Nitty Gritty on the R5

Joules

EOS R
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2017
1,038
1,157
Hamburg, Germany
What makes you say they are artificial? They look very similar as many of my meteor shots, like the one on my neowise picture.
Here is a decent quick guide to tell different artifacts in the sky apart:


I'm with Aussie shooter here, the two solid white lines in the first image are 100% not meteors.
 

geffy

EOS 90D
Jun 24, 2019
102
71
Honestly, you sound like someone who's trying to convince themselves that there's no reason to shell out the money for an R5. But, as someone who owned one since it came out, I can pretty much definitely say that this "dance" that's happening on the internet over the R5 right now is nothing more than that. It's a great camera, and I've already shot thousands of photos on mine. (They go quick at 20fps.) And honestly if you are shooting so much video in the heat limited modes that they're a problem for you, you should probably be using a cinema camera in the first place.
Seems that video is a large part of the R5 hype, I am happy with the R for now and will pick up an R6 when they are sorted, hopefully there will be no recall and any fix will only be firmware, in transit stock have already been recalled ie not delivered
 

AlanF

Stay alert, control the camera, save photos
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
7,092
6,465
I have one on order, and when it arrives, it arrives. It's not going to transform what I can do as I feel I am not limited by my gear and I have been using high resolution FF sensors for the past 4+ years and I do not do serious video.
 

Kit Lens Jockey

EOS R
CR Pro
Nov 12, 2016
872
594
Seems that video is a large part of the R5 hype, I am happy with the R for now and will pick up an R6 when they are sorted, hopefully there will be no recall and any fix will only be firmware, in transit stock have already been recalled ie not delivered
Why do you even care about what the "hype" is around the camera? If you're dropping 4 grand on a camera, wouldn't your main concern be if it meets the needs of what you want to use it for?

I bought my R5 to primarily be a stills camera, and it's doing great at it. It has better dynamic range, IBIS, 45 megapixels, more controls including the joystick finally being back, a much more usable electronic shutter than the R, way less lag in the EVF, amazing AF tracking, 20fps, and two card slots. I couldn't care less about 8K video. My computer would choke even trying to play an 8K video let alone edit one. I don't even own a CFexpress card yet, and I'm still very much enjoying using the camera.

If you're solely making purchase decisions based on what the "hype" is around a camera, do yourself a favor and just don't buy any of them because it's clear that you need to better define what having a new camera will do for you in particular, as opposed to just throwing money at a new piece of equipment because of the "hype."
 
Last edited:

cornieleous

5D4 + R5
Jul 13, 2020
208
733
Some really nice shots. Is it just me though or are astro shots becoming less appealing now that getting one without a satellite in it is becoming quite difficult? I think someone should develop software that automatically removes them
Sadly you are right, there are always satellites now since the last few big constellations went up. For stills its a very quick removal with healing or clone brush, but for timelapse it is a big problem. I'm sure software could be trained on the difference of a satellite track with meteors, although some meteors and some satellites have a similar fade in and out (like iridium flairs). Satellites rarely have much color though, but I have seen some.

I'm hearing about some real mega constellations in the works, and I think it would be nice of all these companies to start thinking about their pollution instead of profit, but slim chance of that. Apparently SpaceX was going to try some new coatings to make theirs less awful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aussie shooter

cornieleous

5D4 + R5
Jul 13, 2020
208
733
You must be one helluva photographer if these are average. ;) Well done! Very jealous not to be able to join the R5 party yet.
Thanks, I don't know that I'm all that, but I do usually enjoy more time to get scouting around in better light than bright harsh daylight or without smoke in the air and carefully setup some compositions or do some focus stacks. These were more of opportunistic shots where I just pointed and clicked, except maybe the sunflowers where we spent time finding some nice light and healthy flowers.

Hope you get your R5 soon, it is a lot of fun! Hopefully when you get it, the first update will be out to the firmware too!
 
  • Like
Reactions: vjlex

Joules

EOS R
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2017
1,038
1,157
Hamburg, Germany
I'm hearing about some real mega constellations in the works, and I think it would be nice of all these companies to start thinking about their pollution instead of profit, but slim chance of that. Apparently SpaceX was going to try some new coatings to make theirs less awful.
As far as I know, the star link sattelites are much less reflective now. The images that show them close together are all from right after launch and not indicative of their apparent brightness once they reach their desired spots in the sky.

At that point it is a trade off between the connectivity options for people in rural areas and how much hassle they have to go through in order to get clean astro images during twilight. With the internet gaining ever more importance, providing service through space rather than physical connections on the ground seems to be a bigger service to the people to me. After all, the established ISPs and governments have already proven their lack of commitment to driving speeds forward for certain areas around the world.

I think the articles that proclaim SpaceX is ruining the night sky belong to the same kind of 'journalism' that continues to push the outrage and recall rumors regarding the overheating issues.

It's not like they aren't doing as much as they can to reduce the issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aussie shooter

Jack Douglas

CR for the Humour
Apr 10, 2013
6,626
1,996
Alberta, Canada
Some really nice shots. Is it just me though or are astro shots becoming less appealing now that getting one without a satellite in it is becoming quite difficult? I think someone should develop software that automatically removes them
If I understand correctly the near future will have so many satellites that you might as well forget astrophotography. Surely, there need to be regulations about polluting the night sky?? So far I haven't being shooting these scenes but still it concerns me.

Jack
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aussie shooter

AlanF

Stay alert, control the camera, save photos
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
7,092
6,465
If I understand correctly the near future will have so many satellites that you might as well forget astrophotography. Surely, there need to be regulations about polluting the night sky?? So far I haven't being shooting these scenes but still it concerns me.

Jack
We could start a Satellite thread.
 

cornieleous

5D4 + R5
Jul 13, 2020
208
733
As far as I know, the star link sattelites are much less reflective now. The images that show them close together are all from right after launch and not indicative of their apparent brightness once they reach their desired spots in the sky.

At that point it is a trade off between the connectivity options for people in rural areas and how much hassle they have to go through in order to get clean astro images during twilight. With the internet gaining ever more importance, providing service through space rather than physical connections on the ground seems to be a bigger service to the people to me. After all, the established ISPs and governments have already proven their lack of commitment to driving speeds forward for certain areas around the world.

I think the articles that proclaim SpaceX is ruining the night sky belong to the same kind of 'journalism' that continues to push the outrage and recall rumors regarding the overheating issues.

It's not like they aren't doing as much as they can to reduce the issue.
Well, I'm a huge SpaceX fan and not anti space, in fact quite the opposite. I don't agree though that people getting internet anywhere and everywhere is so great, or should take precedence over anything else. Cellular is already going to fill in even in rural areas when 5G matures.

I am definitely not of the philosophy that growth and "progress" is always for the better or that our human obsession with technology is always good. Some places should lack signal. Some experiences should stay natural. I feel the night sky is one of them. One already cannot see the night sky in most urban areas, including about half of the US and most of Europe because people are afraid of the dark and we blast orange and blue light into the night sky in cheap omni directional bulbs.

You have tied our observation about satellites to Starlink and articles you have read, but I am going by personal experience, not media or hype on that particular constellation to form an opinion. Go to any dark sky now, and you can already almost always be following a satellite or two at once. No, this is not just after launch either. Almost every astro photo I take has a satellite in it. Spacecraft can only be made a certain amount non reflective since the colors and coatings that can be applied must be compatible with the thermal design of the spacecraft. Most spacecraft (satellites) remove heat through black body radiation and heat conduction from one part of the craft to another, since there is no convection in space. This often is done with coatings/colors so there is only so much that can be done for spacecraft that cannot heat pipe the hot spots around to equilibrium and must get rid of heat.

Also note, there are presently less than 1000 SpaceX sats up, but they have approval for 12000, and want to launch 40000. SpaceX isn't the half of what is coming either. I'm aware of serious proposals for huge constellations upwards of 3000 count per, by several other companies. Do you want a night sky with dozens upon dozens of satellites in view at any time? I don't. This is also a huge headache for all types of astronomy and going to get very messy and dangerous for other space operations eventually. It is becoming a waste dump up there. The average satellite lasts 5-7 years, and extended duty is usually 15, then they die and burn up or float.

More is not always better, and when we lose the fundamental connection to and experience of our earth and sky so we can build more stuff, and have more internet and other distraction, I don't see that as any kind of win. Humanity and business or technological "progress" is not always what it seems. There needs to be sustainable balance.

As to relating the opinions about night sky preservation to the overheating issue, I won't even go there. There are completely unrelated. I get your point about hype, but lets not make our individual opinions into 'facts' or bludgeon each other with them, lets just say we disagree that large constellations packing the night sky is going to be great.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jack Douglas

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
1,606
1,455
Most spacecraft (satellites) remove heat through black body radiation and heat conduction from one part of the craft to another, since there is no convection in space. This often is done with coatings/colors so there is only so much that can be done for spacecraft that cannot heat pipe the hot spots around to equilibrium and must get rid of heat.
The most efficient color for this sort of thing is...black, unless I am misremembering my college physics. A shiny surface is absolutely the worst. So you'd want carbon black to be your color. Which might alleviate the issue. (You probably will want a reflective surface to face the sun to cut down on absorption, however, which means around sunset/sunrise, you'd see bright satellites. But if such a surface is on a sort of parasol, it could be angled away from Earth.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joules