Canon to release major firmware update for the Canon EOS R5

shadowsports

R5 C - RF Trinity
CR Pro
Jan 15, 2023
172
145
Bay Area, CA
Well, the leak does corroborate the notion of a "major FW update." The ability to generate a 400MP image qualifies as a major update. Hopefully, there will be more to the update than what was leaked :).
I'm sure there will be. No ibis here so no PS for me. (Which is actually fine) I don't think you guys will get unlimited recording either. There will be other cool stuff though. When do you guys think its going to drop??? .... Sunday night the 26th or Friday 3/31 for April Fools Day?
 
Upvote 0

fr34k

Canon R5 and lots of RF glass
Jul 16, 2022
67
80
When do you guys think its going to drop???
TLDR; probably sometime within about 3 weeks

Until now, Thursdays were quite frequent as a release date. CR Guy said something about NAB next month (from 15.04) so 30, 6 or 13 are candidates. Yet there are some anomalies as e.g. 1.7 or 1.6 (Wednesday and Friday respectively). It's just guesswork. Also skipping 1.8 seems to me that they were "ready", yet found some bugs in the software. This is a testament to their QC as producing these updates is (probably) less intensive (and expensive) in the programming part (although I don't want to downplay that), but the validation and testing part. But I guess they still sometimes don't squash all of them as error 70 on the R6 made clear.
 
Upvote 0
I'm curious how useful this pixel-shift, IBIS High Resolution feature will be for astrophotography. Can anyone weigh in?

Also, can anyone suggest some super-steady tripods that would be needed to make this feature useful?
I use this tripod and it is rock solid.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
A 400 megapixel jpeg:



Nice! I suspect the RAW will just be the 9 individual shots like how the in-camera HDR and focus bracketing modes work. Unfortunately according to the spec sheet, the video recording time limit remains 29:59, but who knows! Hope springs eternal. Either way, sounds like a promising update to look forward to.
It would be a big let down if you are only left with a jpeg.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

koenkooi

CR Pro
Feb 25, 2015
3,609
4,188
The Netherlands
It would be a big let down if you are only left with a jpeg.
I think the best case scenario we can expect is that DPP4 can do the merging and will hand you a TIFF.

An in-camera CR3 would be best, but I very much doubt Canon will give us that. A 3rd party tool that generates a linear DNG would be great as well, for some reason the TIFFs from DPP4 have less latitude than the CR3s.
 
Upvote 0
TLDR; probably sometime within about 3 weeks

Until now, Thursdays were quite frequent as a release date. CR Guy said something about NAB next month (from 15.04) so 30, 6 or 13 are candidates. Yet there are some anomalies as e.g. 1.7 or 1.6 (Wednesday and Friday respectively). It's just guesswork. Also skipping 1.8 seems to me that they were "ready", yet found some bugs in the software. This is a testament to their QC as producing these updates is (probably) less intensive (and expensive) in the programming part (although I don't want to downplay that), but the validation and testing part. But I guess they still sometimes don't squash all of them as error 70 on the R6 made clear.

I'm sure there will be. No ibis here so no PS for me. (Which is actually fine) I don't think you guys will get unlimited recording either. There will be other cool stuff though. When do you guys think its going to drop??? .... Sunday night the 26th or Friday 3/31 for April Fools Day?

Sometime in the next three weeks sounds good. A leak like that wouldn't happen too far in advance, but who knows?
 
Upvote 0
It would be a big let down if you are only left with a jpeg.

It would be disappointing but wouldn't be totally surprising. They could give us this in the R5 as a "teaser" and then have a robust implementation in the R5 II that gives us RAW files.

Alternatively, they could give us a combined RAW file, similar to the one for the RAW Burst Mode in the newer bodies, that can only be processed by DPP, and an in-camera jpeg. The capture could be limited to 10 or 11-bit due to HW limitations of the R5 but would have a full 14-bit in the R5 II (or a plethora of other technical limitations). However, having the format out there would give third-party SW developers some time (a year?) to implement support for this format before the R5 II with the full PS capability is launched.
 
Upvote 0

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
4,722
2,655
I think the best case scenario we can expect is that DPP4 can do the merging and will hand you a TIFF.

An in-camera CR3 would be best, but I very much doubt Canon will give us that. A 3rd party tool that generates a linear DNG would be great as well, for some reason the TIFFs from DPP4 have less latitude than the CR3s.

TIFFs (in the way you are using the term here) will always have less latitude than a raw file.

The black point, white point, and WB are already baked in for a color TIFF. A color TIFF contains an interpolated R, G, and B value for each pixel and does not preserve the actual monochrome luminance values actually captured by the sensor and recorded in the raw file.

Just because one can have a 16-bit color TIFF does not mean those 16-bits store image information in the same way that a 14-bit or 16-bit raw file does.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

usern4cr

R5
CR Pro
Sep 2, 2018
1,376
2,308
Kentucky, USA
It would be a big let down if you are only left with a jpeg.
The past versions of this (that I've seen) have always output only a jpeg with no raw option for the final image.
I'm guessing that they will only give a jpg output of this again. If they shock me with a raw version of it then you would still have to wait for the post software to upgrade to read the new raw format file, but that would still be worth the wait to see what it can do then.
 
Upvote 0
Sep 20, 2020
3,106
2,424
TIFFs (in the way you are using the term here) will always have less latitude than a raw file.

The black point, white point, and WB are already baked in for a color TIFF. A color TIFF contains an interpolated R, G, and B value for each pixel and does not preserve the actual monochrome luminance values actually captured by the sensor and recorded in the raw file.

Just because one can have a 16-bit color TIFF does not mean those 16-bits store image information in the same way that a 14-bit or 16-bit raw file does.
Wouldn't it be better to edit the 9 RAW files independently?
I am not sure about the advantage of a single RAW output file.
 
Upvote 0

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
4,722
2,655
Wouldn't it be better to edit the 9 RAW files independently?
I am not sure about the advantage of a single RAW output file.

I'm not the one desiring a single raw file output. You'd have to ask @koenkooi why that might be an advantage. I was just explaining that TIFFs seem to have less latitude for adjustment because they actually do have less latitude for adjustemnt.

One problem with editing nine raw files independently is getting them properly aligned to less than single pixel intervals afterwards if any lens correction has been applied.

Roger Cicala explains why correcting any kind of geometric distortion in post costs absolute resolution in this lensrentals blog entry.


Of course, having a pixel map with 400 MP should yield better resolution, even after the stretching required for geometric lens distortion, than having a pixel map of 45 MP after stretching it for geometric lens distortion.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

koenkooi

CR Pro
Feb 25, 2015
3,609
4,188
The Netherlands
I'm not the one desiring a single raw file output. You'd have to ask @koenkooi why that might be an advantage. I was just explaining that TIFFs seem to have less latitude for adjustment because they actually do have less latitude for adjustemnt.

One problem with editing nine raw files independently is getting them properly aligned to less than single pixel intervals afterwards if any lens correction has been applied.
The ideal situation would be having the 9 individual RAW files and have DPP4/LR/DxO support making the 400MP composite in post.
Since DPP4 will, at best, deliver a TIFF and DxO/LR/C1 won’t support compositing, having the camera give us a RAW-ish composite, like a linear DNG, is the best we can realistically get from Canon. And ‘realistically’ is being stretched big time :)
 
Upvote 0

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
4,722
2,655
The ideal situation would be having the 9 individual RAW files and have DPP4/LR/DxO support making the 400MP composite in post.
Since DPP4 will, at best, deliver a TIFF and DxO/LR/C1 won’t support compositing, having the camera give us a RAW-ish composite, like a linear DNG, is the best we can realistically get from Canon. And ‘realistically’ is being stretched big time :)

The basic problem is that due to the overlapping nature of the disparate frames, they must be debayered/demosaiced before being combined. At that point, the flexibility of raw is already lost, because adjustments to black point, white point, WB, light curves, etc. must be reapplied to the raw data at the time it is debayered/demosaiced (again - to render a new viewable image with the adjustments to the debayering/demosaicing instruction set applied) to leverage the flexibility of raw. Once it's been converted to any type of RGB raster image, the full flexibility of raw is lost.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

koenkooi

CR Pro
Feb 25, 2015
3,609
4,188
The Netherlands
The basic problem is that due to the overlapping nature of the disparate frames, they must be debayered/demosaiced before being combined. At that point, the flexibility of raw is already lost, because adjustments to black point, white point, WB, light curves, etc. must be reapplied to the raw data at the time it is debayered/demosaiced (again - to render a new viewable image with the adjustments to the debayering/demosaicing instruction set applied) to leverage the flexibility of raw. Once it's been converted to any type of RGB raster image, the full flexibility of raw is lost.
But said raster image would still be significantly better than the jpeg the website mentioned. As @David - Sydney wrote, hopefully we can get a HEIC, that would give use better-than-8-bit. I would still prefer a lossless compressed 12-bit image generated by the camera or in post.

If this were a new feature introduced with a new camera, we could expect improvements through firmware updates. But with this being introduced on a 3 year old body, I fear the current implementation is all we're going to get. And the next "high resolution" body, be it R1, R5II or R-not-4 will likely have a more refined implementation, with a good chance of future improvements.

But we haven't seen the actual implementation in the R5 yet, it might be "good enough" for the use case I had envisioned: focus stacking static, non-self-overlapping objects.
 
Upvote 0

fr34k

Canon R5 and lots of RF glass
Jul 16, 2022
67
80
hopefully we can get a HEIC
In order for that we need one significant improvement the R3, R7 and R6 II have: HDR PQ with ES. This is not possible with the current firmware.
I seriously hope though that it will come, just as focus stacking. I'd love to see internal stacking, but again for that HDR PQ with ES will have to be enabled as otherwise HEIC output would not be available. So: Canon: please let us use HDR PQ with ES.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,163
12,990
In order for that we need one significant improvement the R3, R7 and R6 II have: HDR PQ with ES. This is not possible with the current firmware.
I seriously hope though that it will come, just as focus stacking. I'd love to see internal stacking, but again for that HDR PQ with ES will have to be enabled as otherwise HEIC output would not be available. So: Canon: please let us use HDR PQ with ES.
It seems that I can capture HDR PQ with full electronic shutter on my R3. Not sure about the R7 and R6II. Or maybe I am misunderstanding your point?
 
Upvote 0