# Canon R5 Records 4KHQ 30fps Externally for 4 HOURS



## nolifedigital (Aug 6, 2020)

Been detailing this in the Canon Rumors discord. But I've found that if there are no cards in the camera, you get 4 hours of external recording before "overheating". I use quotes here because after overheating and shutting down, a quick 5 min rest allowed me to shoot that last 20min segment in 4KHQ, with still no warnings - and I expect it to last at least another hour or two. I tested this in the video with a dummy battery, but afterwards tested with a new Canon LP6H, and the battery died before any warnings. 

This leads me to believe there is some type of temperature limitation going on with the cards. Either the cards are triggering an aggressive overheating timer, or the cards themselves are what's overheating to the point of turning off. This makes sense, as the only thing that is hot is the card. During these 4 hours, the camera is nearly cool to the touch, with maybe some warmth on the back panel. 

I will be doing some outdoor tests to see if ambient temps play a role. But the original "only 45 min / 75 with overheat control on" does not seem to be the case without SD/CFEx cards installed.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 6, 2020)

Been watching you on the Discord and YouTube, gotta say I’m impressed. I love when people work though any issues they have rather than just bitch like little kids.

Hats off to you and very well done for finding a workable solution.


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Aug 6, 2020)

That's great news


----------



## Jethro (Aug 6, 2020)

Interesting - I wonder if that means overheating warnings will therefore vary depending upon different card types used? I haven't seen mention of that anywhere.


----------



## BeenThere (Aug 6, 2020)

Why did Canon Engineers not know this, or is external recording not considered de rigueur?


----------



## SteveC (Aug 6, 2020)

Hmm.

So what happens if only one card is in place? I would think, if it's the card heating up due to huge amounts of data being shoved onto it, that it would make little difference, but maybe that open gap will help to cool the card that is there?

(I ask, because I do not yet have a CFexpress card.)

Or, here's another thought--you swap CARDS when the camera overheats! Would it recover more quickly then? Is the overheat sensor measuring the card temperature, or is it being inferred (or is all of this totally off base somehow)?


----------



## Able (Aug 6, 2020)

Bravo on your findings sir! I Started a thread about it in the “Rumors” section and don’t know how to delete it, so I’m just going to leave this screenshot from it here.


----------



## bhf3737 (Aug 6, 2020)

This makes sense. CFexpress cards have an on-die thermal sensor and SMART reading info from the card is available to the device firmware, similar to info from your computer hard drive. I think firmware implements different levels of throttling to manage the heat generated for the device protection purpose.
This throttling can be done in a proactive way or as a preset table. It seems that if the CFExpress card is not in the camera, there is no sensor info from the card and the throttling function is off.
Based on the data we see regarding the remaining time counter, R5's firmware seems to have a preset table for thermal control, and if true, this is a rather crude implementation. The good news is that it is all manageable by firmware and a proactive heat management mechanism is pretty doable. My guess is that it can be addressed in the next firmware for R5.


----------



## Viggo (Aug 6, 2020)

This is very cool, hope more people confirm this, should be easy enough to replicate.


----------



## nolifedigital (Aug 6, 2020)

Another added data point. This Youtuber states he got over 2 hours with no warnings, and Gerald Undone DID confirm to me this Youtube did NOT have cards in the camera.


----------



## nolifedigital (Aug 6, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Hmm.
> 
> So what happens if only one card is in place? I would think, if it's the card heating up due to huge amounts of data being shoved onto it, that it would make little difference, but maybe that open gap will help to cool the card that is there?
> 
> ...



I'll be doing outdoor tests, as well as tests featuring some different situations. I've noticed that using a new Canon LPE6H without a card, the battery died before any overheating issues. So stay tuned for more updates on this. For a quick TLDW, I don't think anyone needs to worry about overheating using the R5 externally, unless you're shooting over 4 hours, with the camera on for the entire time, and need 1 continuous recording.


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 6, 2020)

BeenThere said:


> Why did Canon Engineers not know this, or is external recording not considered de rigueur?


It seems logical to have cards moved out of camera and into a battery grip with active cooling. A grip based external recorder otherwise. I recall a CR forum member has mentioned that external recorder in a battery grip grip would be a nice option to have. Well. Sounds like we gonna have one soon )


----------



## Viggo (Aug 6, 2020)

What about 8K?


----------



## Kit. (Aug 6, 2020)

Viggo said:


> What about 8K?


R5 doesn't support external recording of 8K.


----------



## Viggo (Aug 6, 2020)

Kit. said:


> R5 doesn't support external recording of 8K.


Ah, didn’t know that, I guess that’s a valid reason why it hasn’t been tested then.


----------



## nolifedigital (Aug 6, 2020)

All fingers starting to point to the cards









Canon R5 Overheating | Are CFexpress Cards To Blame? | Alik Griffin


Is the thermal throttling of CFexpress cards to be blamed for the Canon R5’s heat issues?




alikgriffin.com


----------



## SteveC (Aug 6, 2020)

nolifedigital said:


> All fingers starting to point to the cards
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yay! My brand new camera doesn't suck!!! 

(Not that it ever did. At least for my purposes.)


----------



## YuengLinger (Aug 6, 2020)

Look what can be learned by one person who decides to experiment, to just try things with a camera, rather than be satisfied with the usual quick, formulaic reviews AND the endless complaining.

Thank you! Canon should buy you a bottle of Dom Perignon! And load you up with some bling.


----------



## Able (Aug 7, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> Look what can be learned by one person who decides to experiment, to just try things with a camera, rather than be satisfied with the usual quick, formulaic reviews AND the endless complaining.
> 
> Thank you! Canon should buy you a bottle of Dom Perignon! And load you up with some bling.


Canon doesn’t want to gift a bottle of anything for anyone discovering their firmware implemented “overheating.” They are STILL crippling mirrorless cameras to sell their Cinema Line. ‍


----------



## Jethro (Aug 7, 2020)

Able said:


> Canon doesn’t want to gift a bottle of anything for anyone discovering their firmware implemented “overheating.” They are STILL crippling mirrorless cameras to sell their Cinema Line. ‍♂


These videos (all power to the makers!) to be clear *don't* have anything to say about either the current R5 firmware *or *Canon 'crippling' anything - they are about the apparent effect of CFexpress cards on apparent internal overheating in the R5. The issue may be fixable via firmware upgrades, but that doesn't mean the original/current version intentionally (why on earth would it??) introduced truncated overheating limits.


----------



## YuengLinger (Aug 9, 2020)

So wouldn't it be nice to see some significant improvement in the CFE cards? So they don't overheat when pushed to their specified limits???


----------

