# Canon has pulled firmware v1.3.2 for the EOS 5D Mark IV



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jun 7, 2021)

> Last week Canon released a minor firmware update for the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV. Over the weekend, it looks like Canon pulled v.1.3.2 for the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV due to an issue(s) reported by users.
> I have not heard what the exact issue is, but if you have downloaded v1.3.2 and not yet installed it, please hold off until Canon releases a fixed version.



Continue reading...


----------



## tron (Jun 7, 2021)

Toooo late!


----------



## amorse (Jun 7, 2021)

I wasn't in a rush to get it done as I wasn't sure how it would work with the different versions (i.e. C-log vs the voice memo versions - you can have one but not both upgrades) and my 5D IV has been working perfectly anyway. I guess my laziness wasn't a bad thing for me for once.


----------



## vladk (Jun 7, 2021)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


I always wait at least couple weeks, and monitor all major photo forums for potential issues, before upgrading firmware.


----------



## Maximilian (Jun 7, 2021)

amorse said:


> ... my 5D IV has been working perfectly anyway. I guess my laziness wasn't a bad thing for me for once.


Same here. Good that I had too many things to do.


----------



## Fischer (Jun 7, 2021)

Painful that Canon has fallen into a bad habit of releasing faulty firmware prematurely...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 7, 2021)

It's unfortunate. Generally, I've gotten into the habit of not adopting updates to any software/firmware immediately unless I'm experiencing problems from a bug that the update is intended to fix. That applies to camera firmware, MacOS and iOS updates, etc.


----------



## kten (Jun 7, 2021)

Fischer said:


> Painful that Canon has fallen into a bad habit of releasing faulty firmware prematurely...


Although I agree if that is the case to play devils advocate it isn't always the case and can be excusable. Some bugs only appear in none standard configurations or very rare number of cases thus even with extensive testing they only show up once the fw/patches etc go live in the community. Without knowing what the bug is or how easy it is to repeat it it's hard to say if Canon are pushing things too soon.

Plenty of companies push things too soon with minor inhouse testing and they [Canon] may be doing that. However I have seen problems a few times were such things trigger more from user "error" doing things in none standard way that manufacturers miss because they tend to abide strictly to the official manual sop way of doing things when testing.


----------



## tron (Jun 7, 2021)

kten said:


> Although I agree if that is the case to play devils advocate it isn't always the case and can be excusable. Some bugs only appear in none standard configurations or very rare number of cases thus even with extensive testing they only show up once the fw/patches etc go live in the community. Without knowing what the bug is or how easy it is to repeat it it's hard to say if Canon are pushing things too soon.
> 
> Plenty of companies push things too soon with minor inhouse testing and they [Canon] may be doing that. However I have seen problems a few times were such things trigger more from user "error" doing things in none standard way that manufacturers miss because they tend to abide strictly to the official manual sop way of doing things when testing.


Even if it is user error as you call it quality software should be able to catch it and handle it. But I understand what you mean and I agree with you: manufacturers are not users!


----------



## tron (Jun 8, 2021)

It seems it can be downgraded (It is happening now). I will let you know!

EDIT: And it has been downgraded to 1.3.1

I didn't expect it. Nice surprise


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Jun 8, 2021)

DSLR's are dead!

Why?

Well they deliberately bricked them via firmware updates.


Canon never used to be this slack, so many pulled fw updates last few years. Maybe they outsource to Microsoft.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 8, 2021)

Fischer said:


> Painful that Canon has fallen into a bad habit of releasing faulty firmware prematurely...


Maybe Canon needs to start releasing beta firmware updates.
They would need to be reverseable


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 8, 2021)

Mr Majestyk said:


> DSLR's are dead!
> 
> Why?
> 
> ...


Where were you January 6th?


----------



## adventureous (Jun 8, 2021)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


lol either Friday or Saturday I could not find the update on Canons website so I came here and in the article it had the update link so I used it and now I read this. I have not seen any difference in use but I have not used the tether feature since the update.


----------



## Maximilian (Jun 8, 2021)

Mr Majestyk said:


> DSLR's are dead! ...


Mine are still working pretty fine. 
And I hope they will for much, much longer, as long as the R/RF system is so expensive.
Of course if you gift me an R5 I'll change immediately.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 8, 2021)

Maximilian said:


> Mine are still working pretty fine.
> And I hope they will for much, much longer, as long as the R/RF system is so expensive.
> Of course if you gift me an R5 I'll change immediately.


I already have an R5 and I have no intentions of ever giving up DSLRs.
If Canon and Nikon give up on DSLRs then I will eventually go with Pentax.
I would much rather get another Canon DSLR but that is up to Canon.


----------



## tron (Jun 8, 2021)

Mr Majestyk said:


> DSLR's are dead!
> 
> Why?
> 
> ...


Funny!

First, they didn't brick them. 
Second, deliberately? Really? Because they like negative reactions sure.
Third, even mirrorless R5 and R6 had their fw updates pulled this year!


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Jun 9, 2021)

Oh dear good to see the humour is weak on this site. So many serious users.

I still have one DSLR, and love to use it, but as soon as there is a mirrorless replacement it will be gone. I have little nostalgia for old cameras, the are sold to fund the next camera. Now they will be making mirrorless in 1D formats that's the final nail IMO.


----------



## Joules (Jun 9, 2021)

Mr Majestyk said:


> Oh dear good to see the humour is weak on this site. So many serious users.


More likely, there is a large amount of pretty wild posts and opinions being spread. Apart from the ridiculous content nothing from your post gave an indication that it may not have been written seriously. 

If you are being sarcastic and want your comments to be interpreted as such instead of as spreading misinformation or trolling, use an /s tag or an appropriate emojy.


----------



## wolfpaulus (Jun 9, 2021)

I was able to 'downgrade' to 1.3.1 however, it didn't change the behavior. E.g., using an 'old' Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 lens on the 5D4 .. it will take a long time to write your image to the SD card, during which time the camera become unresponsive aka useless.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Jun 9, 2021)

Maximilian said:


> Same here. Good that I had too many things to do.


I'm in the L5D4FUC (Lazy 5D4 Firmware Upgrader's Club), too


----------



## justaCanonuser (Jun 9, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> I already have an R5 and I have no intentions of ever giving up DSLRs.


Just out of real interest in photography: can you tell me why you do not completely switch to ML cameras?

I still live in the OFV world and use DSLRs plus vintage film cameras, and I am quite happy so far with my DSLRs. But I realized (by testing different ML cameras from Leica to Sony) that EVFs are now so mature since about 3-4 years that for me there are only a few arguments left for digital cameras with OVFs:

(1) especially for wildlife shooters: no battery drain when you frequently peer through your tele lens and wait for action
(2) no visible VF noise when you shoot in the night - but that comes with a pretty dark OVF
(3) from an artist's viewpoint: no room for imagination left anymore, you see what you get with an EVF. But for me, imagination is much more important for film photography, there you can't peer and have to wait until the film rolls are developed.

In fact, IMO DSLRs were always intermediate tech until real digital cameras arrive, but for many years they represented the best tech you could get. Plus, even today's very good ML cameras aren't completely digital, they still are hybrid electro-mechanical devices with the mechanical shutters they yet need for fast action. Electronic global shutters are getting better of course, so it is just a matter of time until you can get a purely digital camera in the FF ILC market.


----------



## Maximilian (Jun 9, 2021)

justaCanonuser said:


> ... for me there are only a few arguments left for digital cameras with OVFs: ...


Really good summary, technically. Same opinion here. But you forgot the price argument  for both bodies and lenses


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 9, 2021)

justaCanonuser said:


> Just out of real interest in photography: can you tell me why you do not completely switch to ML cameras?


 I just prefer an OVF.
My other mirrorless camera is a G9.
I mainly got the G9 and R5 for their superior image stabilization.
Canon and Nikon could have put IBIS into DSLRs but they just decided not to.

I have not used enough mirrorless cameras to say DSLRs are better.
The R5 is the best mirrorless camera that I ever used and nothing about it makes me want to give up DSLRs.
I do love the compact size so I would not sell it if Canon were to come out with the 5D Mark V but I would buy the 5D in a hot second if it had a flip screen and IBIS.

Now that Canon has a smart hot-shoe, they can make an OVF for DSLRs and give us the best of both worlds.
I still have a Rebel camera (Thanks Magic Lantern) but for small travel cameras, I would buy an EF-M camera over an APS-C DSLR any day.
The one big advantage of an OVF is that it can be removable.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Jun 9, 2021)

Maximilian said:


> Really good summary, technically. Same opinion here. But you forgot the price argument  for both bodies and lenses


Yeah, the price tag is a bit funny, given the fact that DSLRs should be more complex in production with the mirror box and a separate phase AF system. Okay, in Canon's world, other than Pentax, there is no IBIS included in the DSLRs, other than in an R5/6.

But I guess Canon simply tries to lift the price level with a view on the fact, that the ILC FF systems will always be a special market, and the compact's market is eaten up by smartphones. Plus, they have to return their R&D investments for the RF system, and they surely aren't small, given the relatively fast growth of this new product section. Looks like they currently succeed with this strategy. Well, on the other side, a profitable camera maker is always good for those how have massively invested in the gear of that brand.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Jun 9, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> I just prefer an OVF.
> My other mirrorless camera is a G9.
> I mainly got the G9 and R5 for their superior image stabilization.
> Canon and Nikon could have put IBIS into DSLRs but they just decided not to.
> ...


Thank you, now I understand your comment better. Hm, a last generation DSLR with a smart hot shoe for an additional EVF - interesting idea...


----------



## Maximilian (Jun 9, 2021)

justaCanonuser said:


> Yeah, the price tag is a bit funny, ...
> 
> But I guess Canon simply tries to lift the price level with a view on the fact, that the ILC FF systems will always be a special market, and the compact's market is eaten up by smartphones. ...


Exactly my thoughts, again. 
Keep turnover high with lower number of items sold. And with less items R&D per item gets higher.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 9, 2021)

justaCanonuser said:


> Yeah, the price tag is a bit funny, given the fact that DSLRs should be more complex in production with the mirror box and a separate phase AF system


I hear this a lot but a proper EVF is a pretty expensive piece of equipment.
Especially, if it is high resolution and has a 120 Mhz refresh rate,
The cheapest Canon DSLR is $400 MSRP with a lower street price, so how much can an OVF cost?
Their cheapest mirrorless is $500 MSRP and comes with no EVF.
Canon sells their optional EVF for $200 and it is not bad but not the best.


----------



## JMik01 (Jun 10, 2021)

Since I installed version 1.3.2, the self timer to 10 seconds no longer works!!!!
The contdown start, reaches 1 and then restart again from 10... an so on in loop to infinity!!!




I applied a downgrade to previous version (1.3.1) and the issue above is not more exit !!!! Therefore, the is an issue of 1.3.2!!! -.-'


----------



## Dockland (Jun 10, 2021)

tron said:


> Funny!
> 
> First, they didn't brick them.
> Second, deliberately? Really? Because they like negative reactions sure.
> Third, even mirrorless R5 and R6 had their fw updates pulled this year!



It was a joke


----------



## tron (Jun 10, 2021)

Dockland said:


> It was a joke


Well it didn't look like a joke especially the "Canon never used to be this slack, so many pulled fw updates last few years. " part which does have some truth. To their defense they try to fix their mess and sometimes introduce new features.
The Microsoft one yes that was evident but only that part.
The first two didn't seem a joke.

The issue with writing is that we do not interact with anyone, we do not see them or talk to them so as to understand their intentions. We cannot see if they are smiling or if they look serious.


----------



## tcphoto (Jun 11, 2021)

OOPS! I updated shortly before a large shoot, luckily I didn't experience any issues.


----------



## tron (Jun 11, 2021)

tcphoto said:


> OOPS! I updated shortly before a large shoot, luckily I didn't experience any issues.


If you want you can revert to 1.3.1 with no issues.


----------



## tonidavid5 (Jun 18, 2021)

Firmware v1.3.3 already available. It fixes the issues introduced with 1.3.2


----------

