Bro - I just want to see some PITCHERS! GNAWHUTAHMSAYIN? PITCHERS NOW DAMMIT!
And I really appreciate the sentiment. I’m glad the bubbas are getting their toys and mine will be here one of these days.

Upvote
0
Bro - I just want to see some PITCHERS! GNAWHUTAHMSAYIN? PITCHERS NOW DAMMIT!
And I really appreciate the sentiment. I’m glad the bubbas are getting their toys and mine will be here one of these days.
Thanks for doing the tests, I am happy to hear that things are not as bad as they seem in your conditions. I do agree however with another poster here that shooting 1080p is "fluff". I mean either you need 4k delivery or you don't, I usually don't start throwing in FHD footage. If I want to record FHD I can use basically any camera that was released the past 5 years or longer.I set my R5 in direct sunlight today in 85 degree ambient air. I shot back to back in order: 30 mins of 4K60P, 30 mins of 1080P, 30 mins of 4K30P, then 8.5 more mins of 4K60P before it shut itself down. In direct sunlight, with warm ambient air. 30 mins of 4K60P IPB was nearly 50GB- is it really practical? Also, I could have shot 1080P or 4K30 for a LOT longer, as those cycles did little to heat up the camera. For a while, the R5 was barely warmer than my powered off Canon 5D4 which I also set in the sun during the test. I'm pretty sure the reports of shooting stills preventing one minute of video later are either from Phoenix where it was 118 degrees today, or the reports are carelessly lacking all the things that came before to heat up the camera.
Well you're absolutely right. However as a sidenote the R6 has a 20MP sensor end even overheats in 4K30...and that is just sub-par, even leaving out the unreleased A7S3. Even if you say the R5 is fine we gotta admit, that Canon regularly does seem to have some electronic design problems. I mean it's not the first time their processors are a bit underperforming (not being efficient enough for 4K x26* was the whole reason for the MJPEG codecs on past cameras).There IS no hybrid camera that can do full frame high framerate and high resolution and stills all in one tiny MILC body.
Serious questions: Are the video features of the 1Dx III comparable to the R5? Have these issues been found in the 1DX III?
If not, why not?
The 1Dx III should be better sealed than the R5, so it should hold heat in even more than the R5, right? If you subtract the size of the battery grip, the 1Dx III isn't all that much larger, so what could they have done in the 1Dx III to dissipate the heat so much more effectively?
You are right - cold (or heat) not entering the body points to a faulty (or severely underdesigned) thermal interface. This is confirmed by testimonies that when the camera overheats, the body stays cold.
However, the "cooling adapter" is certainly ridiculous.
Just some points come to mind:Keen to understand (genuinely) why you believe that such an adaptor would be certainly ridiculous ?
You are right - cold (or heat) not entering the body points to a faulty (or severely underdesigned) thermal interface. This is confirmed by testimonies that when the camera overheats, the body stays cold.
However, the "cooling adapter" is certainly ridiculous.
Just some points come to mind:
- The patent shows an extender without lens elements -> for EF lenses only
- The heat is transmitted through the RF mount (with what seem to be heatpipes). To be effective the mount needs to heat up to nearly the temperature that it is cooling (say 60-80C). However, this happens also when native lenses are connected, that are constantly being heated up at least at the mount point. I'd be surprised if this tech is in the cameras but this can easily be verified by R5 owners (is the mount hot when the camera overheats?)
- The patent suggests variations of an air channel design with small fans. This is not a common thermal solution because it requires small high pressure fans (tend to spin fast and be loud). With unfiltered ambient air, such channels tend to jam and a filter worsens the pressure drop requirements.
- The lens mount (or any two solid surfaces) are never well connected thermally, i.e. there is always a remaining (micrometer) air layer between source and sink that acts as a thermal insulator. You would need to put thermal paste/grease on the lensmount when you attach the "heat-sink-extender" to get good cooling.
Overall, you get a much better (as in more compact) thermal solution by putting a fan in the body, e.g. blower style fan in the bottom plate. Such a solution can certainly be made weather sealed and removable/serviceable/cleanable.
You seem to have some knowledge on heat dissipation. So let me ask you, what are your thoughts about this idea? (Please be gentle on me if you think the idea is ridiculous, heh heh)
What about another hand grip option to dissipate the heat?
The camera design priorities seems to be weather sealing over heat dissipation. The battery cover is 1 part of the weather seal system. The cover needs to be removed to attach the 2 grips designed to be used wit the camera. Could Canon have made a way to transfer the heat out of the body through the battery compartment and into a grip? The grip could have small fan(s) or heat sinks that would let the air out in some sort of opening(s) in the grip. Those openings would come with different covers, for minor weather proofing (and medium heat transfer) , high weather proofing (less heat transfer) or just not use them at all to get the most heat out. The grip could have a disclosure sticker on it stating something like: "Use of this grip will reduce the weather sealing system dramatically".
This would give more versatility for uses to use video for various conditions, allowing for weather proofing or longer video recording times.
When user expectations are unrealistic, I don't know what any company can do.
People interpreted the marketing as they could shoot 4K60/120 and 8K all day in any environment.
When people are posting hyped videos and getting paid to be talking heads and produce click bait- yes, their data points are sometimes less valid than a real customer.
Where is the outrage that the Sony also over heats in several reviews? I own a Sony camera, so I'm no brand elitist. I just want rationality and objectivity.
I also explained how ridiculous I think it is to expect a tiny mirrorless to ever be able to cool itself with high frame rate high resolution and IBIS combined, which you seem to agree with.
It is not unrealistic to expect to be able to shoot more than 20-30m of HQ video in a day. Competing camera bodies overheat but are usable again...really usable again, not usable for 1-3m...after short breaks. They also respond to external cooling with fans or ice packs. Heck, the X-T3 will will recover a good chunk of record time if you turn it off for two minutes and change the battery!
There is very clearly a thermal issue here, whether it's firmware (less likely) or hardware (more likely; they're likely not conducting heat away from DIGIC X or the body shell like they should). This is well below what competitors are offering.
That's a straw man. No one expected that. The record times ************* found in testing are perfectly respectable, but not the 2 hour minimum recovery times. Nor the near complete loss of HQ video modes just from shooting stills or looking through the EVF for an extended period.
And now we have a report of shutdown from shooting stills. Maybe this is a one off quirk, maybe he's trolling the forum. But maybe it's a sign of more bad news to come. It's not unreasonable to expect this as the next shoe to drop given the fact that stills shooting destroys HQ record times. Heat is building up even for stills.
When Armando Ferreira uses the R5 in a real production environment to recreate famous movie scenes and concludes that the R5 has thermal issues that severely limit its usefulness, it has thermal issues. He is not a click baiter and he has been more than fair to the EOS R and to Canon in general.
Are there any Sony bodies with recovery times of 2-6 hours?
I did when I thought the drama was people expecting continuous footage. Looking at the reports it's clear people are shocked at the recovery times and at how merely turning the camera on eats into record times. These are supposed to be hybrid cameras. They're no good as hybrid cameras to wedding photographers who can't switch to video because they've been shooting stills (as but one example).
Contrast this with the competition: the X-T3 and X-T4 may be APS-C, but they've also been used for short, Hollywood-quality films without any severe thermal issues. (They will overheat but they also quickly recover.)
Actually, I think it is pretty reasonable to think that Canon could have designed a battery grip that improves head dissipation. To me, this is technically much simpler and more effective that a "heat-sink mount adapter". I believe Fuji does this on the T3 (maybe also T4) to some degreee, where the full video specs are only accessible with grip. However, such a grip must be co-designed with the camera to actually achieve the desired effect (heat needs to be transferred through the bottom plate and battery compartment).
However, I would think that the R5/R6 can be passively cooled, but the needed technology was simply not economically viable or technically ready for mass-production at launch (it may for example require new body materials, manufacturing of new cooling systems at scale, ...).
An R5 has 7.2V×2.13Ah=15.3Wh battery. Let us assume that when the R5 consumes the most power (e.g. in the highest quality video recording mode), the battery lasts 1.5h-3h (guess on my part), then the R5/R6 generate 5W-10W internal heat. This is likely in the ballpark of the max power consumption (=internal heat generation) of an S1H, A7siii, and possibly also 1DXiii. For reference, this is roughly comparable with high-end mobile phones or tablets.
Unfortunately, I was not able to find an R5 or R6 "exploded view picture" that would reveal what the primary cooling mechanisms (heat conduction only, heat pipes, vapor chambers, ...) and where the primary cooling surfaces are (bottom plate, front, all similar). My best guess is that the R5/R6 have similar heat dissipation mechanisms than the 5D/6D with modest improvements (that result in cameras that need long times to cool down).
If this is true, the body is to some degree a thermal isolator such that external airflows, putting ice cubes on the camera, or any other thermal solution has only a mild effect on cooling the camera - the only upside is that the camera does not really heat up internally when exposed to direct sunlight. All these effects have been observed in one way or another.
Overall, we may have to accept that the R5, like the 5Div, is a fantastic stills camera (possibly the best) but the "workhorse" video features are limited to some use cases and cannot generally compete with the best in class (like S1H or A7siii).
My speculation would be the following: Canon product design/engineering likely build the R5 to compete with A7r and Z7; and R6 to compete with A7 and Z6.
However if true, the current price points are somewhat delusional but that would also apply to many RF lenses.. so who knows.
Not bad reasoning, with assumptions used. From what little has been said, Canon indicated the magnesium alloy of this body was perhaps modified to be more thermally conductive than previous, which is good since many magnesium alloys are not that thermally conductive. It feels that way in my hands so that specualtion seems reasonable to me that it is a new blend and the body is a heat sink. Even holding it for 5-10 minutes indoors powered off it warms slightly; the 5D4 does not, the 6D does not.
Why do you consider the price 'delusional'? That wording seems unreasonable. Consider that for many, the short duty HQ video will be useful in a way that does not overheat giving more capability than stills only, and most should be buying this as the mirrorless equivalent of what would be the 5D5. The 5D4 was $3500 at release in 2016. It had no IBIS and overall was much less capable. The 5D3 was similarly priced at release, and also matched pricing close to competitors. The A7R4 was $3500 at release. The competition that is actually comparable (stills centric hybrids) are all similarly priced at release. People keep making the wrong comparisons.
RF I also don't see how you would consider them overpriced or 'delusional' in their pricing. They are amazing optically and priced similarly to the competition, particularly if overall performance, build quality and weather sealing are considered. There might be a slight price premium there, but hardly what I would call 'delusional'.
I'm really tired of the blathering about the competition when none of the comparisons make sense,
This camera is not well below the competition in any way if you make an accurate and fair comparison.
This is a mirrorless 5D5 with strong IBIS, EVF, weather sealing, and a high MP sensor, and short duty HQ video capability (making it a great hybrid camera) all in a tiny body.
It is not a 12MP dedicated video camera with weaker IBIS and much less sensor to read out (a large thermal advantage and less capable hybrid).
Compare apples to apples when it comes to data throughput, features and body size.
If you are not going to be objective about overall capability when considering heat generation and ability to remove heat, don't bother.
The point is, people are reacting to single data points, most from talking heads who make their living blathering about gear and we all know controversy pays.