More features coming to Canon EOS R5 in future firmware [CR2]

[neuroanatomist]

I'll take a haptic silent feedback for the e-shutter.

As a firmware update? Good luck with that one.

 

[koenkooi]

As a firmware update? Good luck with that one.

Just make IBIS shake the sensor real hard! You'll get fewer fps in ES mode as well as a side effect

 

[CanCamFan]

Hate to say this, but this sounds more like the R1 than the R5ii.
I wouldn’t expect to see a stacked sensor.
If you look at the current line up, there is a pattern leading up to the R1
R6 - low res cmos sensor
R5 - high res cmos sensor
R3 - low res stacked sensor
R1 - high res stacked sensor??

What did people think about the possibility of an R4?

It could have the same 24 MP stacked sensor as the R3 but to save cost no Eye Autofocus, no 12 FPS Mechanical Shutter, a reduced quality EVF …. etc.

As someone who wears glasses I am reluctant to pay the high price for the R3 when there is a risk that Eye Autofocus might not work for me. Following the recent interview with Canon Executives we now know that Eye Autofocus is a significant factor in the high price of the R3.

However, I must confess that whilst the fictitious R4 would be my dream camera I’m not sure that Canon would build it because they are already skewed towards Sports cameras with the R1 (TBC), R3, R6 Mkii, R7 and R8.

 

[neuroanatomist]

What did people think about the possibility of an R4?

It could have the same 24 MP stacked sensor as the R3 but to save cost no Eye Autofocus, no 12 FPS Mechanical Shutter, a reduced quality EVF …. etc.

As someone who wears glasses I am reluctant to pay the high price for the R3 when there is a risk that Eye Autofocus might not work for me. Following the recent interview with Canon Executives we now know that Eye Autofocus is a significant factor in the high price of the R3.

However, I must confess that whilst the fictitious R4 would be my dream camera I’m not sure that Canon would build it because they are already skewed towards Sports cameras with the R1 (TBC), R3, R6 Mkii, R7 and R8.

I don't think we'll see an R4 (or whatever it might be called to avoid the number 4 if needed, though Nikon didn't feel that constraint) such as you're describing.

Regarding the eye-controlled AF, it does seem very user-dependent. It works well for me, personally (I don't wear glasses when using a camera).

Having said that, have you ever tried the R3 or the 1D X III? IMO, the Smart Controller is truly stellar for driving an AF point around the scene, and since it is also the AF-ON button it is the best AF selection method I've used to date. Eye control is useful in some situations, not in others. The Smart Controller works perfectly for all use cases (for me, at least). I do hope that feature will make its way down the line, but Canon may reserve it for the integrated grip bodies. My point is that AF selection on the R3 is leaps and bounds ahead of any other Canon MILC, and to me that would be a reason to use the R3 even if it cost what it does and didn't have eye control (as the forthcoming R1 may not).

 

[CanCamFan]

I don't think we'll see an R4 (or whatever it might be called to avoid the number 4 if needed, though Nikon didn't feel that constraint) such as you're describing.

Regarding the eye-controlled AF, it does seem very user-dependent. It works well for me, personally (I don't wear glasses when using a camera).

Having said that, have you ever tried the R3 or the 1D X III? IMO, the Smart Controller is truly stellar for driving an AF point around the scene, and since it is also the AF-ON button it is the best AF selection method I've used to date. Eye control is useful in some situations, not in others. The Smart Controller works perfectly for all use cases (for me, at least). I do hope that feature will make its way down the line, but Canon may reserve it for the integrated grip bodies. My point is that AF selection on the R3 is leaps and bounds ahead of any other Canon MILC, and to me that would be a reason to use the R3 even if it cost what it does and didn't have eye control (as the forthcoming R1 may not).

Thank you very much for the feedback. There is a big cycling event in the UK in August (UCI World Championships) and whilst I know that I will be replacing my 5D Mkiv with an R camera, I haven't decided which one yet - nice problem to have !

 

[entoman]

I don't think we'll see an R4 (or whatever it might be called to avoid the number 4 if needed, though Nikon didn't feel that constraint) such as you're describing.

Regarding the eye-controlled AF, it does seem very user-dependent. It works well for me, personally (I don't wear glasses when using a camera).

Having said that, have you ever tried the R3 or the 1D X III? IMO, the Smart Controller is truly stellar for driving an AF point around the scene, and since it is also the AF-ON button it is the best AF selection method I've used to date. Eye control is useful in some situations, not in others. The Smart Controller works perfectly for all use cases (for me, at least). I do hope that feature will make its way down the line, but Canon may reserve it for the integrated grip bodies. My point is that AF selection on the R3 is leaps and bounds ahead of any other Canon MILC, and to me that would be a reason to use the R3 even if it cost what it does and didn't have eye control (as the forthcoming R1 may not).

I really hope the smart controller finds its way into lower-priced bodies - I'll be extremely disappointed if it's missing from the "R5 MKii". I haven't tried a 1Dxiii or R3, but everyone heaps praise on the smart controller, it's clearly one of Canon's best ergonomic features, and almost worth buying an R3 just to have it!

 

[Nelu]

I really hope the smart controller finds its way into lower-priced bodies - I'll be extremely disappointed if it's missing from the "R5 MKii". I haven't tried a 1Dxiii or R3, but everyone heaps praise on the smart controller, it's clearly one of Canon's best ergonomic features, and almost worth buying an R3 just to have it!

Well, I disabled the "Smart Controller" on my 1DX Mark III because it's not that smart.
I use back-button AF and when I had the smart controller enabled, instead of starting the AF it would randomly move the AF point, even when set on its lowest sensitivity.

 

[entoman]

Well, I disabled the "Smart Controller" on my 1DX Mark III because it's not that smart.
I use back-button AF and when I had the smart controller enabled, instead of starting the AF it would randomly move the AF point, even when set on its lowest sensitivity.

That's the first complaint I've heard about it. Let's hope that the design of the controller can be changed to prevent accidental nudges. Luckily it wouldn't affect me, as I don't use BBF. It would be interesting to hear from other R3/1DXiii owners to see if others have had similar issues.

 

[neuroanatomist]

That's the first complaint I've heard about it. Let's hope that the design of the controller can be changed to prevent accidental nudges. Luckily it wouldn't affect me, as I don't use BBF. It would be interesting to hear from other R3/1DXiii owners to see if others have had similar issues.

I haven’t seen this. It can’t be ‘nudged’ like the multicontroller, it’s a button with the central portion of the surface being a touchpad. It’s sensitive to the surface being swiped with a thumb, but pressing the button disables the touchpad.

Basically, if you go from thumb off the button to pressing the button, AF is activated but the selected AF point doesn’t move (unless the camera is tracking a subject that moves).

I could see if one had developed the habit of lightly resting one’s thumb on the AF button while waiting to start AF, that could ‘accidentally’ move the AF point.

 

[unfocused]

Having quite a bit of experience with the “smart” controller and the thumb control on the screen on the 1Dx III, the R3, the R5 and the R, I much prefer the thumb control on the screen. Larger surface area of the screen allows for more accurate positioning. Frankly I don’t understand why Canon forces users to choose, since the screens are touch sensitive anyway and you can turn either feature on or off, no good reason not to offer both and let the user decide.

 

[entoman]

Having quite a bit of experience with the “smart” controller and the thumb control on the screen on the 1Dx III, the R3, the R5 and the R, I much prefer the thumb control on the screen. Larger surface area of the screen allows for more accurate positioning. Frankly I don’t understand why Canon forces users to choose, since the screens are touch sensitive anyway and you can turn either feature on or off, no good reason not to offer both and let the user decide.

I'm glad Canon gives us a choice - as a left-eye user it's too damn easy to poke oneself in the eye with the right thumb when using the touchscreen for AF! I find the normal AF joystick a bit awkward to position quickly and accurately too, so having a 3rd choice of smart controller, and having options like eye-control point selection, are good things IMO.

Personally, although I sometimes use the AF joystick, I find it much faster to keep the AF spot in the centre, and just focus/recompose, although obviously this doesn't work for every user in every situation.

The more choice the better as far as I'm concerned, none of us are forced to use a method that we don't like, when there are so many options, and users can usually disable the *unwanted" ones, if they are prone to accidentally nudge them.

 

[JWest]

Thank you very much for the feedback. There is a big cycling event in the UK in August (UCI World Championships) and whilst I know that I will be replacing my 5D Mkiv with an R camera, I haven't decided which one yet - nice problem to have !

I used the R5C for a few mtb races last year as well as my 1Dx3 but the R3 I started using this winter is to me a worthwhile step forward and for a bike race it would be my first choice. That plus a 70-200/2.8, and honestly, because I hate zooms that extend, I'd stick with an EF 70-200/2.8 if you have one.

I just got the RF 100-500 and its extending downside is only barely balanced out by it's compact size for hiking, birding, moving around a lot, compared to how even my 300/2.8 is in size and weight.

 

[CanCamFan]

I used the R5C for a few mtb races last year as well as my 1Dx3 but the R3 I started using this winter is to me a worthwhile step forward and for a bike race it would be my first choice. That plus a 70-200/2.8, and honestly, because I hate zooms that extend, I'd stick with an EF 70-200/2.8 if you have one.

I just got the RF 100-500 and its extending downside is only barely balanced out by it's compact size for hiking, birding, moving around a lot, compared to how even my 300/2.8 is in size and weight.

Thank you for your feedback also. Please can I ask how did you find the R5C for focusing on the cyclists. The R5’s higher mega pixels does appeal to me so I am trying to decide if the better focussing systems of the R3 (and maybe even the R6 Mkii) is worth the drop in mega pixels.

 

[JWest]

Thank you for your feedback also. Please can I ask how did you find the R5C for focusing on the cyclists. The R5’s higher mega pixels does appeal to me so I am trying to decide if the better focussing systems of the R3 (and maybe even the R6 Mkii) is worth the drop in mega pixels.

So, I thought the R5C was great but I had not yet used the R3 and would say it's better. I don't recall the differences to the standard R5 but it also has IBIS whereas the R5C does not.

 

[InchMetric]

Note that my R5 is in transit to Canon repair because it bricked upon getting the V1.8 update.

I'll be paying $558 to have them repair the camera that their firmware update killed. I hope that upon completion they shed some light on what happened.

 

[shadowsports]

I'll be paying $558 to have them repair the camera that their firmware update killed. I hope that upon completion they shed some light on what happened.

Thats an incredible amount of money for a firmware reflash. You are the only R5 user I've heard from whose camera was "bricked" by v1.8.1. In fact I don't think I've heard from anyone else 1.4, 1.5.x, 1.6.x, 1.70, or 1.8.1. Did you touch any buttons or try to operate the camera after pressing the set button?

Did you use the EOS Utility or copy the .FIR file manually to a SD card?

There has to be something else going on with the camera for the price of repair to be so high.

 

[koenkooi]

I'll be paying $558 to have them repair the camera that their firmware update killed. I hope that upon completion they shed some light on what happened.

Mainboard replacement?

 

[Kit.]

Thats an incredible amount of money for a firmware reflash.

It's obviously not a firmware reflash. Most likely, mainboard replacement due to a faulty hardware component (flash memory chip?).

 

[shadowsports]

Agree, this is why I said there must be something else going on. That amount does coincide with a mainboard replacement. I'm sure Canon will let him know.

 

[Dreysi]

If they could update my "current flagship" R4 with features found on lesser models like the R7, R6ii like pre buffer that would be great you know. Features bird and action photographers would love to use with their flagship (yeah i know R1 will be flagship but it's not out).