Teardown: The Canon EOS R5 gets an autopsy

[Able]

Hi all, just got account approved and want to share some more information after dig into the shared video.

On the reply section of the shared video's original site, there's a link posted by the uploader which links to their taobao site (very large chinese site for e-shops, similar to alibaba but more reliable and focus more on individual needs). The link, are offering hardware upgrading service for r5's cooling ability for 500CNY, and the service will begin in mid August.

I not promoting their business, but this got my attention and found more information about this guy and what are they saying on chinese geeks site.

Again, I don't recommend doing the same thing, which might break your warranty, but you might find it interesting:

I found their discussion on this site: https://forum.xitek.com/thread-1894934-1-1-1.html about R5's hardware with overheating issue. The poster ( not the shared video uploader) saying that" it looks like a PCB is covering the CPU which does not help with heat rejection. The metal plate for heat rejection is designed between the mother board and CMOS. Only a small pice of paste is used between CPU and the metal plate which doesn't help that much." ALSO, " the guy (video's uploader) added a grease pad between the plate and CPU, made it absorbing the heat more evenly and helped a lot. Just by doing that, (In a different video) the R5 was able to record 8K for 15 minutes(without overheating sign), turned off, and let the camera to take a 10 minutes break. Then was able to record 8K, until the card is filled (512GB, 27minutes of recording --- found it on the post below)." Here's the uploader's original post btw: https://tieba.baidu.com/p/6848700307?pn=1

their conclusion: " - just simply adding the grease pad does help a lot.
-Might be better by using bronze plate instead of aluminum for where the CPU is covering.
- CPU was around 40 ℃, which creates more heat than CF express card.
- the firmware is limiting the device. (since, after he added that pad. He was able to record longer 8K footage, but still overheat eventually. But after overheating, he left R5 under AC that R5's body is REALLY REALLY cold and still, he could only got 5 minutes of 8K or 10 minutes of 4K. "

that's pretty much what I got from the uploader's posts. Hope it could help or just ....entertain you a bit?

Oh, btw, they also found one cooling module originally designed for smartphone works very well on R5's back. One got an hour of 4K60 without overheating sign, and the body was still touch cold. Remember that fan module on the form a few days ago? That helps.

Solid first post. Well researched and informed. Well worth the read if anyone skimmed over it

 

[Mackman]

One thing I haven’t heard discussed is the operating temp for the cfexprsss card. It’s only up to 70 degrees c. SD card is 85 degrees c. That means the camera must shut down earlier to avoid possible data loss if a cf express card is installed. Remove the card and it probably had a much higher operating limit. And the rate you dissipate heat is proportional to the temperate difference between the object and the environment. Which means without the card it can get hotter and thus shed heat faster likely at a rate equal to the heat generated while recording. Hence the unlimited recording time without the card installed.

 

[VICYASA]

Why not put one of those cold thingies you put in the freezer that your wife gives you after she punches you in the face, emasculating and castrating you of your self worth, inside the camera? Like a mini one that stays cold forever and ever.

 

[DBounce]

I don't think it's doing that though--It's locking you out of high end video, perhaps, but it's hardly turning into a brick.

This camera is purposely crippled to segment it from the cinema line. It’s not a limitation of the hardware, it’s a choice to protect the cinema line. I’m not sure why anyone skills be ok with that. Especially when Canon marketed this camera as a pro video tool that could be used along side the C300 Mk3.

 

[olympus593]

Let the moddings begin!

 

[cornieleous]

This camera is purposely crippled to segment it from the cinema line. It’s not a limitation of the hardware, it’s a choice to protect the cinema line. I’m not sure why anyone skills be ok with that. Especially when Canon marketed this camera as a pro video tool that could be used along side the C300 Mk3.

Broken record is broken. We get it, cripple hammer, canon is doomed, this camera is unusable. I'll let you finish this list, I'm going to go take stills with my R5 and sell some more prints.

 

[londonxt]

Can I have it after?

 

[nchoh]

Solid first post. Well researched and informed. Well worth the read if anyone skimmed over it

So, in the video, modders are using a metal separator as a heat sink. That means that the heat of from the CPU will transfer over to the sensor. I wonder if that will impact the life of the sensor and essentially the camera.

 

[nchoh]

This camera is purposely crippled to segment it from the cinema line. It’s not a limitation of the hardware, it’s a choice to protect the cinema line. I’m not sure why anyone skills be ok with that. Especially when Canon marketed this camera as a pro video tool that could be used along side the C300 Mk3.

Really?

Imagine if Canon put in a perfect heat sink. Then all the heat generated in the CPU would be thrown against all the boards, connectors and components in the vicinity. The R5 would be able to records hours and hours of video, but
then we would see a problem of R5s failing after extended video recording use. Based on the design considerations, I don't think that Canon purposely crippled the camera. It's a stills camera first and foremost. If you want a long recording video look at the video cameras that are on the market from Canon and Sony. OMG, they are bigger for heat dissipation. Duh!!

 

[Jonathan Thill]

Yes, I understand that, but some heatsink is better than no heat sink at all.

Actually @SteveC in this case I think no heatsink is better.

Increasing the surface area by using a heatsink is helpful to pull the heat away from the heat source but if that heat is trapped in the body it will just add to the time required to cool the system after it has been heat soaked.

 

[SteveC]

Actually @SteveC in this case I think no heatsink is better.

Increasing the surface area by using a heatsink is helpful to pull the heat away from the heat source but if that heat is trapped in the body it will just add to the time required to cool the system after it has been heat soaked.

So you'd rather leave the heat entirely within the component that is probably the one that imposes the limit? How will you cool that component off (or let it cool down) in any kind of timely fashion if there's nowhere for its heat to go to? (Interestingly, that reminds me of what we have right now--a camera that claims to be overheated but doesn't feel very warm to the touch, and then takes forever to cool off.)

At least the body of the camera (which is most likely the heatsink in question) does have a surface on the outside.

 

[nchoh]

So you'd rather leave the heat entirely within the component that is probably the one that imposes the limit? How will you cool that component off (or let it cool down) in any kind of timely fashion if there's nowhere for its heat to go to? (Interestingly, that reminds me of what we have right now--a camera that claims to be overheated but doesn't feel very warm to the touch, and then takes forever to cool off.)

At least the body of the camera (which is most likely the heatsink in question) does have a surface on the outside.

What are your design considerations? Magnesium alloy body. Weather sealed.
If you are designing with the above 2 considerations, then you know that without any specifically designated way of removing heat from the camera, it will take a lot of time for the heat to slowly dissipate through the camera body.

The next question to ask is, how much heat is being generated and how how do you want the heat to be dissipated? If you use less than the whole body to dissipate the heat and the amount of heat is significant, you will have a part of the camera that is really hot. Hot enough to burn your hands.

So if the rate of heat generation is greater than the rate of heat dissipation, you will have an issue of over heating.

As mentioned by Ramage, if you spread the heat around in the camera, then the cooling down time will be longer, all things being equal.

 

[Jonathan Thill]

So you'd rather leave the heat entirely within the component that is probably the one that imposes the limit? How will you cool that component off (or let it cool down) in any kind of timely fashion if there's nowhere for its heat to go to? (Interestingly, that reminds me of what we have right now--a camera that claims to be overheated but doesn't feel very warm to the touch, and then takes forever to cool off.)

At least the body of the camera (which is most likely the heatsink in question) does have a surface on the outside.

If it was up to me (which it is not) I would rather there was no mode that pushed the Camera to its thermal limit so no overheating was observed. Canon would be called out for not pushing the tech forward and the same people (Not including you in this) that appear to be outraged about documented limits will be outraged that Canon is protecting its cinema line.

My educated guess is Canon is going to address the long cool off times, but leave the current limits pretty much as is. They know what the thermal limits of the components are and are likely not willing compromise them.

I am sure Canon went to great lengths in EVT, DVT and PVT to ensure the hardware was working as expected. Canon made a big mistake in allowing the Camera to hit thermal limits, I think they looked at how MOST peolpe use the Camera and thought people would be happy.

If I had a dollar for every Youtuber that did an overheating test by running the Camera till it overheated I would own 2 R5's

 

[dominic_siu]

There are reports that CFExpress cards heat up when in the slot even when not being used. I haven't got an R5 and can't verify this one way or another so perhaps someone who does can reply whether this is true or not.

If not it's just some careless coding by Canon where they're detecting card present for cutoff limits rather than card is set for recording.

I tried shooting some 4K120fps footage and the CFExpress card heat up substantially.

 

[Otara]

My understanding is that some pads are just as good these days, if not being changed a lot. We're also not talking laptops or desktops, but something intended to be far more rugged.

Fascinating to see how quickly 'overclocking' is turning up, time will tell how much room there is for it, and what price might be paid for doing it.

 

[nchoh]

I tried shooting some 4K120fps footage and the CFExpress card heat up substantially.

I am curious as in the video, the CFE slot is on the same board and very close to the CPU. This might be causing the CFE card to heat up.

 

[DBounce]

Really?

Imagine if Canon put in a perfect heat sink. Then all the heat generated in the CPU would be thrown against all the boards, connectors and components in the vicinity. The R5 would be able to records hours and hours of video, but
then we would see a problem of R5s failing after extended video recording use. Based on the design considerations, I don't think that Canon purposely crippled the camera. It's a stills camera first and foremost. If you want a long recording video look at the video cameras that are on the market from Canon and Sony. OMG, they are bigger for heat dissipation. Duh!!

I honestly don’t believe that overheating has anything to do with this. I think it’s merely a deliberate crippling. With no memory card the camera does not overheat. It can run for hours. It can output 4K HQ for hours. Worst still I think Canon could enable 8K raw output on the R5... the HDMI port can support 8K @30p. Canon just choose not to.
We know Canon deliberately cripples cameras.... Who can forget the missing 24p debacle? Or the missing log? I’m not sure why so many are acting like the idea of Canon deliberately crippling a camera is preposterous?

 

[SecureGSM]

I honestly don’t believe that overheating has anything to do with this. I think it’s merely a deliberate crippling. With no memory card the camera does not overheat. It can run for hours. It can output 4K HQ for hours. Worst still I think Canon could enable 8K raw output on the R5... the HDMI port can support 8K @30p. Canon just choose not to.
We know Canon deliberately cripples cameras.... Who can forget the missing 24p debacle? Or the missing log? I’m not sure why so many are acting like the idea of Canon deliberately crippling a camera is preposterous?

You forgot to mention missing fan, XLRs and inbuilt ND filters... Canon is horrible. We know that. Now... why are you still wasting your time posting on a Canon forum?

 

[marathonman]

This camera is purposely crippled to segment it from the cinema line. It’s not a limitation of the hardware, it’s a choice to protect the cinema line. I’m not sure why anyone skills be ok with that. Especially when Canon marketed this camera as a pro video tool that could be used along side the C300 Mk3.

Breathe. Repeat after me.
"When there's motion, you can't tell".....

 

[vjlex]

An interesting observation was made in the thread created before this one:

After pausing at 01:58 and using Google Translate from the smartphone level, I learned that the EVF installed in this Canon camera model is the Sony ECX339A https://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/201805/18-049E/

According to specs for the EVF, it's actually capable of 240 fps.