Firmware: Canon EOS R v1.3.0
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
Things that needs to be addressed at EOS R IMHO:
1. changing from manual iso to auto iso - when changing manual iso settings via touch bar or control ring it is possible to choose all ISO values, however auto iso is not selectable. to set it you need to wait ~2-3sec and than it is selectable, which is quite annoying.
2. if lens control ring is set to change iso values than changing direction is not possible clockwise is always decreasing iso values.
3. time-lapse movie interval is set to minimum of 2 seconds, would be nice to have it smaller, at least 1 second should be possible without the need to change anything in the interface.
4. would be nice to have c-log also in time-lapse movie mode, same as above.
5. interval timer should be added, why do we have it on EOS RP and not here?
6. canon 90d has support for 120P in Full HD with Digic 8 processor, why do we not have it with EOS R?
1. changing from manual iso to auto iso - when changing manual iso settings via touch bar or control ring it is possible to choose all ISO values, however auto iso is not selectable. to set it you need to wait ~2-3sec and than it is selectable, which is quite annoying.
2. if lens control ring is set to change iso values than changing direction is not possible clockwise is always decreasing iso values.
3. time-lapse movie interval is set to minimum of 2 seconds, would be nice to have it smaller, at least 1 second should be possible without the need to change anything in the interface.
4. would be nice to have c-log also in time-lapse movie mode, same as above.
5. interval timer should be added, why do we have it on EOS RP and not here?
6. canon 90d has support for 120P in Full HD with Digic 8 processor, why do we not have it with EOS R?
Upvote
0
YES. #5 kills me... Also, I would love to be able to shoot 1080p 60 when in crop mode (using an EFS lens). It makes no technical sense why you cannot currently do this.
Upvote
0
D
Deleted member 383640
Guest
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.
Upvote
0
Add more to that list.
1. Other setting feedback during ISO change. You only really increase it decrease ISO to get a certain shutter speed. So it would be nice to see that value (changing) as you adjust ISO.
2. Currently the fastest way to do bracketing is to go to the Q menu and touch EC and use the front dial. Currently in other LV modes touching EC both dials only change EC.
3. Touch Bar tweaking in terms of more consistent behavior and sensitivity, though that might not be possible.
4. Better AF-C object recognition. It wonders sometimes. Bringing in the smaller boxes to show where the AF really is focusing on instead of just a big box would be better. It would be better for the photog to determine where the thing is really focused on.
5. Fix the AF box size change issue. I have it set to right tap on the bar. But the size only changes in one shot mode. I have to toggle to one shot change the size then back to servo. That is just sloppy.
6. This is a major one I think. They need to expand customizability. I would like to be able to assign just ISO to a button. I would like to assign AE lock to whatever I want... currently you can only assign it to two buttons. DOF seems to only be assignable to 1 button?!?
Etc. They need to refine. And it is actually extremely simple in many cases. Which is why it isn’t really excusable.IMHO
Upvote
0
“5. Fix the AF box size change issue. I have it set to right tap on the bar. But the size only changes in one shot mode. I have to toggle to one shot change the size then back to servo. That is just sloppy.”
Yeah, that is a bug for sure. I have it through the Q-menu so haven’t seen your finding before now, but that’s a bug.
Yeah, that is a bug for sure. I have it through the Q-menu so haven’t seen your finding before now, but that’s a bug.
Upvote
0
To make 3rd party RF lenses less appealing because they won't be as capable when used with the camera.
Upvote
0
It didn't need one for the RF85 f/1.2, so it's not 'each' new lens. Only half of them
Upvote
0
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!
Upvote
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.
Upvote
0
I think he meant it in the sense of buying something being not really happy with it as is, but hoping they would turn it into what you want later with a firmware update. To that sentiment I wholeheartedly agree. Never buy a product based on what it might do in the future. Even if the manufacturer promises updates to add those features. Buy it only if you happy with what it does at the time of purchase. If it gets better later that's gravy, but promises don't always materialize...
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Yes, and the RF whitepaper says the RF lenses themselves hold the correction data, so DLO and correction data nothing should be needed on the RF mount. The RF85 f/1.2 didn't require an update.
This makes me think it's not about correction, but about something else, like a whitelist for dynamic IS. Or something went wrong with the lens firmware and the cameras need to do something different to correct that.
Upvote
0
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.
Upvote
0
Similar threads