Canon EOS R5 firmware update [CR2]

[David - Sydney]

Hello Sony, sorry ... I know it's been a long time, please forgive me.

The best part of your comment is that you will no longer need to post in Canon rumors again!

 

[David - Sydney]

Of course, there’s also trickle-down tech. Having used the Smart Controller for AF point selection on the R3, if I used an R5 and the R5II gets that feature from the 1D X III / R3, I would consider updating for that alone.

Trickle down economic theory in general is pretty poor in practice but I agree that hardware trickle down certainly does. What is somewhat head-scratching to me is new features appearing in lower end cameras but not available in higher end ones.

What would be ideal is introducing a new feature as a firmware module that can be added to a number of camera bodies at once. In theory the coding has been done once so it is a matter of porting per body within hardware limits eg pixel shift only for IBIS bodies but taking multiple raws shots and allowing for de-mosaicing in separate SW as a higher res image could be done on any body. This is the apple model of course but wishful thinking for other hardware manufacturers.

 

[David - Sydney]

I think we are still a way off from having portable firmware components from one camera migrated over to another. The R5's code was developed for the R5's hardware. The R3 and R6ii's hardware is slightly different and I suspect that it's not a simple "copy over to the R5" situation that we would all like.

The goal in
EDIT
every
many SW solutions is to develop code in modules as much as possible. Code once and port to hardware platform. Fastest and cheapest way to do it if managed well. It would be pretty simple at a high level to show that every camera is the same... button input in based on selected parameters (eg ISO/aperture/shutter speed), AF identification, move lens focus, open shutter, process image to buffer, buffer transfer to card. Of course, much more complex in the detail but having a modular structure means that a new 'feature" should be able to be transferred relatively simply.

If Canon is not doing this then that is an issue but the R5c is a good example of porting the cinema menu/features to the R5 hardware platform. FW updates to reduce the switch over time were warmly received.

Clearly also done on the hardware side as well.... The 3rd party lenses companies have done the same thing in the past with optical solutions and then port to hardware mounts. Car manufacturers for chassis platforms etc

 

[David - Sydney]

I was happy to buy my R5 at the released specs at the time of pre-ordering. Every FW release is a bonus but most of the improvements (besides fixing a range of "phenomenon") has been on the video side. Not to say that they aren't a good improvements but not critical for me.

The high res implementation was a disappointment though. Sure, give the option of in-body jpeg but why not output multiple raw images and allow combination in SW separately. An in-body high res raw would have been ideal of course!

It is interesting that Canon is considered by reviewers to be 3rd for AF tracking at the moment. Underwater it could certainly be better but clearly that is a narrow niche vs use case above water. I don't know if that impression is based on default AF settings but if so, perhaps Canon might be able improve the default which is what most user was apply.

 

[David - Sydney]

CR should keep a (wish) list of what would be considered simple vs perhaps more complex FW improvements. It would save repeating them for every FW update rumour

 

[David - Sydney]

I asked a straightforward general question about commercial practices. I made it absolutely crystal clear that it was a general question by phrasing it as encompassing Canon/Sony/Nikon and their ethos versus others like Apple. It's certainly not based on any resentment about the R5ii in particular - I accept that I will have to upgrade my Canon gear as I have done through 7D, 7DII; 70D, 80D, 90D; 5DIII, 5Div; M2, M5 etc. The 7D major upgrade, which I appreciated at the time, is detailed here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EOS_7D

I have made 2 generational leaps in body.. from 7D to 5Diii and then to R5.
There was an interim move to 5Div but that was second hand and had a net zero cost when sold. The 5Div was definitely better than 5Diii but incremental rather than a big jump.

Given the additional cost of a housing, I won't be moving to a R5ii so maybe a R5iii (or second hand R5ii later on) if it still fits the housing.
Lenses are a different story and I can see myself moving to RF14-35/4 and RF100mm macro or at least second hand versions later on but that also means adjusting my port length to suit the different physical length of the wide angle (50 vs 84mm)

 

[neuroanatomist]

It is interesting that Canon is considered by reviewers to be 3rd for AF tracking at the moment.

I always wonder about such reviews. I recall when DPR decided that the Nikon DSLR AF tracking was better than Canon. They were Nikon shooters, and had the Canon AF system set up in a way the manual recommends against (Spot AF in AI Servo). They also claimed the Canon automatic AF point selection was poor...it was behaving exactly as Canon said it should, but Nikon did it differently and that's what they were expecting so it was Canon's fault it didn't match their expectations.

 

[DhlcadR6]

I always wonder about such reviews. I recall when DPR decided that the Nikon DSLR AF tracking was better than Canon. They were Nikon shooters, and had the Canon AF system set up in a way the manual recommends against (Spot AF in AI Servo). They also claimed the Canon automatic AF point selection was poor...it was behaving exactly as Canon said it should, but Nikon did it differently and that's what they were expecting so it was Canon's fault it didn't match their expectations.

DP has their own bias, both Richard(Seattle team) and ex-DPTV Chris&Jordan. They rate Sony better than Canon when the Sony body has turn on the subject recognition/tracking, meanwhile testing the Canon without turning on subject recognition/tracking and say it wasn't good enough.

When comes to Autofocus testing, I'll not trust DPreview....I rather see KaiW and JaredR3Polin, as those 2 are ex-Nikon shooter and actually use Sony&Canon for professional work.

 

[DhlcadR6]

That makes zero sense. Why would a newer model that possibly has more/better features make you want to jump brands? Getting a new body is simply that. Switching brands is generally going to require a wholesale change in not only lenses, but batteries and other brand specific accessories. I guess if you only have one or two lenses, whatever, but most people that are laying out that kind of money on a body are probably heavily vested in lenses for the system, as well.

But I’m sure all the camera manufacturers would absolutely love if everyone had your same philosophy and willingness to dump their current brand/system that they may have spent (easily) five figures on and do it again with them, this time instead.

They are either: youtubers, keyboard gearholics with no gear on hand, or they have less than 5 lenses for a system.

If you are bored(or has a lot of free time) and go through youtube's comment section. There's a lot of hobbyist folks saying they have been shooting Canon since FD blah blah blah and they are ditching Canon for others because of the 3rd party lenses. It makes me wonder are they ai-bots.

I've argued with an ex-7Dii user saying he is leaving Canon because his Tamron/Sigma EF lenses suffered focus shift and bashing Canon for recent launches(I can spot him in many Canon's product reviews/few anti-Canon channels). Sometimes I do wonder why they are more energetic than I do on Canon.

 

[EricN]

They are either: youtubers, keyboard gearholics with no gear on hand, or they have less than 5 lenses for a system.

If you are bored(or has a lot of free time) and go through youtube's comment section. There's a lot of hobbyist folks saying they have been shooting Canon since FD blah blah blah and they are ditching Canon for others because of the 3rd party lenses. It makes me wonder are they ai-bots.

I've argued with an ex-7Dii user saying he is leaving Canon because his Tamron/Sigma EF lenses suffered focus shift and bashing Canon for recent launches(I can spot him in many Canon's product reviews/few anti-Canon channels). Sometimes I do wonder why they are more energetic than I do on Canon.

Maybe the ones switching from canon all the way back from FD are the people who only bought the kit lens?

 

[David - Sydney]

DP has their own bias, both Richard(Seattle team) and ex-DPTV Chris&Jordan. They rate Sony better than Canon when the Sony body has turn on the subject recognition/tracking, meanwhile testing the Canon without turning on subject recognition/tracking and say it wasn't good enough.

Except for perhaps Thoughts R Us, the vast majority of posters in the DPR forums are anti-Canon which is okay but certainly not the best place to look for considered information. I think that the Canon users just gave up posting there although moderation seem to be better than the cesspool it descended too prior to temporary closure.

 

[koenkooi]

It would be foolish to view code as something that is completely interchangeable regardless of the hardware design. Different hardware has different capabilities. The R5 for instance has custom coding in it to lower performance when battery power drops below a certain level. Other camera's may need that but the code may need to be tweaked to reflect different power requirements and capabilities.

It is also not the goal of every software solution to develop code in modules, that is what a total noob to software engineering would say. Software shouldn't be modularized for the sake of being modularized, it should be modularized according to the teams that are working on it. If a single developer is making a bunch of modules, they're just making a bigger and stupider mess.

And this assumes Canon has teams, plural working on the firmware, which is something I doubt. They have only a single lens design team after all...

 

[jeffa4444]

Which improvements could be easily ported?

The AF improvements between the R5 & R6 MKII

 

[DhlcadR6]

Except for perhaps Thoughts R Us, the vast majority of posters in the DPR forums are anti-Canon which is okay but certainly not the best place to look for considered information. I think that the Canon users just gave up posting there although moderation seem to be better than the cesspool it descended too prior to temporary closure.

Thoughts R Us is so active in the comment section.

tbh the Canon area in DPR forum is civilized.

 

[jeffa4444]

As soon as the R5 MKII was rumoured to be testing in the wild it was folly to believe we would see a major upgrade to the R5 firmware and to be fair to Canon they have issued multiple firmware upgrades to the R5 including CLog-3 and better AF detection.
The R6 didn’t receive major firmware upgrades prior to its replacement and I would consider the improvements brought for the R6 MKII to be inline with all major manufacturers when there is life-cycle change. It was enough for me to change my R6 for the R6 MKII.
That said given the considerable price difference between the R5 & R6 MKII Canon should in my opinion of improved the AF inline with the R6 MKII considering there is at least a year between the release of the R6 MKII and the arrival of the R5 MKII not least in fairness to those buying the R5 in 2023.
The bigger issue with Canon for me echoed by the Ordinary Filmmaker on YouTube is the total lack of mid level RF glass such as f1.4L primes compared both to the EF system and Sony E Mount. After five years it’s an area Canon need to address not everyone wants or needs superzoom.

 

[tq0cr5i]

The AF improvements between the R5 & R6 MKII

Yes, but Canon may NEVER port these for R5.

 

[Far]

That makes zero sense. Why would a newer model that possibly has more/better features make you want to jump brands? Getting a new body is simply that. Switching brands is generally going to require a wholesale change in not only lenses, but batteries and other brand specific accessories. I guess if you only have one or two lenses, whatever, but most people that are laying out that kind of money on a body are probably heavily vested in lenses for the system, as well.

But I’m sure all the camera manufacturers would absolutely love if everyone had your same philosophy and willingness to dump their current brand/system that they may have spent (easily) five figures on and do it again with them, this time instead.

You make a good point. But I also add that not everyone has a very large system of lenses and accessories. Again, I still enjoy Canon and don't want to switch, but already different disappointments led me to just sell my most expensive lens (RF 50mm f1.2) today, to get ready for either more convincing Canon products (in my case, mid-range, rather lightweight L lenses, and high-res cameras with more advanced autofocus capabilities) or a change of brand.

 

[jeffa4444]

To my earlier point on lenses.

Canon RF & RF-S prime & zooms lenses August 2023 total 35 lenses including the stereo lens

Nikon Z mount including full frame & APS-C. Total 37 lenses

Sony E-Mount including full frame & APS-C. Total 64 lenses

All the above do not include 3rd party lenses. 3rd party lenses are available in the Nikon Z mount and the Sony E-mount but are very limited number in the RF Mount none of which have AF.

It’s not just about camera firmware but lenses that suit all budgets and all needs.

 

[Far]

Long time lurker, but had to register, because I was curious about your set up in this scenario?

What is your Initial Servo AF Point setting set at? In this type of scenario, I would set it to the first option, point the focus box and the person I want to be in focus, activate focus system, and recompose while holding the focus button then take the shot. This is also the method I set when shooting sports to get the exact person I want in focus, where as in auto it just randomly picks a person and you have to toggle around the people.

I looked into all 5 pages of AF settings, and here a list of my settings that could potentially matter in this case:

AF operation: Servo AF
AF method: Face + tracking
Subject to detect: People
Eye detection: Enable
Continuous AF: Disable
Servo AF Case: Modified 2 (sensitivity: -2, accel/decel: 0)
Switching tracked objects: 0
Initial Servo AF pt for face + tracking: Initial AF pt set for face + tracking
Also,
Back-button focusing with AF-ON set as: AF operation servo, Af method: face+tracking, servo AF characteristics: -

Please note that in this example, I am not sure where my focus point has been when I have pressed AF-ON. In fact, for a candid street shot like this, I do not get the time to position my point at the person of interest, so without looking long at my screen or playing with my focus buttons (I have also set up * button as servo Spot AF) I counted on Face-tracking to pick any of the people in the frame that it wants, so that I get a rather good focus zone, which obviously failed as the camera focused very close on the wall.

What do you think? Writing this to you, I think maybe for a situation like this that we do not have time to direct the face detection to the right area, we should set initial point to Auto, but I should try it and I am not very optimistic about it. I haven't worked with the new AF setup in R8 and R6II, but I believe regardless of the initial point, we could expect the camera to pick one of the faces in such a frame with 4 faces (not the right person we have in mind, but at least one of them).

 

[Far]

I’m also curious what lens, if it’s in single shot, or a synchro tracking mode? Which “case” is it set to etc… I own the R5 and I’m blown away how fast it to lock onto a subject and how sticky it is. I think a lot of users aren’t completely familiar or practiced in all the settings and when to use which.

Thanks. I was using the new RF 28mm f2.8 which I really like, and here a list of my settings that could potentially matter in this case:

AF operation: Servo AF
AF method: Face + tracking
Subject to detect: People
Eye detection: Enable
Continuous AF: Disable
Servo AF Case: Modified 2 (sensitivity: -2, accel/decel: 0)
Switching tracked objects: 0
Initial Servo AF pt for face + tracking: Initial AF pt set for face + tracking
Also,
Back-button focusing with AF-ON set as: AF operation: servo, Af method: face+tracking, servo AF characteristics: -