about raw files, it may be a bit misleading statement; they can be neither strong nor weak. This recovery depends on the initial conversion to jpeg or to interim format when displayed in an editor. If the initial/default conversion is conservative and cuts a lot of highlights, you'll see a lot of 'recovery' when editing raw files. But it's all about initial digital conversion - how much of the full DR gets squeezed into the jpegs.


Canon RAW files are know to contain that additional, "extra bit" of recoverable highlights despite the red channel showing its full capacity utilisation. (255).
sure, it may be editor specific. however with LR or DXO PL I typically am able to recover "clipped" highlights past the initial 255 reading. so call it what you like. what I am saying is that it seems that R5 files are no longer that flexible. It is likely that Canon is "squeezing" every single bit out of available DR now.. fine..


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 15, 2020)

adrian_bacon said:


> I'm not entirely sure Canon is using a 14 bit ADC. Their raw file might be 14 bit, but I've been mapping out their sensor response for the last couple of generations of their cameras (starting with the 80D) and even though it's raw, there appears to be a bit of a toe where exposure gently rolls off a little before settling into the noise floor. There's a couple of extra stops of visible information down there, though it's really noisy. The same goes for the upper end. The sensor stops being linear at ~10,000, and there's more tonal information encoded all the way up to 16383 that isn't linear. It appears that the ADC might actually be 16 bit and they're smooshing it into a 14 bit container.


It must be a 14-bit ADC, it wouldn't make any sense to convert to 16 bit but only write 14 bits. Also 16-bit reading takes much longer than 14-bit.



SecureGSM said:


> Canon RAW files are know to contain that additional, "extra bit" of recoverable highlights despite the red channel showing its full capacity utilisation. (255).



In 14-bit raw files, the red channel, roughly speaking, will be between [0..16383]. There will also be a white point and black point values specified in the raw file that indicate where exactly the clipping occurs. The range of [blackPoint .. whitePoint] is then mapped to RGB, sRGB or whatever colour space you have in the editor and monitor.

So what you see in the initial jpeg preview or in the editor (including the red at 255) is a cconverted value into a much narrower colour space. Any so called 'highlight recovery' is just an application of a different conversion curve.


----------



## Maru (Aug 15, 2020)

Can we get a camera like "R6 - Video feature" or "R5 - Video feature" to reduce the cost!


----------



## deleteme (Aug 15, 2020)

Lot of pages here and most seem concerned with video.
I am interested in what a FW update might do for stills.
The first thing I think of is enabling a multi-shot high res mode. That would be nice and bring them into parity with the competition that offers it already.
As they are coming later to the party maybe they could do something special such as a high bit depth quasi-HDR high res mode.


----------



## adrian_bacon (Aug 15, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> It must be a 14-bit ADC, it wouldn't make any sense to convert to 16 bit but only write 14 bits. Also 16-bit reading takes much longer than 14-bit.



they already don’t write the sample data into the 14 bit container in a completely linear fashion because they add a bias that limits the range of discrete values that they can write, so to even write 14 stops of information into the CR2/CR3 with the bias they put in there, they’re already not linear just to get it to fit. Besides, I’m talking about stills mode, not video mode. Having a 16 bit readout for stills could result in less noise on the bottom end, even if writing it into 14 bit container. With a 14 bit container, you have more than enough discrete sample data that you’ll never see banding or tonal artifacts, so how many bits your ADC is, is somewhat less of an issue.

you can even see this with other camera manufacturers. How are they getting more than 14 stops of dynamic range in a 14 bit raw file? At least part of the tonal range isn’t being written linearly if they have more than 14 stops of tonal data to write.

this is part of the reason why I started to spend a little time mapping out the sensor response of every new camera that I get. The container size isn’t necessarily indicative of the ADC bit depth, and the metadata in the raw file doesn’t necessarily tell the whole story of what’s happening during an actual exposure. That and it was a good excuse to use my sensitometer for something besides determining film speed In my lab.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 16, 2020)

adrian_bacon said:


> they already don’t write the sample data into the 14 bit container in a completely linear fashion because they add a bias that limits the range of discrete values that they can write, so to even write 14 stops of information into the CR2/CR3 with the bias they put in there, they’re already not linear just to get it to fit.



Clamping doesn't make linear data non-linear. The raw values come from ADC, then there's white point threshold which is very close to the upper limit of 16383 and black point which is near 0 and indicates where the noise floor is.



adrian_bacon said:


> Besides, I’m talking about stills mode, not video mode. Having a 16 bit readout for stills could result in less noise on the bottom end



For stills, it would've been very easy to produce 16-bit raw files had it been the actual 16-bit ADC. It would have been a huge selling point.
With the noise, they do some strange in-camera noise reduction in the shadows on raw data - they wouldn't need that had they had very clean 14-bit values downsampled from 16-bit ADC.


----------



## adrian_bacon (Aug 16, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Clamping doesn't make linear data non-linear. The raw values come from ADC, then there's white point threshold which is very close to the upper limit of 16383 and black point which is near 0 and indicates where the noise floor is.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Using the EOS 80D as an example (I haven't done the R5 yet, waiting for official raw reader support in my toolset) The CR2 file metadata indicates that the non-linear portion starts at 10,000. If I create an exposure that nets a raw sample data value of 10,000 in the green channel, then increase the number of photons hitting the sensor by a third of a stop, if it were writing the values to the raw file out in a linear fashion, it should net a raw sample value of 13,334. It doesn't. Instead, it nets a raw sample value of 12,727. If I increase the number of photons hitting the sensor by 2/3rds of a stop over 10,000, if it was being written out in a linear fashion, it should net a raw sample value of 16,667, which is basically clipping at 16383, but it doesn't. Instead, it writes a raw sample value of 15,870. If I double the number of photons hitting the sensor over 10,000, it should net a raw sample value of 20,000, also way over 16383. What it actually nets in the file is 15872, or once you take the bias of 511 into account, 16383.

Going the other way, if I cut the number of photons hitting the sensor in half from the original 10,000 exposure, it should net a raw sample value of 5000. It does. Wash, rinse, repeat until you start getting near the bottom, then you see similar non-linear again where it doesn't reduce by quite as much as half for each full stop exposure until it settles into the noise floor. 

In short, if you can make the controlled exposures and count the actual unique exposure steps in the resulting raw file, there's more than 14 steps of visible tonal information, and this is on the 80D, a camera a couple of generations back. I should note that this doesn't take into account what people consider useful tonal information in terms of noise levels as those bottom couple of steps are pretty noisy. I should also point out that I'm straight up ignoring the black point and white point values in the raw file meta data simply because I've found that those values are there to provide easy consistency over every ISO setting and are very conservative when it comes to a single ISO setting like ISO 100. If you spend the time to really characterize your sensors tonal response, you can usually get more tonal data than those limits would otherwise suggest.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 16, 2020)

First of all, any non-linearity doesn't imply the sensor has a 16-bit ADC. It can be just physical characteristics of the sensor.

Second, I'm afraid you got the calculations wrong. 1/3 of a stop isn't 33% and you don't get it by multiplying the original value by 1.33. 
It's 2^(1/3) ~= 1.259.
2/3 of a stop is 2^(2/3) ~= 1.587.
That roughly matches increments in ISO and shutter speed: 100, 125, 160, 200. Not 100, 130, 170, 200.

So I'm not surprised you got 10000, 12727 and 15870. They look perfectly linear to me.
10000 * 1.259 = 12590 which is close to your 12727 value.
10000 * 1.587 = 15870 which is *exactly* your 15870 value.




adrian_bacon said:


> Using the EOS 80D as an example (I haven't done the R5 yet, waiting for official raw reader support in my toolset) The CR2 file metadata indicates that the non-linear portion starts at 10,000. If I create an exposure that nets a raw sample data value of 10,000 in the green channel, then increase the number of photons hitting the sensor by a third of a stop, if it were writing the values to the raw file out in a linear fashion, it should net a raw sample value of 13,334. It doesn't. Instead, it nets a raw sample value of 12,727. If I increase the number of photons hitting the sensor by 2/3rds of a stop over 10,000, if it was being written out in a linear fashion, it should net a raw sample value of 16,667, which is basically clipping at 16383, but it doesn't. Instead, it writes a raw sample value of 15,870. If I double the number of photons hitting the sensor over 10,000, it should net a raw sample value of 20,000, also way over 16383. What it actually nets in the file is 15872, or once you take the bias of 511 into account, 16383.
> 
> Going the other way, if I cut the number of photons hitting the sensor in half from the original 10,000 exposure, it should net a raw sample value of 5000. It does. Wash, rinse, repeat until you start getting near the bottom, then you see similar non-linear again where it doesn't reduce by quite as much as half for each full stop exposure until it settles into the noise floor.
> 
> In short, if you can make the controlled exposures and count the actual unique exposure steps in the resulting raw file, there's more than 14 steps of visible tonal information, and this is on the 80D, a camera a couple of generations back. I should note that this doesn't take into account what people consider useful tonal information in terms of noise levels as those bottom couple of steps are pretty noisy. I should also point out that I'm straight up ignoring the black point and white point values in the raw file meta data simply because I've found that those values are there to provide easy consistency over every ISO setting and are very conservative when it comes to a single ISO setting like ISO 100. If you spend the time to really characterize your sensors tonal response, you can usually get more tonal data than those limits would otherwise suggest.


----------



## adrian_bacon (Aug 16, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> First of all, any non-linearity doesn't imply the sensor has a 16-bit ADC. It can be just physical characteristics of the sensor.
> 
> Second, I'm afraid you got the calculations wrong. 1/3 of a stop isn't 33% and you don't get it by multiplying the original value by 1.33.
> It's 2^(1/3) ~= 1.259.
> ...



I agree that it could just be a physical characteristic of the sensor, though oddly, almost every Canon camera I've looked at has a tag that indicates non-linearity starts at 10,000. A few have deviated from that, but most of them are that number exactly. I'd half expect every new sensor to be a bit different.

The math you're presenting is technically correct, though, strangely enough, if I shoot a scene at the camera's native white balance (on the 80D it's 5200K), if the exposure is high enough that the green channel is above 10,000, but hasn't yet hit full saturation or clipped (like 11,000 for example) but the red and blue channels aren't, after white balance, the color in that upper range shows a magenta shift unless I correct the green channel to the values I previously mentioned, then once the raw samples are white balanced, the magenta shift is gone. So for values above 10,000 there's definitely something wonky going on.

Here's the limits for the 80D that are reported in the CR2 file:

"AverageBlackLevel": "512 512 512 512",
"PerChannelBlackLevel": "511 511 512 512",
"NormalWhiteLevel": 11435,
"SpecularWhiteLevel": 11892,
"LinearityUpperMargin": 10000,
"ColorTemperature": 5200,
"ISO": 100,
"RedBalance": 1.738281,
"BlueBalance": 1.720703

If you go purely by those numbers when processing raw files, you're leaving a solid extra 1/3 or more of a stop on the table just on the high end alone.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 16, 2020)

adrian_bacon said:


> The math you're presenting is technically correct, though, strangely enough, if I shoot a scene at the camera's native white balance (on the 80D it's 5200K), if the exposure is high enough that the green channel is above 10,000, but hasn't yet hit full saturation or clipped (like 11,000 for example) but the red and blue channels aren't, after white balance, the color in that upper range shows a magenta shift unless I correct the green channel to the values I previously mentioned, then once the raw samples are white balanced, the magenta shift is gone. So for values above 10,000 there's definitely something wonky going on.



It might be something related to how the values get combined from sub-pixels in dual pixel sensors (on 80D and other dual pixel ones). I don't know what 'LinearityUpperMargin = 10000' means exactly, tried to google it but couldn't find anything useful. If it's the same value with different sensors, it's unlikely to be bound to the h/w part of the sensor, e.g. physical photon/electron counting. It could also be related to how the jpeg/preview was generated, like white balance, which can be corrected later on.


----------



## adrian_bacon (Aug 16, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> It might be something related to how the values get combined from sub-pixels in dual pixel sensors (on 80D and other dual pixel ones). I don't know what 'LinearityUpperMargin = 10000' means exactly, tried to google it but couldn't find anything useful. If it's the same value with different sensors, it's unlikely to be bound to the h/w part of the sensor, e.g. physical photon/electron counting. It could also be related to how the jpeg/preview was generated, like white balance, which can be corrected later on.



yeah, I don’t know either. All I can go on is what I observe when mapping out the tonal response.


----------



## Baron_Karza (Aug 16, 2020)

for the R6, why can we not remove the card immediately as mentioned in the manual?

"If [




] or a red [



] icon appears during movie recording, the card may be hot, so stop recording the movie and let the camera cool down before removing the card. (Do not remove the card immediately.)"


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 17, 2020)

Baron_Karza said:


> for the R6, why can we not remove the card immediately as mentioned in the manual?
> 
> "If [
> 
> ...


So you do not get your fingers burned. You still can remove card, but at your own risk. You have been warned though


----------



## SteveC (Aug 17, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> So you do not get your fingers burned. You still can remove card, but at your own risk. You have been warned though



Maybe someone can sell card pliers, the exact size and shape necessary to pull the hot card out of the camera, with a stop so you can't crunch the edge of the card with them. That and a metal pan to drop the card into would solve the problem.


----------



## Baron_Karza (Aug 17, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> So you do not get your fingers burned. You still can remove card, but at your own risk. You have been warned though



Hmmm...are acutal users stating it is too hot to touch?


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 17, 2020)

Baron_Karza said:


> I don
> 
> 
> Hmmm...are acutal users stating it is too hot to touch?


Indeed. There is no doubt about it.


----------



## FrenchFry (Aug 17, 2020)

Normalnorm said:


> Lot of pages here and most seem concerned with video.
> I am interested in what a FW update might do for stills.
> The first thing I think of is enabling a multi-shot high res mode. That would be nice and bring them into parity with the competition that offers it already.
> As they are coming later to the party maybe they could do something special such as a high bit depth quasi-HDR high res mode.



Hi, 

If you get a chance, please post your firmware improvement ideas here: https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/t...-firmware-upgrade-and-feature-requests.38815/ 

Thanks!


----------



## Deleted member 384473 (Aug 18, 2020)

Baron_Karza said:


> Hmmm...are acutal users stating it is too hot to touch?


CFExpress can get pretty hot from my experience with the C500 MII. Probably explicitly stated for legal reasons to prevent lawsuits from people claiming to get burned. Better safe than sorry

*But you were talking R6... probably same sentiment for SD.


----------



## Baron_Karza (Aug 20, 2020)

JIM JIM said:


> CFExpress can get pretty hot from my experience with the C500 MII. Probably explicitly stated for legal reasons to prevent lawsuits from people claiming to get burned. Better safe than sorry
> 
> *But you were talking R6... probably same sentiment for SD.


OK, I seriously wasn't sure why. In that case thought they would have also added "You may get seriously burnt". I thought maybe it would cause camera or card damage. Similar to damage my friend caused to my home theater projector when he pulled the power plug after I turned it off (where after doing so, a cooling fan kicks up in speed and stays on for 30 seconds before it auto powers off completely).


----------



## Deleted member 384473 (Aug 20, 2020)

Baron_Karza said:


> OK, I seriously wasn't sure why. In that case thought they would have also added "You may get seriously burnt". I thought maybe it would cause camera or card damage. Similar to damage my friend caused to my home theater projector when he pulled the power plug after I turned it off (where after doing so, a cooling fan kicks up in speed and stays on for 30 seconds before it auto powers off completely).


 Oh, I have no idea if that’s the real reason or not, I was just guessing but it does get hot. I would worry more if the card finished writing or not because I’m paranoid like that. I definitely won’t be pulling out power plugs from my projectors like that any time soon after reading that. Lol.


----------



## tarjei99 (Aug 22, 2020)

Paul Nordin said:


> When you shoot 5minutes of 8k RAW and eject the CFexpress card, and its too hot to hold, it becomes quite obvious that limits are not marketing ploys to sell more cinema cams. For those of us working in serious cinema, its crazy to even consider using the R5 or any of the other hybrids as an A-Cam. There is far too much at stake cost and time wise for each setup. Cinema cams have their target use. I'm very excited though, to be able to supplement them with the R5, which opens up possibilities.




Could it be that it is the CFexpress card itself that overheats?


----------



## tarjei99 (Aug 22, 2020)

Otara said:


> I love my R5, but the recovery times are a bit too mystical and seem oddly long. I dont find it directly impacts me so much as it seems - weird.
> 
> Finding out there is an ignore function has made the threads much easier to read. Personal attacks, ALL CAPS and more than one exclamation mark are a pretty good starting point for consideration.



If it is the CFX card that is the problem, it is no mystery that it takes a long time to recover : It is inside the camera body and behind a door!!!! It is well insulated.

What you can try is to remove the CFX card from the camera and let it cool outside the camera. If it stands on it side, it should cool more effectively. Keeping the slot door open should increase cooling.

If you know what you are doing, you can create a piece of metal (aluminium, copper, silver, etc) that will fit in the slot and *not *shorten the connectors or contacts. It should extend well beyond the camera. When inserted, this should help remove heat from the card area at a faster rate.


----------



## Otara (Aug 22, 2020)

tarjei99 said:


> If it is the CFX card that is the problem, it is no mystery that it takes a long time to recover : It is inside the camera body and behind a door!!!! It is well insulated.
> 
> What you can try is to remove the CFX card from the camera and let it cool outside the camera. If it stands on it side, it should cool more effectively. Keeping the slot door open should increase cooling.
> 
> If you know what you are doing, you can create a piece of metal (aluminium, copper, silver, etc) that will fit in the slot and *not *shorten the connectors or contacts. It should extend well beyond the camera. When inserted, this should help remove heat from the card area at a faster rate.



None of this is correct.


----------



## Baron_Karza (Aug 22, 2020)

Otara said:


> None of this is correct.



right. Canon is doing some weird shit to make sure you cannot record for a reasonable period of time


----------



## tarjei99 (Aug 23, 2020)

Mr Majestyk said:


> clog3 will almost give an additional 2 stops DR and put it close to the A7sIII. It's not the record times that are a problem so much as the ridiculous cool down times. Hopefully they can allow for more recording time too after a briefer shut down.




In which universe will passive cooling of heat isolated component be as fast as heating them up?

It is certainly not in this universe.


----------



## Vertex Imagery (Aug 25, 2020)

I purchased a 5D in 2007, a 5D III in 2013 and I more than likely would have purchased a 5D V. Now A R5 is at the top of my list. The question is, if getting the video to level being requested means stressing the camera so you lost 3 to 5 years off its lifecycle, it that worth the change?


----------



## Lance vdv (Apr 28, 2021)

As a person who mostly shoots wildlife.....I've been more annoyed at the black screen after trying to wake the R5 up a few times.....the screen and view finder are solid black but the IS is activated and camera awake etc.....missed a few shots. Only fix turn the camera on and off again.


----------

