Firmware: Canon EOS R v1.3.0

Feb 13, 2019
2
1
All good points. I hoped for a big improvement in the "eye" AF. With the super fast R lenses, capable of super shallow depth-of-fields, eye AF is a game changer. On the EOS R, Canon has made a flawed 1st attempt. Sony has it figured out. Steal it, Canon!
Of course Sony figured it out. They are now on there 4th generation camera.
 

Roy Hunte

EOS R
Aug 30, 2018
34
23
I think the more obvious difference is the switch able control/focus ring. I would expect this switch would need to be handled by the camera, to know how to treat the data from the lens.
Sounds like the most sensible and rational deduction of the reason for the update.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sharlin

SereneSpeed

EOS T7i
Feb 1, 2016
81
27
I'm really interested in how to send any feedback to Canon. I am a gold CPS member, Canon knows exactly what piece of equipment I own, which serial number ... Yet, I have never, ever received a questionnaire about any product, nor have they ever asked for my opinion. I don't want to think that I'm the one who matters a bit, but I really don't understand how the feedback gets to them.
Just call CPS and ask to make a feature request. I made four requests within a mo th of buying the EOS R and three showed up in the last firmware update.

They don’t need to contact you, enough people contact them. I’m not the only person asking for changes.

Also, to those hoping for more from this update, keep waiting... At launch there were rumours of a firmware update with added functionality. The first firmware update had none of the expected upgrades. But the next one did.

Call me optimistic, but I believe there’s more to come. And, at the price I paid for the EOS R, I am very pleased with the performance.
 

Uneternal

EOS T7i
Jan 25, 2016
57
32
I'm so disappointed with this firmware. Why would you even bother releasing a FW with ONE change when there are so many little things that need to be addressed.

- Intervalometer
- Error and goes into full freeze with certain adapted third party lenses that worked on EF
- An option to put switching between EVF and screen on the touch bar
- etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rgeorge33

Viggo

EOS 5D SR
Dec 13, 2010
4,094
649
I'm so disappointed with this firmware. Why would you even bother releasing a FW with ONE change when there are so many little things that need to be addressed.

- Intervalometer
- Error and goes into full freeze with certain adapted third party lenses that worked on EF
- An option to put switching between EVF and screen on the touch bar
- etc.
The reason being that the 24-240 already came out and people are getting it NOW. Wouldn’t you be seriously bummed if your new long awaited lens wouldn’t work? The rest of the fixes come later, along with the PTP-fix etc.
 

LDS

EOR R
Sep 14, 2012
1,549
132
I think the more obvious difference is the switch able control/focus ring. I would expect this switch would need to be handled by the camera, to know how to treat the data from the lens.
Strange design, if the camera has to know the switch position, and the electronics in the lens does nothing but sending it along the data about the ring position. It looks to me the RF protocol has already ways to know if the data comes from a focus ring or settings ring - and the lens electronics should take care of it.

It doesn't bode well if Canon can add "planned obsolescence" into cameras this way.
 
Aug 22, 2019
3
3
Strange design, if the camera has to know the switch position, and the electronics in the lens does nothing but sending it along the data about the ring position. It looks to me the RF protocol has already ways to know if the data comes from a focus ring or settings ring - and the lens electronics should take care of it.

It doesn't bode well if Canon can add "planned obsolescence" into cameras this way.
Depends how they are handling the data and how much flexibility the want in the future.

Maybe they want to allow the switch to be customised to something other than focus and control ring? If it's all in the lens and the body has no idea the switch is even there.

Could be handy to have some different options on this switch as well. Who knows what they have planned.
 

koenkooi

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
425
253
If I didn't install firmware update 1.2 yet, will firmware 1.3 bypass and also provide what was in 1.2 also?
AFAICT Canon only publishes full firmware files, so that should work. With Canon being Canon you will get an error message before it does anything if that isn't that case.
 
Dec 28, 2015
3
0
Why is it Sony can do major software upgrades that significantly improves many features as well as introduces new options in their cameras. While the R has lots of minor things that are poorly implemented and could be made to work and we get a simple lens addition – come on guys, you can and need do far better than this…
 
Jul 24, 2019
2
0
In general that's true but there does seem to be some moves in this direction. Fuji in particular have really improved some older cameras via firmware, Sigma and Tamron take it seriously with their lenses and both Nikon and Canon have tried to improve the autofocus on their mirrorless offerings.

Moreover technology in general now works increasingly that way. Apple in particular has a history of improving and adding to older phones via software and many people choose to buy Apple's often extremely expensive phones partly because the software improvements keep coming. I would like to see Canon go further on this. Adding an interval timer for example, something with a technology overhead approaching a cheap 1990s digital wrist watch, should be easy.

I don't know much about computers etc though so I wonder if anyone here knows enough about the chips etc in the R to know if there exists much headroom for more improvement.
I believe Fuji did their trick: by making a very potential camera but lock up some features at the time of release. Only then they can make "improvement" by unlock those features via new firmwares.
 

jvillain

EOS T7i
Sep 29, 2018
87
72
More and more that’s the development philosophy in software. Companies are embracing “Agile” with the intent of getting working products in customers hands early and often.
Nothing about that sounds like Canon of the last few years. They really just don't care much any more.

Why is it Sony can do major software upgrades that significantly improves many features as well as introduces new options in their cameras. While the R has lots of minor things that are poorly implemented and could be made to work and we get a simple lens addition – come on guys, you can and need do far better than this…
Sony and the other manufacturers still care about grabbing market share. Canon? Not so much.

Canon Releases Interim Financial Report, Sales Plummeted By 10%
 
  • Like
Reactions: rgeorge33

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,543
1,975
Sony and the other manufacturers still care about grabbing market share. Canon? Not so much.
Sure, the other manufacturers care about grabbing market share. They’re completely failing to do it effectively, but they care about it. Meanwhile, Canon’s market domination continues.

Canon Releases Interim Financial Report, Sales Plummeted By 10%
Meanwhile, the Sony division that includes digital cameras dropped by 15%, Nikon’s dropped by 12%, Fuji’s dropped by 15%, and Olympus’ dropped by 25%. I’m sorry, but when you state that Canon plummeted by 10%, what was your point again? Other than demonstrating that you’re clueless about this market, I mean. Yeah, that’s what I thought.
 

Cryhavoc

Eos R, 1D MK IV, 80D
Jan 17, 2019
37
43
Seattle
I'm so disappointed with this firmware. Why would you even bother releasing a FW with ONE change when there are so many little things that need to be addressed.

- Intervalometer
- Error and goes into full freeze with certain adapted third party lenses that worked on EF
- An option to put switching between EVF and screen on the touch bar
- etc.
Not sure I've ever seen Canon release a firmware fix to address a third party lens. I have seen Tamron and Sigma release firmware updates to fix issue with newer Canon Camera's.

I don't think Canon is in the business of fixing third party lens compatibility.
Regarding Intervalometer. I have that in my remote. Don't need it in my Eos R, but wouldn't complain if they added it in.
Still would be a battery suck though, especially for long interval shooting.
 

Freddell

EOS M50
Oct 2, 2014
42
2
If anyone installed it was it working exactly as before is did it introduce any other behavior?
 

Cryhavoc

Eos R, 1D MK IV, 80D
Jan 17, 2019
37
43
Seattle
I have noticed 1 thing since adding ver 1.3 ( i do not know if its because of 1.3)..

With a third party battery, I can not charge it via USB
With a genuine Canon battery, usb charging from my pc still works.

I do not, for 100%, know if third party battery charging worked before 1.3 to be quite honest.
3rd party packs have been stand by use for me, where typically the Canon packs are installed, BUT I do know now for 100% certainty, that I cannot charge a power2000 LP-E6N pack via USB, whereas I can charge a Canon LP-E6N.

Someone with a third party pack and still on ver 1.2 would need to check ver 1.2 usb charging
 

koenkooi

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
425
253
I have noticed 1 thing since adding ver 1.3 ( i do not know if its because of 1.3)..

With a third party battery, I can not charge it via USB
With a genuine Canon battery, usb charging from my pc still works.

I do not, for 100%, know if third party battery charging worked before 1.3 to be quite honest.
3rd party packs have been stand by use for me, where typically the Canon packs are installed, BUT I do know now for 100% certainty, that I cannot charge a power2000 LP-E6N pack via USB, whereas I can charge a Canon LP-E6N.

Someone with a third party pack and still on ver 1.2 would need to check ver 1.2 usb charging
I rented an R a while ago and it came with 3rd party batteries and it wouldn't charge with 1.1 nor would it charge after updating to 1.2.