The Canon EOS R5 Mark II – We have now seen it

I really need to set a calendar reminder to update my camera and lens firmware. I always remember just before an event/trip (like now, when I’m reminded but have an event tomorrow).
I update firmwares religiously as soon as announced :)
My R8 warns me about the RF 10-20mm,
In which sense? I was not aware of a new firmware for the 10-20?
and my R3 locked up last week. Fortunately, on the R3 ‘pulling the battery’ is no slower than power cycling.
Oh I thought that the R3 did not have lock ups. Was it a one off occurrence or has it happened multiple times?
 
Upvote 0
I update firmwares religiously as soon as announced
I've seen enough reports of issues, and Canon has clawed back a few posted firmware updates. So, I wait.

In which sense? I was not aware of a new firmware for the 10-20?
I wasn't, either...so I looked and I cannot find an update (there aren't many) that lists 'adds compatibility for the RF 10-20mm', just the RF-S 10-18mm. Still, I'm running the 1.0.0 that came with the R8, and it shows this at power on with the RF 10-20/4 mounted:

R8 10-20.jpg

Despite that, the lens does work properly including distortion correction for the EVF/LCD (the black corners aren't there, but they are in the uncorrected RAWs).

Oh I thought that the R3 did not have lock ups. Was it a one off occurrence or has it happened multiple times?
Others have mentioned it, it's less pervasive than the R5's issues and the installed base of R3 users is much smaller. But it has happened multiple times, camera puts itself in MF mode and nothing works, even switching the power off has no effect, the camera remains on and stuck. It's not common, happens maybe once every 3 months and as stated, the fix (unlock and relock the battery) is just as easy as powering off/on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
I've seen enough reports of issues, and Canon has clawed back a few posted firmware updates. So, I wait.


I wasn't, either...so I looked and I cannot find an update (there aren't many) that lists 'adds compatibility for the RF 10-20mm', just the RF-S 10-18mm. Still, I'm running the 1.0.0 that came with the R8, and it shows this at power on with the RF 10-20/4 mounted:

View attachment 217217

Despite that, the lens does work properly including distortion correction for the EVF/LCD (the black corners aren't there, but they are in the uncorrected RAWs).[…]
RF lenses can send the correction data to the body, which avoids having to sync it manually, like with EF-M and cheaper EF bodies.
Right up to the moment where Canon comes up with a lens design that needs a new algorithm in the body, like the 24-105STM.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
RF lenses can send the correction data to the body, which avoids having to sync it manually, like with EF-M and cheaper EF bodies.
Right up to the moment where Canon comes up with a lens design that needs a new algorithm in the body, like the 24-105STM.
Makes sense as to why the lens works, but not as to why the camera warns that it may not.
 
Upvote 0
I dunno, Brian. That sounds exactly like MY spray and pray routine. :ROFLMAO: The "hope" part is the praying. I like to spray my hope with FPS for better crop yields.

As I say this I'm holding my blazing fast R. Yeah, just R. :ROFLMAO:
My and pray as relying soley on the frame rate to get you something. When I hit a burst, I know I'm seeing a play that will have a usable frame in it. At that point the 20fps is only about getting closer to that perfect moment, which would be missed in between the 7fps of the olden days. I've known a few hobbyists like myself to fill up multiple memory cards and come home with nothing useable. That's spray and praying.

Neither my older laptop nor fairly new desktop struggles with R5 file sizes. If you are only keeping 50 out of 3000, which is very reasonable, seems you'd be deleting so many that storage space is not an issue either.

And there's CRAW. IQ compromises seem slight and reasonable.

Is your bottleneck at the Detail batch processing stage? Or someplace else? Sincerely curious.
I have started using CRAW and it does help. But the downloads take longer, the conversion takes longer (especially if using noise reduction), I'm switching memory in the field more often. After they are sorted, processed, the storage is fine. Its moving and sorting them where the bigger files slow things down. My PC is a ryzen5 with a gtx3080 card and 96gb of ram (yes, I went overboard there), so its no slouch. But R6 files still go through it 2x as fast. 30-36mp might be my ideal. And in the end I can't often point to where the extra mp really made a huge difference for the final use. Sort of like driving a Corvette to the grocery store.....
 
Upvote 0
Because V90 cards are far too expensive.
2 CF Express B slots would actually be cheaper.
I agree with cost and speed but heat generation and backward compatibility seem to be Canon's rationale.
Happy for Canon to change from >10years of history. Canon would be very wary of any impact to thermals after the R5 launch response.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
I have started using CRAW and it does help. But the downloads take longer, the conversion takes longer (especially if using noise reduction), I'm switching memory in the field more often. After they are sorted, processed, the storage is fine. Its moving and sorting them where the bigger files slow things down.
I can just picture the struggles you face! (The attached photo is of some of William Henry Jackson's gear being transported for Western frontier photography.)
 

Attachments

  • whjackson3.jpg
    whjackson3.jpg
    116.2 KB · Views: 5
Last edited:
Upvote 0
I have started using CRAW and it does help. But the downloads take longer, the conversion takes longer (especially if using noise reduction), I'm switching memory in the field more often. After they are sorted, processed, the storage is fine. Its moving and sorting them where the bigger files slow things down. My PC is a ryzen5 with a gtx3080 card and 96gb of ram (yes, I went overboard there), so its no slouch. But R6 files still go through it 2x as fast. 30-36mp might be my ideal. And in the end I can't often point to where the extra mp really made a huge difference for the final use. Sort of like driving a Corvette to the grocery store.....
1 TB CFexpress 2.0 Type B cards are $200. Your bottleneck might be storage. Does your PC use SATA SSD HDDs or M.2 Internal SSDs?
 
Upvote 0
but that doesn't mean that cooling will not help. it will help with any long exposure.
Agreed but I guess (like everything) there are decreasing returns vs dollar
So unless you are going on a REAL shoestring budget and using used circa 2000 8mp rebel, a cheap dob with suspect DIY autoguiding, most would use a 30kg tracking mount + auto guilder + astro imager and call life good.
There is a middle ground with the Benro Polaris. The automation is great but definitely a learning curve. It could also be much more if they could improve their SW.
Dan Zafra spent a long time putting together a course on the polaris based on workshops in different countries and different cameras. Not cheap but answers a lot of questions and avoids frustration.
https://academy.capturetheatlas.com/courses/benro-polaris-course/
 
Upvote 0
45 megapixels can hardly be considered high res. Not in todays market. Canon doesn't have a high resolution camera and it hasn't had one since 5DSR.
The difference between the 5DS/R @ 50mp and R5 is negligible. At the time, there 50mp was quite high relative to average though.

Given that the majority of final images are significantly lower resolution (FB, insta, etc), there doesn't seem to be a many use cases for higher res although downscaling the final image will result in better quality.
I get enough cropping ability from 45mp as it is
Big billboards and magazine covers can take advantage of higher resolution. 45mp @ 300dpi gives you 70x45cm so unless you are printing bigger....
YMMV
 
Upvote 0
Big billboards and magazine covers can take advantage of higher resolution. 45mp @ 300dpi gives you 70x45cm so unless you are printing bigger....
YMMV
Even going bigger it doesn't really make a notable difference because you look at the picture from a longer distance. The bigger the print, the lower the DPI you need. I recently did two big high quality prints, one 160x80cm from a very high resolution file because it was a pano stich, and one 120x60cm from a cropped file with lower than 150 DPI. And honestly, I could never be able to tell which one used a lower res file even if I "pixel peep" the frames, and both look amazing on the wall.

The only real life practical advantage higher res gives is for cropping (and which is the reason I went with the R5 instead of the R6, I do a lot of cropping with my landscapes as most of it is in Alpine territory with very distant peaks).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
Agreed but I guess (like everything) there are decreasing returns vs dollar

There is a middle ground with the Benro Polaris. The automation is great but definitely a learning curve. It could also be much more if they could improve their SW.
Dan Zafra spent a long time putting together a course on the polaris based on workshops in different countries and different cameras. Not cheap but answers a lot of questions and avoids frustration.
https://academy.capturetheatlas.com/courses/benro-polaris-course/

I had one like that, it wasn't a benro, I can't remember the brand now. it will come to me. Not sure if it was a skywatcher (nope, skytracker)

of course the tough thing is always polar alignment.

found it...

3302W-2.jpg
 
Upvote 0
The difference between the 5DS/R @ 50mp and R5 is negligible. At the time, there 50mp was quite high relative to average though.

Given that the majority of final images are significantly lower resolution (FB, insta, etc), there doesn't seem to be a many use cases for higher res although downscaling the final image will result in better quality.
I get enough cropping ability from 45mp as it is
Big billboards and magazine covers can take advantage of higher resolution. 45mp @ 300dpi gives you 70x45cm so unless you are printing bigger....
YMMV

big billboards can use a stupid low resolution because the observer distance is so far, you don't need high resolution.

it all comes down to image magnification and observer distance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
it takes alot of engineering to do GPS well inside of a metal body. the 1D series had GPS for one rendition, but I guess the pros didn't find it useful.

I remember when the 70d came out with gps that was accurate, but battery-sucking. Then the 7Dii came out, and seemed to manage to get gps right but provided a more-sane gps update mode preference. Was the best of both words in a magnesium alloy body. Then they ditched it. I kept expecting it to come back again in the higher-end bodies, but nope.

I was never much a fan of sacrificing any battery depth to gps at the time, but in retrospect, I appreciate the capacity to find comparison shots at the same wildlife location over the years. I'd use it now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0