Gordon Laing explains the updates in firmware v1.1.0 for the Canon EOS R5

[TheSalvatore]

You are still missing the point, IT IS NOT AN OVERHEATING ISSUE, IT IS A DESIGN LIMITATION. If the design limits your use then get something else that doesn’t.

Neither are you getting the point. It's just a work around for current R5 users that are affected at the moment. Of course at their own risk. And of course, choose something else if people that don't like its (R5,R6) design and limitation. Simple. And posting the video is just to share with current R5 users to at least help them out if they ever want to risk it in desperate moments (As some countries like mine, temp can be 30-36C). I'm just sharing what I've found. That's all. Don't get why you have to be so worked up. Don't like, don't buy. Move on, life is simple.

 

[privatebydesign]

Neither are you getting the point. It's just a work around for current R5 users that are affected at the moment. Of course at their own risk. And of course, choose something else if people that don't like its (R5,R6) design and limitation. Simple. And posting the video is just to share with current R5 users to at least help them out if they ever want to risk it in desperate moments (As some countries like mine, temp can be 30-36C). I'm just sharing what I've found. That's all. Don't get why you have to be so worked up. Don't like, don't buy. Move on, life is simple.

Because people that do buy and persist the conflation of ‘issue’ and ‘design’ will impact everybody, me included. Personally I don’t want to be impacted by others stupidity, everybody that got an R5 knew the design limitations, even the people in the first batch because word was out immediately.

Canon even posted the limits which DPR tested and said were 100% correct. Anybody that felt those design limitations made the camera unusable for them could have returned the camera or sold it for a $1,000 profit. Not one single person in the world is stuck with an R5. If it isn’t what you need don’t buy it, if it isn’t what you need but you already have it sell it for a profit. But please stop calling design limitations ‘issues’ and stop buying it if those design limitations don’t work for you.

Even the design limitations allow for effectively unlimited 4kHQ via an external monitor that allows vastly greater capacity than the biggest current cards for less money with more functionality anyway, why even bother with these stupid ‘work arounds’? Now the vide crowd refuse to use external monitors? It’s pathetic.

 

[TheSalvatore]

Because people that do buy and persist the conflation of ‘issue’ and ‘design’ will impact everybody, me included. Personally I don’t want to be impacted by others stupidity, everybody that got an R5 knew the design limitations, even the people in the first batch because word was out immediately.

Canon even posted the limits which DPR tested and said were 100% correct. Anybody that felt those design limitations made the camera unusable for them could have returned the camera or sold it for a $1,000 profit. Not one single person in the world is stuck with an R5. If it isn’t what you need don’t buy it, if it isn’t what you need but you already have it sell it for a profit. But please stop calling design limitations ‘issues’ and stop buying it if those design limitations don’t work for you.

Even the design limitations allow for effectively unlimited 4kHQ via an external monitor that allows vastly greater capacity than the biggest current cards for less money with more functionality anyway, why even bother with these stupid ‘work arounds’? Now the vide crowd refuse to use external monitors? It’s pathetic.

I'm one of the first batch user. " If it isn’t what you need don’t buy it, if it isn’t what you need". Precisely that was my point dude. Also I'm a full time wedding photographer but I do occasionally film for my travel videos. I believe there are people like me and having the R5. So if you don't like, don't get it. Why are you so easily impacted by others? You do you.

To me I don't think sharing is wrong. Sharing is caring, At least people out there know about this. Alright let's just stop debating. You don't like it, like i said, don't buy and simply just ignore all the overheating article. Peace out.

 

[Jonathan Thill]

NEW TRICK FOUND ON YOUTUBE FROM FILM POET TO BYPASS OVERHEATING INSTANTLY!!! LOOKS PROMISING

Oh look more stupid ways to potentially damage a perfectly working Camera.

Any links to videos about cleaning loaded firearms or jumping off bridges because your friends did it?

 

[TheSalvatore]

Oh look more stupid ways to potentially damage a perfectly working Camera.

Any links to videos about cleaning loaded firearms or jumping off bridges because your friends did it?

Then you don't risk and don't do it? Lol It's for people that wanna risk.
*Fyi not my friend.

 

[Jonathan Thill]

Then you don't risk and don't do it? Lol It's for people that wanna risk.
*Fyi not my friend.

Read the room, buddy...

 

[TheSalvatore]

Read the room, buddy...

If you don't like it then don't do haha. It's for people that don't mind trying. Oh well. Why so serious.

 

[SteveC]

I'm one of the first batch user. " If it isn’t what you need don’t buy it, if it isn’t what you need". Precisely that was my point dude. Also I'm a full time wedding photographer but I do occasionally film for my travel videos. I believe there are people like me and having the R5. So if you don't like, don't get it. Why are you so easily impacted by others? You do you.

To me I don't think sharing is wrong. Sharing is caring, At least people out there know about this. Alright let's just stop debating. You don't like it, like i said, don't buy and simply just ignore all the overheating article. Peace out.

What he is concerned about is that the after market will never trust a used R5, for fear that some chimpanzee in human form defeated the safeties and damaged the camera sometime in the past.

You can't seem to understand that because you are unable to even entertain the thought that the limits might be there to protect the hardware. You'd rather believe that Canon just put them there to aggravate you. Try entertaining the thought that the limits might be there for a valid engineering reason! If they are safeties against hardware damage AND you go around them, you've damaged the hardware. The aftermarket will figure this out and R5 used prices will drop accordingly because the buyer of a used camera will never know if the seller is one of those assholes (yes, I just went there) who fucked up his camera.

 

[Bdbtoys]

Not taking sides here... because I see both.

At an academic level...
It is interesting that the time-out can be reset by forwarding a day (won't get into how silly it is to have dates wrong on your videos). This is basically a different take on battery pull trick... Except instead of not writing the timeout, it tricks to think the timeout is over. It's actually closer to getting around video game timeouts.

The user level...
By all rights do it to your camera if you want (it's your camera). Don't do it to a camera you have no intention of keeping. Be honest when selling your camera. If when you sell your camera you say 'yeah, I bypassed the overheat control on a regular basis' more power to you. But let's be honest here... almost no one would do that... so you get the next situation.

The resale market...
There is a general concern what the people do with these cameras that they ran hard and get rid of, and the negative experience the unknowing end user will have. Which might trickle down to the general statement of 'all used r5's are garbage', which will then hurt peoples ability to upgrade, which then has an effect on new model sales.

I almost cringe for every fly by night YT'r that does the old 'reason I'm getting rid of the R5'... I mean seriously... we all know why. Most got the camera for a quick click generator and have no intention of keeping it when the credit card bill comes due... so no skin off their back to abuse it as they see fit. The problem is how many of these camera's get repackaged and resold to the general public again (that they think is new or a lightly used return). This is not limited to the R5's... I think it happens a lot w/ any new first-batch tech (think of those that overclock video cards, and return them).

IMO...
Canon screwed up here... they should have done a power-on sensor thermal check to check the actual temp of components, shell, etc. and adjust cool down times based on that. Yes that would have added more temp sensors to the build... but it would have been better than the 'hmm it should be cooled off enough after 3 hours, I mean 1hr, or w/e we guess in the new firmware'. But the point is Canon is trying to prevent you from damaging your gear (heck if nothing else but for reliability (for reputation) and ultimately service reasons(for warranty repairs)).

 

[SteveC]

I almost cringe for every fly by night YT'r that does the old 'reason I'm getting rid of the R5'... I mean seriously... we all know why. Most got the camera for a quick click generator and have no intention of keeping it when the credit card bill comes due... so no skin off their back to abuse it as they see fit. The problem is how many of these camera's get repackaged and resold to the general public again (that they think is new or a lightly used return). This is not limited to the R5's... I think it happens a lot w/ any new first-batch tech (think of those that overclock video cards, and return them).

There were at least three users here who, a couple of weeks ago, threw an "I'm boxing it up and sending it back" tantrum (one who is simply reselling because, apparently where he lives he can't return it). Given they were all mad about the video limits...well, I wouldn't want to buy a used camera from any of them. I DON'T know what they did with it. They all assumed it was just Canon Cripplehammer in action.

IMO...
Canon screwed up here... they should have done a power-on sensor thermal check to check the actual temp of components, shell, etc. and adjust cool down times based on that. Yes that would have added more temp sensors to the build... but it would have been better than the 'hmm it should be cooled off enough after 3 hours, I mean 1hr, or w/e we guess in the new firmware'. But the point is Canon is trying to prevent you from damaging your gear (heck if nothing else but for reliability (for reputation) and ultimately service reasons(for warranty repairs)).

If Canon had done this, it wouldn't have mattered. Some people would still have assumed it was the "cripple hammer" at work and hacked it.

 

[privatebydesign]

If you don't like it then don't do haha. It's for people that don't mind trying. Oh well. Why so serious.

Hi Baron....

 

[Jonathan Thill]

I think we will see this addressed in the next firmware and that will help as long as there are other incentives to updating the firmware.

If there is no reason to update then there is a high chance some users will stick with the firmware that allows the hacks and only update if/when they go to sell their crispy Camera.

 

[SteveC]

I think we will see this addressed in the next firmware and that will help as long as there are other incentives to updating the firmware.

If there is no reason to update then there is a high chance some users will stick with the firmware that allows the hacks and only update if/when they go to sell their crispy Camera.

Of course new cameras will be updated already...so a camera with a high serial number will be more trustworthy--it will never have had the version of firmware that allowed the X, Y, or Z hack, on it.

My serial number is in the upper 900s, but fortunately I doubt I'll ever feel the need to "upgrade" with this one.

 

[Baron_Karza]

I can't wait to see all the new flood of Canon Youtube videos at the end of the year:

"Dead Pixels in R5"

"R5 No Longer Turns On - It's Garbage"

"R5 Overheating Indicator Stays On - Even after turning off for 24 Hrs!"

"How to remove Stuck Rice in R5"

"Replacing Melted Heat Sensor in R5"

"SD Card Melted and Stuck in R6!!"

"R5 - WAS I WRONG to By Pass Timer? Camera Won't Turn On!!"






"My Canon is Dead???"

 

[Bdbtoys]

If Canon had done this, it wouldn't have mattered. Some people would still have assumed it was the "cripple hammer" at work and hacked it.

I disagree to an extent. Yes there would be a few that would circumvent... but it would be much harder to do so by the general masses if it was reading real temps. It would take a "real" hardware/software hack... vs a battery pull or date change.

Personally, I have much more faith in overheat protection based on real time data vs projections... as the latter can be disputed.

 

[SteveC]

I disagree to an extent. Yes there would be a few that would circumvent... but it would be much harder to do so by the general masses if it was reading real temps. It would take a "real" hardware/software hack... vs a battery pull or date change.

Personally, I have much more faith in overheat protection based on real time data vs projections... as the latter can be disputed.

True enough. I'm sure they had that conversation at Canon beforehand, and the decision was made to reduce costs in exchange for (what was perceived to be) a slight loss of usability. It wouldn't be the first time the beancounters f*cked something up.