It’s time to fill those memory cards. Canon releases firmware v1.8.1 for the Canon EOS R5. 400mp stills are now possible

[PaulieWalnuts]

Disappointing.

From what I have read about other cameras that can do the high res image stitches it’s little more than a gimmick that doesn’t really add much in practice.

I was hoping for an AF upgrade too.

In my experience, Sony's implementation is a half-baked gimmick. Creates multiple files in camera that must be moved to a computer and converted to a single RAW file using Sony's slow and clunky Imaging Edge software. My A7RIV has no motion compensation and the movement artifacts require so much editing it's not worth it. The A7RV now has motion compensation but without in-camera RAW files it's a no-go.

Lumix's version works exceptionally well. Single 187MP RAW file in-camera. Two configurations for motion detection and I use both depending on the subject. It's about as close to having a camera with a 187MP sensor as you can get.

Was hoping to move back to Canon for smaller/lighter R5 body and better lens selection but this doesn't look quite there yet.

 

[SwissFrank]

Good thing I just got a half TB of memory cards for the R5.

 

[fr34k]

Good thing I just got a half TB of memory cards for the R5.

RAW video my man, that's gonna kill ya every time you use it. 24min

 

[SwissFrank]

No reason to complain if an update only has a feature or two.
If an update has multiple exciting features, the way software development time usually doesn't go to plan means that the maker has just been sitting on perfectly good features WITHOUT releasing them, possibly for months or even a year or more, until they had a bunch of things to update at once. The user base isn't well-served by that. I'd prefer many small updates a year. Also one reason is that we stay in practice doing the update so it goes fast.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Since all IS (both lens and in-body) will be disabled,

Obviously IBIS would need to be disabled. I wonder why lens IS is disabled.

 

[fr34k]

No reason to complain if an update only has a feature or two.
If an update has multiple exciting features, the way software development time usually doesn't go to plan means that the maker has just been sitting on perfectly good features WITHOUT releasing them, possibly for months or even a year or more, until they had a bunch of things to update at once. The user base isn't well-served by that. I'd prefer many small updates a year. Also one reason is that we stay in practice doing the update so it goes fast.

still, they're sitting on code that "only" needs porting. The R6 II and R7 have features that the R5 could also manage computation wise. One such (of the many) is internal focus stacking. When the R5 can handle 400MPx images, it for sure can stack a bunch of 45MPx ones...

I hope you're right, that there is more in the pipeline that just got postponed.

 

[fr34k]

I wonder why lens IS is disabled.

I guess you'd also have to correct for the lens distortion. When lens IS is working you will see tiny changes in distortion and when you test this feature you'll see that every movement is one to much. (and also the lens IS introduces more vibration/movement)

 

[sanj]

Compared to what the rumors promised it was not much.
We are on the site that hosted those rumors so I think it is a fair point to make.

Ok, I understand

 

[Czardoom]

I think the possible good news is that by not including the AF advances from the R6 II, we might expect an R5 II sooner rather than later. If they had included all the AF advances plus the removal of the 29 minute time limit, then I think the R5 II would have been at least 2 years away.

And to all those that are complaining...Don't you understand that all the things you miss on this update, you only expected because you visit a rumor site and then believe all the rumors? Don;t blame Canon for not giving you what you wanted. Blame Canon Rumors for the firmware not giving you what you expected. If you really want to enjoy your camera, hopefully lesson learned. Stay away from the internet!

 

[Gazwas]

I don't know why people are so disappointed and something I've said in another thread that this is just a feature update for spec junkies.

There was no way Canon were going to implement this in any way useful to actual photographers.

No flash sync, No RAW files, NO USE!

 

[kten]

Hoping the incredible stupid and hindering 29.nn Minute time limit would be gone.. ( a legal and not a technical issue of course, that i would even pay for)

In case you haven't considered it or don't realise it, thought may be worth mentioning the limit only applies to internal recording. Since you're willing to pay you can pick up a monitor if really need to avoid the limit because it doesn't apply to external recording. Plus if video matters to you to the point the time limit affects you a decent monitor is arguably essential since there is a lot more functionality than just avoiding time limits, more favourable codecs, zebras, timecode, better visibility and so on which can speed up workflows or make life much easier.

 

[fr34k]

think the possible good news is that by not including the AF advances from the R6 II, we might expect an R5 II sooner rather than later. If they had included all the AF advances plus the removal of the 29 minute time limit, then I think the R5 II would have been at least 2 years away.

This line of reasoning might work for the older R5 but definitely not for the R3. I guess as an R3 owner (of which I am not) you might be even more bummed out... Pre-shooting buffer is another one...

Still, I think (and hope) there is still something to come this year. If the rumour holds true, then "a major update this year" has not come yet soooooo...

 

[SwissFrank]

This vid says a lot.

I don't know why they even bothered to add it really.

Lol, it says a lot but it says it in Swiss German :-D (Or at least German being attacked by a Swiss :-D )

To the left of the speaker we see Grosser Mythen (the pointy mountain) that has stairs to the top of, and Kleiner Mythen. You can see those from Zurich, though they're exactly behind the Fraumunster in this shot from the Urania bar (the bar with an astronomical observatory on top). I think the speaker is at the Rigispitz, on the bench by the crucifix, and that wire is holding the crucifix up. But I haven't been there in a long time, maybe I'm misremembering. If so that's the Laurzersee behind him.

 

[blanddragon]

Compared to what the rumors promised it was not much.
We are on the site that hosted those rumors so I think it is a fair point to make.

Because rumor's are facts...at least to some posters.

 

[InchMetric]

Did anyone else\'s camera freeze up after installing?

Finally stopped showing the post-update screen with no responsiveness to any control, and now black with no response to any control.

 

[SwissFrank]

still, they're sitting on code that "only" needs porting. The R6 II and R7 have features that the R5 could also manage computation wise. One such (of the many) is internal focus stacking. When the R5 can handle 400MPx images, it for sure can stack a bunch of 45MPx ones...

I hear you man. I haven't worked in camera software but I've worked for software companies and there's usually a pretty good reason why they don't do the obvious thing, generally either a technical reason or a business reason. The technical reasons tend to be things like bus speeds, buffer sizes, and so on. The business reasons could be the dreaded "cripple hammer" (a company purposely not updating something, to get you to buy something else) but often there's a better explanation. Maybe they don't want to devote even a little manpower to porting that code to the R5 because they're working on something significantly better. (I'd like focus stacking to actually look at the image and figure out for itself how many exposures and what aperture, rather than requiring that these be manually guessed at. If some such were being worked on, working on anything else would be kind of wasted effort. And it's pretty common for something simple and achievable to be pushed to the side while the deluxe version seems to take longer and longer and longer.

 

[Stu5]

Just use a telephoto with tripod with good head, and stitch raw together in post to get a DNG file. The R5 can only do it in post anyway. So if they this is post processed, its the same as doing it manually without a zoom lense.

Except it is not doing the same thing.

 

[CarlMillerPhoto]

Assuming Canon isn't going to release another firmware in the next 3 weeks (as was rumored to coincide with NAB), it sounds like the R5 will remain artificially crippled with the 29min. record limit. What a let down.

 

[unfocused]

Remind me to never gift a horse to any of you.

 

[entoman]

There will definitely be a very tiny minority of commercial photographers who actually need/want 400MP images, but for 99.99% of owners, pixel-shift is just a feature that they'll never use, or will maybe use just to try it out, but never use it again.

It may sound cool to tell your friends that you've got a 400MP camera, and it may therefore make it a more appealing buy for tech-junkies and brand-warriors who think extreme specifications and "bragging rights" are more important than learning how to take good photographs, but for the rest of us, to call this a "major upgrade" is a joke.

To keep this in perspective, the R5 is still a great camera, in fact it was arguably the *best* FF camera, even back as far as 1.6.0, but this upgrade is disappointing, especially considering all the rumours about more worthwhile features that could so easily have been included.

WHERE are the R3/R6ii/R7 AF improvements?
WHERE are the options to select different fps with ES?
WHERE is the option to bracket exposures with ES?
WHERE is pre-capture?

For me, the *only* reason to install this would be to get the (unspecified) bug fixes, but it hardly seems worth the effort, as the R5 has been bug-free since 1.6.0 - I've read very little recently about people experiencing freezes or error messages.