Canon EOS R5 firmware update coming soon, RAW light to be added? [CR2]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
Full image details at Just need some more DRView attachment 192115
Very nice and your Flickr is impressive as well. Thank you!
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
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.
Upvote
0
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.
Upvote
0
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.
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.
Upvote
0
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.Im currently waiting for my RF 70-200 to turn up.
Its gonna be great going by what you and others have said!
Upvote
0
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.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
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
Upvote
0
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.
Attachments
Last edited:
Upvote
0
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.
Upvote
0
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.
Upvote
0
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?
Upvote
0
