Is Pixel-Shift coming to the Canon EOS R5?

After shooting several sport events this weekend, a fix for this damn, anoing, pictures loosing Error 70 is still number one on my wishlist. As much as I appreciate further upgrades...
Oh God, this!!! Shooting basketball games and if I shoot to quick after a rest or after chimping I will lose the next burst of shots with a black screen lock up sometimes requiring battery removal. So very annoying, happens about once a game over 1500-2000 images.

On the positive side, the advertised number of shots, 490, per batter is ridiculously under estimated. Like I said, I'll shoot 1500-2000/game, mechanical shutter, all eyepiece shooting, only turn off at half-time, and only go through 1/3 of battery charge with the green indicator of high speed still on at the end of the game!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Upvote 0
David,
The addition of cLog on the 5D4 was software, not hardware.

And, [Respectfully[ Canon like other manufacturers does "cripple" [call it what you like] or omit features that could be included on body's in order to "protect" sales of higher end models. This doesn't have to do with someone's knowledge. Firmware updates that add functionality does not negate what was initially [purposely] omitted. It does enhance the user experience and value, but only after the fact.
OK, so how does that differ from what car manufacturers do? I never hear anyone complain that Toyota "Crippled" the Avalon because they didn't include the fancier audio system that they put in the Lexus ES350 (hypothetical example). I remember years ago that a company called Pioneer made a model 770, 880, and 990 (or something like that) as the number got higher, the price went up and you got more features. Canon is doing the same thing. So what? You want the fancy model; you need to pay the fancy price. That's how the world works.

Another problem I have with this line of thinking is that a lot of this complaining is about a feature that is implemented primary in FW. The argument goes "it's just a FW option" they could have put it in, but evil Canon decided to deliberately "cripple" my camera by not providing a feature that they reserved for an upscale model. Yea, OK, the proper marketing term for that is product differentiation. The whiners are people who want something for nothing. The feature has value, otherwise you wouldn't be whining about it. if, indeed it has value, Canon can certainly charge for it.

FWIW: I think my issue is with the term "crippling" which for all I have ever seen is nothing more Canon's marketing approach to product differentiation.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Upvote 0

davidespinosa

Newbie
CR Pro
Feb 12, 2020
188
138
Canon can keep secrets, but I don't think service centers can.
Some service center employee will tell his friends "it's just a firmware update, with no hardware changes", and the news will leak out.

So if Canon is charging for a firmware update, they should simply say so.
It's better than trying to hide it.
Nothing wrong with charging -- software isn't free.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Jan 27, 2020
826
1,796
I've tried pixel shift before. The times when the image stays absolutely the same between the multiple exposures at slightly different times, and there is also absolutely no camera shake whatsoever, and the focus is so sharp that there is no blur between pixel elements are almost never realized in my experience. Therefore "pixel shift" is one feature that I think is great to exist for marketing to sell more cameras, but is absolutely worthless to me. Your mileage may vary, of course, so I respect those who feel differently.
I agree that it is mostly a marketing gimmick. Olympus has had the feature for years and it seems like - from user comments over the years - that times when it can be used are almost never. Users try it a few times, and when it works, you think, this is cool, but then realize the differences between pixel shift and not are so minor, and the times it works so rare, that you never use it again and forget that your camera even has that feature. Really a feature for pixel peepers, in my opinion. Putting it on a 45 MP camera, which already has enough MPs for almost every user, is really just for marketing. The R6, perhaps, could benefit from it, but not the R5, in my opinion.
But, if it happens, we'll see. I'll be glad to be proven wrong if someone can make pixel shift a worthwhile function.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,174
13,013
But, if it happens, we'll see. I'll be glad to be proven wrong if someone can make pixel shift a worthwhile function.
I shoot a fair amount of architecture, typically with TS-E lenses on a tripod. To me, that seems like a subject that can significantly benefit from pixel shift, if not for the increased resolution then mainly because pixel shift eliminates color moiré (which often occurs with high-frequency repeating patterns, like bricks-and-mortar).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
I agree that it is mostly a marketing gimmick. Olympus has had the feature for years and it seems like - from user comments over the years - that times when it can be used are almost never. Users try it a few times, and when it works, you think, this is cool, but then realize the differences between pixel shift and not are so minor, and the times it works so rare, that you never use it again and forget that your camera even has that feature. Really a feature for pixel peepers, in my opinion. Putting it on a 45 MP camera, which already has enough MPs for almost every user, is really just for marketing. The R6, perhaps, could benefit from it, but not the R5, in my opinion.
But, if it happens, we'll see. I'll be glad to be proven wrong if someone can make pixel shift a worthwhile function.
From my experience, it works well on the newer EM1 Mark III and the OM1, but it only works if you have a good lens. Oddly enough, the hand held high resolution mode works very well for astrophotography landscapes and can replace a tracker when shooting up to 60 second exposures.
 
  • Love
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,677
2,589
I shoot a fair amount of architecture, typically with TS-E lenses on a tripod. To me, that seems like a subject that can significantly benefit from pixel shift, if not for the increased resolution then mainly because pixel shift eliminates color moiré (which often occurs with high-frequency repeating patterns, like bricks-and-mortar).

I've had magenta highlights show up on coins whose design has closely spaced parallel lines, so this is definitely a real thing, and now I know what to call it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
1,998
2,438
UK
I agree that it is mostly a marketing gimmick. Olympus has had the feature for years and it seems like - from user comments over the years - that times when it can be used are almost never. Users try it a few times, and when it works, you think, this is cool, but then realize the differences between pixel shift and not are so minor, and the times it works so rare, that you never use it again and forget that your camera even has that feature. Really a feature for pixel peepers, in my opinion. Putting it on a 45 MP camera, which already has enough MPs for almost every user, is really just for marketing.
I'd agree with most of that, it *does* seem more of a gimmick than something of real value to most of us (you could say the same about 8K).

But there are circumstances where pixel-shift does work, e.g. architecture, product and artwork photography. It's quite feasible that resolutions far in excess of 45MP would be needed for such applications, depending on the size and viewing distance of the eventual print.

It certainly does no *harm* to include the feature, and if it helps Canon to sell more cameras, it's to all our benefit, as it makes Canon a stronger company, with more money to invest in development.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

koenkooi

CR Pro
Feb 25, 2015
3,611
4,190
The Netherlands
Just out of interest: when we install an upgrade, is it just amending/replacing a few elements of the existing firmware? Or does is delete all the old firmware, including that which came when we bought the camera, and replace it in its entirety?
Since you can skip in-between versions, it will lean more towards the latter system.

‘Entirety’ is a misleading term, since some low level bits like the first stage bootloader and the settings area likely won’t be affected.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
Apr 29, 2019
275
263
Just out of interest: when we install an upgrade, is it just amending/replacing a few elements of the existing firmware? Or does is delete all the old firmware, including that which came when we bought the camera, and replace it in its entirety?
Firmware update means the old firmware is replaced by the new firmware.
There will be many parts from the old remain untouched, but there is no way the customer knowing which (the customer does not know the SW structure)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

Quirkz

CR Pro
Oct 30, 2014
297
221
Just out of interest: when we install an upgrade, is it just amending/replacing a few elements of the existing firmware? Or does is delete all the old firmware, including that which came when we bought the camera, and replace it in its entirety?
It depends, but usually for hardware devices such as these running microcontrollers, it's a replacement of the entire software on the device.
It's common for an initial bootloader to remain untouched on separate storage to handle the flashing process. That might not be the the case here for Canon cameras, as you flash the device using an menu option in the running firmware. (compare this to other devices where you may copy the firmware to a memory card, then turn on the camera while holding particular buttons. In this case the upgrade process is unlikely to be contained in the main firmware.)

While the entire firmware might be replaced, this doesn't mean all the software contained within it changes. They may still use the exact same image processing code, or autofocus algorithms, for example. It's just included as part of the new image and re-written in it's entirety.

This is a very simple and very safe way to perform updates when software sizes are small and the hardware identical for all users.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Jan 27, 2020
826
1,796
I'd agree with most of that, it *does* seem more of a gimmick than something of real value to most of us (you could say the same about 8K).

But there are circumstances where pixel-shift does work, e.g. architecture, product and artwork photography. It's quite feasible that resolutions far in excess of 45MP would be needed for such applications, depending on the size and viewing distance of the eventual print.

It certainly does no *harm* to include the feature, and if it helps Canon to sell more cameras, it's to all our benefit, as it makes Canon a stronger company, with more money to invest in development.
Yes, no harm. I have absolutely no objection to it being added, and as you and others have pointed out, there will be some applications for it's use. I guess my main point would be, don't get too excited about it unless you plan on using it in those very specific instances where it might work and be useful. You will not suddenly have a 180 MP (or whatever they will rate it as) camera for doing landscapes, wildlife and most other applications.
 
Upvote 0
I just don't see that being used. Unless someone is doing like landscapes and a perfectionist. The focus is amazing and sharp unless you zoom in a million percent. I don't see people needing this, especially if it takes multiple photos and stacks. Maybe if it snaps one photo then perfectionists use it but other than that it wouldn't be worth any sort of hassle to use.
-Becca
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Pixel-shift would be a great feature that will be useful to certain users, but personally I'd rather see:

  • exposure bracketing with electronic shutter
  • variable fps with electronic shutter
  • major reduction in EVF lag from standby
  • AF initiated within any AF zone and tracked across entire frame
  • animal-eye AF that worked with a much wider variety of animals
  • much stickier AF tracking with less tendency to hop onto backgrounds

Now, if we got ALL of these, I'd be a very very very happy bunny!

View attachment 207871
FYI: I JUST REGISTERED AND AM NEW HERE, great to join:) I always enjoy reading CR...
I believe the R7 has this feature and I too wish the r5 has it, so
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

cayenne

CR Pro
Mar 28, 2012
2,866
795
I agree that it is mostly a marketing gimmick. Olympus has had the feature for years and it seems like - from user comments over the years - that times when it can be used are almost never. Users try it a few times, and when it works, you think, this is cool, but then realize the differences between pixel shift and not are so minor, and the times it works so rare, that you never use it again and forget that your camera even has that feature. Really a feature for pixel peepers, in my opinion. Putting it on a 45 MP camera, which already has enough MPs for almost every user, is really just for marketing. The R6, perhaps, could benefit from it, but not the R5, in my opinion.
But, if it happens, we'll see. I'll be glad to be proven wrong if someone can make pixel shift a worthwhile function.
My Fuji GFX100 has pixel shift.
It is useful in the correct circumstances.
It is often used for high fidelity art cataloging....like paintings in a museum type thing.

I'm setting up to do film scanning (Mostly medium format and large format) and using cameras to "scan" the images.
For really special ones that I might want to print very large and sell, I'm planning to experiment with the pixel shift of the GFX....400 meg images.

But just every day, hand held use, unless Canon does something special with it, no...not for that type use. But for really high definition images for still subjects it can be useful....your cropping ability alone is kinda fun to play with.

Just my $0.02,

cayenne
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0