The Canon EOS R5 Mark II coming in Q2, 2023? [CR2]

[Dragon]

I gotta say the overall quality on FB is better than Instagram, but there's something about 45MP or above that gives the image a sort of 3D effect on both platforms. The images look great on my phone, no complaints there, but it's the compression that's bothering me a little bit after they're posted on social media. Again, there isn't a huge difference, but just enough where I see details getting lost with compression. Wondering if someone who's had experience with both the R6 and R5 noticed a difference?

I have found I get the best results on FB by prescaling images to around 4k (i.e. 8-12 MP depending on aspect ratio). That holds for everything from a P1000 to an R5. Facebook's scaler seems to work best at 2:1 downsampling.

 

[davidhfe]

I have found I get the best results on FB by prescaling images to around 4k (i.e. 8-12 MP depending on aspect ratio). That holds for everything from a P1000 to an R5. Facebook's scaler seems to work best at 2:1 downsampling.

+1 — my unsolicited advice here would be to see if there are some other workflow changes that might help.

I remember there was a bit of a debate when the A7S3 came out—is 8mp enough for social photos or is it necessary to carry a second camera? And as long as you’re not cropping in too much, the samples seemed to be just fine. I’m really skeptical that the R6 sensor isn’t capable of producing a great image with the depth/3D feeling you’re after.

Edit: Only social stuff I do is direct to instagram, but I wonder if you can do something like pre-compress the image so that FB doesn’t re-compress it?

 

[kylerlueck]

I have found I get the best results on FB by prescaling images to around 4k (i.e. 8-12 MP depending on aspect ratio). That holds for everything from a P1000 to an R5. Facebook's scaler seems to work best at 2:1 downsampling.

Great to know! I'll try doing that for my photos going forward to see if I can tell a difference.

+1 — my unsolicited advice here would be to see if there are some other workflow changes that might help.

I remember there was a bit of a debate when the A7S3 came out—is 8mp enough for social photos or is it necessary to carry a second camera? And as long as you’re not cropping in too much, the samples seemed to be just fine. I’m really skeptical that the R6 sensor isn’t capable of producing a great image with the depth/3D feeling you’re after.

Thanks! Was just curious to know how detail within a higher resolution camera (although still compressed after posting on social) would hold up against a lower resolution camera. I know the R6 is capable of capturing great images like that, but R5 images in terms of detail always seem to really stand out to me on social whenever I see them. Thoughts on that?

 

[Dragon]

Great to know! I'll try doing that for my photos going forward to see if I can tell a difference.

Thanks! Was just curious to know how detail within a higher resolution camera (although still compressed after posting on social) would hold up against a lower resolution camera. I know the R6 is capable of capturing great images like that, but R5 images in terms of detail always seem to really stand out to me on social whenever I see them. Thoughts on that?

The compression is what it is. In the case of FB, most (if not all) are compressed to under 1 MB. The point is that social platforms scale before they compress, so they are always compressing from the same resolution (unless you send a tiny pic). The remaining question is how well the scaler holds detail with different scaling ratios. The compressor may actually work better with less detailed images because it seems to have a pretty hard cap on max file size. Try different prescaling to test the scaler and different compositions to test the compression.

 

[Dragon]

+1 — my unsolicited advice here would be to see if there are some other workflow changes that might help.

I remember there was a bit of a debate when the A7S3 came out—is 8mp enough for social photos or is it necessary to carry a second camera? And as long as you’re not cropping in too much, the samples seemed to be just fine. I’m really skeptical that the R6 sensor isn’t capable of producing a great image with the depth/3D feeling you’re after.

Edit: Only social stuff I do is direct to instagram, but I wonder if you can do something like pre-compress the image so that FB doesn’t re-compress it?

I have found that prescaling can be helpful, but excess precompresson is detrimental. FB will scale before they compress, so having a better image for the scaler to work with is important.

 

[usern4cr]

Yep..I would be in that group as a 5D3 owner.
I rarely jump in on first versions of things....some times, but usually I wait till a .2 or so version.

With everything that came in the R5, and I am one that DOES love video too....I was apprehensive jumping in on this first batch.
And with wind a R52 might be on the way as soon as next year....I'm definitely waiting.

IN the intermediate years, I've gone to experimenting with medium format film....monochrome sensor digital cameras, even digital MF.....and so I'd not felt compelled to replace the 5D3. But now, I'm wanting to not only get into it....but also have a regular FF color mirrorless camera I can experiment with adapting my growing collection of vintage glass.

I'm hoping to get to shooting concerts again and that R5 platform will be great for that...not used to having a camera lock onto an eye that's really moving around and keep in focus...should be fun.

But anyway, this is the long winded way of saying, yep...I'm in this group you're talking about.

cayenne

If you've been working with medium format monochrome digital cameras, have you tried using narrowbank filters (O2, HAlpha etc) on it for astrophotography? With a good tracker & lens you could get magnificent photos even in moderately light polluted areas, too.

 

[Czardoom]

Honestly, I have no dog in the "brand wars" fight from a quality or performance perspective. If you're spending $1999 or more on a camera body these days, you're going to get phenomenal results no matter what brand you go with (so long as you have a modicum of creativity and even a basic understanding of photography). It's pretty hard to suck at photography in this day and age, and that's great for consumers across the board. ALL of the products these companies are pumping out are mind-blowing.

For me, it simply comes down to how the manufacturers are handling themselves and treating me as a customer. Look at my account age - I've been around here since 2011. Most of that time has literally been piles of posts from people hmmm-ing and haw-ing about, "I think Canon will catch up to Sony - should I wait another year or buy now??!" or "Canon will leapfrom the XYZ body - just wait a year or two - it's coming guuuuys - for reeeaaalz!"

Waiting. Waiting. And more waiting.

The general vibe in the marketplace (in my opinion) just seems to be that Canon is following along in the advancement of mirrorless. We were all on the edge of our seats when the EOS M came out, thinking it was going to be some grand foray into Canon's mirrorless play... but the R5 didn't come until 8 years later.

EIGHT. YEARS.

WTF?

And while I also have 10s of thousands tied up in EF glass, and the transition will be painful from a dollar perspective, I'm just tired of being Canon's sucker/fool (and I also hate using adapters).

**** For me, my position is simple... Sony seems to be giving customers exactly what they want, when they want it. Canon seems to be giving customers what they want, after Sony (or whoever) has already tested the market. And that's just not a system/brand I want to be part of. Silly? Probably. But I'm getting older and cranky, so it is what it is.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me with 47 "wait just one more year!" rumors so I stay locked into your brand longer, shame on me.

I don't hate Canon. Actually, I really love them. And think they make great products. I just really miss the constantly-leapfrogging-the-competition Canon of yester-year. The Canon that took great risks and put out wild/innovative products without fear, just because they could. And hey, they may take up that mantle again some day, and be the leaders once again. But for now, it's clearly not their time. I'll be keeping an eye on them in the years that come, and who knows, I might switch back someday.

But for now, I just want to be where I feel like a company is giving me exactly what I want, when I want it. Not, "please wait - it'll be coming in 2, 3, or 4 years... maybe."

That's it, that's all. Still love ya'll... and Canon.

Of course, big bad Canon hates their customers and have to be forced into making advances due to the wonderful advances that Sony makes, because Sony loves their customers and responds to their wants!

Unless of course...Sony Ergonomics have been an issue since day one, and 8 years later still well below the ergonomics of Canon, Nikon, and most others.
Sony has had a dust on sensor issues from the beginning. Someone (can't recall who, but of the popular internet photo sites) looked at his issue again in 2021 and found that there was still a big dust problem with Sony cameras.
Many have complained about Sony's color science being too blue biased - especially skin tones. 8 years later, still an issue.
In more recent generations, too much rolling shutter due to slow processing speeds, somehow wonderful-consumer-pleasing Sony has not responded.

Now, of course it is true that Sony was well ahead of Canon in mirrorless for years. Odd that you did not switch then. Now that Canon sensors are pretty much on par with Sony, now that Canon's sensors and processors are faster in some models, now that Canon has superior IBIS...now you decide that Canon is behind Sony and essentially a follower?...Makes no sense to me. Of course, each person should decide what brand they want to buy. No issue there. But please, this idea that Sony is all about pleasing their customers and Canon doesn't give a damn is just so ridiculous that I had to respond.

 

[Dragon]

Honestly, I have no dog in the "brand wars" fight from a quality or performance perspective. If you're spending $1999 or more on a camera body these days, you're going to get phenomenal results no matter what brand you go with (so long as you have a modicum of creativity and even a basic understanding of photography). It's pretty hard to suck at photography in this day and age, and that's great for consumers across the board. ALL of the products these companies are pumping out are mind-blowing.

For me, it simply comes down to how the manufacturers are handling themselves and treating me as a customer. Look at my account age - I've been around here since 2011. Most of that time has literally been piles of posts from people hmmm-ing and haw-ing about, "I think Canon will catch up to Sony - should I wait another year or buy now??!" or "Canon will leapfrom the XYZ body - just wait a year or two - it's coming guuuuys - for reeeaaalz!"

Waiting. Waiting. And more waiting.

The general vibe in the marketplace (in my opinion) just seems to be that Canon is following along in the advancement of mirrorless. We were all on the edge of our seats when the EOS M came out, thinking it was going to be some grand foray into Canon's mirrorless play... but the R5 didn't come until 8 years later.

EIGHT. YEARS.

WTF?

And while I also have 10s of thousands tied up in EF glass, and the transition will be painful from a dollar perspective, I'm just tired of being Canon's sucker/fool (and I also hate using adapters).

**** For me, my position is simple... Sony seems to be giving customers exactly what they want, when they want it. Canon seems to be giving customers what they want, after Sony (or whoever) has already tested the market. And that's just not a system/brand I want to be part of. Silly? Probably. But I'm getting older and cranky, so it is what it is.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me with 47 "wait just one more year!" rumors so I stay locked into your brand longer, shame on me.

I don't hate Canon. Actually, I really love them. And think they make great products. I just really miss the constantly-leapfrogging-the-competition Canon of yester-year. The Canon that took great risks and put out wild/innovative products without fear, just because they could. And hey, they may take up that mantle again some day, and be the leaders once again. But for now, it's clearly not their time. I'll be keeping an eye on them in the years that come, and who knows, I might switch back someday.

But for now, I just want to be where I feel like a company is giving me exactly what I want, when I want it. Not, "please wait - it'll be coming in 2, 3, or 4 years... maybe."

That's it, that's all. Still love ya'll... and Canon.

And during those 8 years, Sony has required their fans to upgrade every year if not more often to reap the "benefits" of advances in mirrorless technology. I would call that milking a pool of sucker cows to pay for R&D. Canon didn't really enter the mirrorless business seriously until the introduction of the R5 and I think my R5 will not really be obsolete even 5 years from now. So, the bottom line is whether you want to always be first and pay dearly for it every year or have some patience and wait until the technology is mature enough to have some staying power. BTW, if you have 10s of thousands invested in EF glass, you are looking at 20s of thousands in Sony glass . A much cheaper solution would be an R5 and an adapter for each of those big whites (then you don't have to think about adapters anymore). I also have a lot of EF glass and my sense is that the perfect compatibility of EF glass with the R Series was a very thoughtful and considerate touch. Much more graceful than the switch from FD to EF (or for that matter from A mount to E mount).

 

[David - Sydney]

For me, it simply comes down to how the manufacturers are handling themselves and treating me as a customer.
And while I also have 10s of thousands tied up in EF glass, and the transition will be painful from a dollar perspective, I'm just tired of being Canon's sucker/fool (and I also hate using adapters).

**** For me, my position is simple... Sony seems to be giving customers exactly what they want, when they want it. Canon seems to be giving customers what they want, after Sony (or whoever) has already tested the market. And that's just not a system/brand I want to be part of. Silly? Probably. But I'm getting older and cranky, so it is what it is.

I just really miss the constantly-leapfrogging-the-competition Canon of yester-year. But for now, I just want to be where I feel like a company is giving me exactly what I want, when I want it. Not, "please wait - it'll be coming in 2, 3, or 4 years... maybe."

Thanks for your thoughts. Your money of course and I hope that Sony treats you well. It would be valuable information for you to share your experience with the A7Rv/Sony lenses after your "grass is always greener" leap.

Canon did leap frog the competition (significantly!) 2.5 years ago with R5/R6 and with the R6ii released for the same price after 2.5 years and rumoured R5ii after 3 years does seem to indicate that Canon has changed a lot vs their previous model lifecycle changes.
Adding feature after feature and tweaking improvements via firmware has been almost like a new model and all for free
The R5 seems to be still great value in comparison with the A1's features/pricing.
Canon is acting like Apple in the sense of taking the market standard and then making it easier to use and adding stuff via iOS updates for free. Adding up to a massive cash stash, huge market cap and enthusiastic users. A big change from the Apple of 20 years ago.

Canon's L lenses should have kept their value well but still a massive change for you. That said, I have sold/replaced my EF for RF as the improvements have been substantial. The only exception is my EF16-35mm/4 which is great and has an adapter welded to it. For some, the drop-in filter adapter replaces front filters saving huge amounts of money for TS-E and EF11-24/4 lenses so adapter are not all bad

 

[AlanF]

Thanks for your thoughts. Your money of course and I hope that Sony treats you well. It would be valuable information for you to share your experience with the A7Rv/Sony lenses after your "grass is always greener" leap.

Canon did leap frog the competition (significantly!) 2.5 years ago with R5/R6 and with the R6ii released for the same price after 2.5 years and rumoured R5ii after 3 years does seem to indicate that Canon has changed a lot vs their previous model lifecycle changes.
Adding feature after feature and tweaking improvements via firmware has been almost like a new model and all for free
The R5 seems to be still great value in comparison with the A1's features/pricing.
Canon is acting like Apple in the sense of taking the market standard and then making it easier to use and adding stuff via iOS updates for free. Adding up to a massive cash stash, huge market cap and enthusiastic users. A big change from the Apple of 20 years ago.

Canon's L lenses should have kept their value well but still a massive change for you. That said, I have sold/replaced my EF for RF as the improvements have been substantial. The only exception is my EF16-35mm/4 which is great and has an adapter welded to it. For some, the drop-in filter adapter replaces front filters saving huge amounts of money for TS-E and EF11-24/4 lenses so adapter are not all bad

I seem to have missed the feature after feature added to the R5 firmware that makes it almost like a new model. Please remind me of the significant features.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I seem to have missed the feature after feature added to the R5 firmware that makes it almost like a new model. Please remind me of the significant features.

They just added the feature to operate normally while shooting a small subject.

Before that, they added the ability to keep recording a movie even as your camera overheats. That’s like Arnold Schwarzenegger giving a thumbs-up as he dissolves in molten metal.



If that’s not a hot new feature, what is? Geez, don’t be so demanding.

 

[AndrewJ19312926]

I’d love to see canon make the r52 for photography or a separate model just for photography. I don’t need or want any video capability out of a camera. In 2 years of owning an r6 I may have recorded 4 minutes of 120 just for and giggles

 

[neuroanatomist]

I’d love to see canon make the r52 for photography or a separate model just for photography. I don’t need or want any video capability out of a camera. In 2 years of owning an r6 I may have recorded 4 minutes of 120 just for and giggles

Given that Canon markets their cameras to still, video snd hybrid shooters, if they eliminate two of those segments, they will sell fewer cameras of that model. Selling fewer cameras means they need to charge more for each one. How much more would you be willing to pay for this camera that you’d ‘love to see’? More importantly, do you honestly believe the majority of the market would be willing to pay significantly more for such a camera?

Master Yoda would remind you to remember the failure at the cave (you know, the one where Luke was told he wouldn’t need a weapon, so he brought a Nikon Df).

 

[davidhfe]

I’d love to see canon make the r52 for photography or a separate model just for photography. I don’t need or want any video capability out of a camera. In 2 years of owning an r6 I may have recorded 4 minutes of 120 just for and giggles

I'm super curious why. Are you hoping this would make the camera less expensive (see Neuro's comment and about 1000 other threads around here)? Do you think that video has impacted/made the R5 more complex? Do you think that the inclusion of those features has made the R5 somehow weaker as a photography camera?

I've gone from 90/10 photo/video to basically 99% photo, and I still love knowing that I can get outstanding video out of my R5 if the need ever arises.

 

[David - Sydney]

I seem to have missed the feature after feature added to the R5 firmware that makes it almost like a new model. Please remind me of the significant features.

Many of the firmware updates have been to fix bugs ("phenomenon"), add support for lenses and incrementally improve existing functions with the main one being AF.

The big one was thermal management in different releases going from time-based shutdown to measuring internal temperatures, updated algorithms and having a high temperature option for the 3 overheating video modes. The need for a R5C is greatly reduced and you still get IBIS.

The following features were added:
Video: Clog3, Raw light video, 120fps HD video, prores output to Atomos, dual video recording to cards,
Stills: eshutter in full time manual focus, saving settings to a card, viewfinder brightness auto dims, lots of FTP improvements

AF selection: tracking in general, head detection (hemuts/googles), cars/motorbikes, shadows or hair over eyes, torso and small subjects.

 

[David - Sydney]

I seem to have missed the feature after feature added to the R5 firmware that makes it almost like a new model. Please remind me of the significant features.

The full list of firmware updates....

Firmware Version 1.7.0 incorporates the following fixes:
Fixes an issue that, in rare instances, may result in the camera not operating normally when capturing small subjects.
Fixes minor issues.

Firmware Version 1.6.0 incorporates the following enhancements:
Adds [Auto Power Off Temp.: Standard/High] to the menu for movie recording. When [High] is selected, the camera will not automatically turn off when the temperature of the camera body and card become high, which may allow for longer movie recording than before, depending on the shooting conditions. Note that the temperature of the bottom surface of the camera may increase at this time.
Adds the ability to convert multiple HEIF images into multiple JPEG images.
Enhances the performance of "Movie Digital IS". It stabilizes the image when taking selfies or walking shots using a wide-angle lens.
Fixes minor issues.

Firmware Version 1.5.2 incorporates the following enhancements:
Optimizes AutoFocus accuracy when Extender RF1.4x or Extender RF2x is attached to the RF800mm F5.6 L IS USM and RF1200mm F8 L IS USM lenses.
Enhances the stability of Eye Detection.
Enhances AutoFocus tracking when shooting moving subjects.

Firmware Version 1.5.1 incorporates the following fix.
Fixes an issue that in rare instances, the camera may become inoperable when shooting in the Servo AF setting while operating the <AF-ON> button.

Firmware Version 1.5.0 incorporates the following fixes and enhancements:
1. Improves head detection performance to support helmets or goggles in winter sports.
2. Adds [Vehicles] selection to [Subject to detect] selection in the [AF] tab to support the detection of automobiles and motorcycles in motorsports. Adds [Spot detection] when [Vehicles] is selected as the helmet of the driver or rider*.
*Detection may not be possible for ordinary passenger cars or bicycles, or for motorcyclists performing stunts or kicking up dirt and dust.
3. Improves detection performance for eye detection when:
-there are shadows on the face.
-hair is hanging over the eyes.
4. Adds support for torso detection of a person. If the eyes, face or head are hidden or cannot be detected, a person's torso will be detected and tracked continuously.
5. Adds the ability to import manual white balance (MWB) data from the Quick Control screen when capturing still images.
6. Eliminates the center press operation of the multi-controller to prevent accidentally transferring images during FTP transfer.
7. Adds the ability, when using EOS Utility or Browser Remote for remote shooting with two cards inserted, to set the recording method and to select which card to be recorded to.
8. Adds [Suppress lower frame rate] to [Smooth] in [Disp. performance], enabling the shooting screen to be displayed with less drop frame rate even in dark locations.
9. Adds support for the RF 5.2mm F2.8 L Dual Fisheye lens.
10. Changes the default value of [FTP server] → [Passive mode] to [Enable].
11. Improves operation stability during FTP transfer.
12. Optimizes controls of In-Body Image Stabilization (IBIS) when using specific EF lenses not equipped with the image stabilization function.
13. Fixes an issue, in which noise occurs along the edges of bright subjects when using Canon Log for movie recording.

Firmware Version 1.4.0 incorporates the following fixes and enhancements:
1. Adds support for outputting 8K/30p/10-bit video signals for ProRes RAW recording to ATOMOS's Ninja V+ recorder
* via HDMI.
* If you have any questions about ATOMOS products, please contact ATOMOS directly.
* Please note that the recorder may become hot.
2. Adds support for movie recording when the camera is connected to the CN-E18-80mm T4.4 L IS KAS S or CN-E70-200mm T4.4 L IS KAS S EF cinema lenses. * Still photography shooting is possible however performance is not guaranteed.
* Movie shooting in vertical position is possible however performance is not guaranteed.
* External power supply is required for AF operation during servo zoom operation.
When there is no external power supply, AF operation is activated only when the servo zoom is not in use.
3. Adds simultaneous movie recording capability on card 1 and card 2, however RAW movies and RAW(Light) movies cannot be recorded simultaneously on card 1 and card 2.
4. Adds support for the VPG 400 (Video Performance Guarantee Profile), a standard based on the CFexpress 2.0 specification.
5. Improves operation stability when using the RF400mm F2.8 L IS USM and RF600mm F4 L IS USM.
6. Fixes an issue in which, during HDMI connection, if the camera's screen turns off, a zebra pattern is displayed via the HDMI output.
7. Fixes an issue in which sufficient image stabilization effects may not be attained immediately after the start of shooting.

Firmware Version 1.3.1 incorporates the following fixes and enhancements:
1. Adds [Canon Log 3] to [Canon Log settings]. You can select [Canon Log] or [Canon Log 3] from [Canon Log settings] in the Shooting tab of the menu.
- Support for RAW movies shot with Canon Log3 and RAW (Light) will be available in Cinema RAW Development and in Digital Photo Professional version in a future update.
- Digital Photo Professional will also support the processing of RAW movies shot in Canon Log3 settings and the application of Viewing LUT in a future update.
2. Adds [RAW (Light)] to the movie recording size and [IPB (Light)] to 8K/4K to enable lower bit rate shooting. These settings can also be selected when RAW+MP4 is set.
3. Adds a high frame rate of 119.9 fps/100.0 fps to the Full HD movie recording size.
4. Adds [Electronic full-time MF] to the AF tab of the menu. When a lens is attached, manual focus adjustment is always possible with both One-shot AF and Servo AF.
5. Adds [6: Monitor Off] to [Shooting info. disp.: Screen info. settings] in the Shooting tab of the menu. This update makes it possible for the camera's monitor to be turned off at all times during shooting.
6. The transfer time (estimated value) now displays on the camera monitor during FTP transfer.
7. Adds the ability, when transferring images via FTP, to select protected images that failed to be transferred and protected images that have not yet been transferred and transfer them all at once.
8. Adds [Save/load cam settings on card] to the Function settings tab of the menu. This allows you to save the camera settings to a card, or load a saved file and restore the camera to the settings you saved to a card.
9. Fixes a phenomenon, in which, in rare instances, the camera does not function normally when using certain CFexpress cards.
10. Fixes a phenomenon, in which in rare instances, the camera cannot function normally when the drive mode is set to "High-speed continuous shooting" to shoot still images continuously.
11. Fixes a phenomenon in which the power may become suspended when the camera is powered via USB for an extended period of time.
12. Fixes a phenomenon in which part of the settings screen is incorrectly displayed on cameras equipped with Firmware Version 1.2.1.
13. Fixes a phenomenon in which the image in the viewfinder and on the LCD screen is displayed brighter than it should be, when shooting with Canon Log 3, if the [View Assist.] setting is set to [On], and the camera is equipped with Firmware Version 1.3.0

Firmware Version 1.2.0 incorporates the following fixes and enhancements:
1. When using high-speed or low-speed continuous shooting modes, in Drive Mode with [High Speed Display: OFF], the visibility of the subject within the frame has been improved when shooting moving objects.*
*During continuous shooting black frames will be inserted between frames in the viewfinder and live view. This will improve the visibility of moving subjects in live view and in the viewfinder.
2. Adds the [Auto] setting to the [Viewfinder brightness] menu that will brighten and dim based on ambient light conditions.
3. Enables 2nd curtain shooting sync during radio transmission wireless flash shooting when the Speedlight EL-1 flash is attached to the camera.
4. Enables manual flash output (excluding high-speed sync and optical transmission wireless flash shooting) to be selected and set up to 1/8192 from the camera menu screen when the Speedlight EL-1 flash is attached to the camera.
5. Improves compatibility of HEIF images recorded in the camera with MIAF (Multi-Image Application Format) standards.
6. Adds support for AF and release during zoom operations for some RF and EF lenses.

Firmware Version 1.1.0 incorporates the following fixes and enhancements:
Useful messaging is now displayed when [HDMI display：Camera+External monitor] and [Overheat control: on] settings are enabled.
When using certain RF lenses for movie shooting, the in-lens image stabilization mechanism has been improved.
Fixes a phenomenon in which the “Slow Synchro” setting screen is not accurately displayed, when the language is set to English.
Fixes a typo displayed on the communication setting screen, when the language is set to Korean.
Connectivity during FTP transmission has been improved.
Fixes a phenomenon, in which the card access time may take longer, when using certain CF express cards.
Temperature detection and shooting time control in video shooting have been improved. In addition, the total shooting time when the short-time recording and power-on/off are performed repeatedly at room temperature is improved.
The phenomenon in which the movie recording time available is not correctly displayed when the Date/Time/Zone is not set has been corrected.

 

[David - Sydney]

I'm super curious why. Are you hoping this would make the camera less expensive (see Neuro's comment and about 1000 other threads around here)? Do you think that video has impacted/made the R5 more complex? Do you think that the inclusion of those features has made the R5 somehow weaker as a photography camera?

I've gone from 90/10 photo/video to basically 99% photo, and I still love knowing that I can get outstanding video out of my R5 if the need ever arises.

From a hardware perspective, there is little difference between stills and video as the EVF needs to "see" video from the sensor full time similar to live view on DLSRs. AF coverage for mirrorless is full sensor using "video" vs separate AF detection / mirror assembly / pentaprism.
HDMI/mic/headphone ports would not be needed if there was no video output. Thermal management is higher if video is recorded to the cards ie the R5's "overheating" issues were only in 3 video modes

From a SW perspective, there are differences and incremental cost are higher. The R5C has a separate cinema menu for instance but the R5 incorporates most of those functions within the standard menu. Many of the firmware updates have been for video features.

Canon must produce hybrid video/stills bodies to keep up with the competition and provide many users what they are need for their use and video is definitely being used more.
Video hasn't made the R5 weaker for stills but there is definitely a cost that we cannot estimate. A pure stills body is unlikely to be a high volume seller and hard to believe that there would be a significantly different cost without video.

 

[AlanF]

Many of the firmware updates have been to fix bugs ("phenomenon"), add support for lenses and incrementally improve existing functions with the main one being AF.

The big one was thermal management in different releases going from time-based shutdown to measuring internal temperatures, updated algorithms and having a high temperature option for the 3 overheating video modes. The need for a R5C is greatly reduced and you still get IBIS.

The following features were added:
Video: Clog3, Raw light video, 120fps HD video, prores output to Atomos, dual video recording to cards,
Stills: eshutter in full time manual focus, saving settings to a card, viewfinder brightness auto dims, lots of FTP improvements

AF selection: tracking in general, head detection (hemuts/googles), cars/motorbikes, shadows or hair over eyes, torso and small subjects.

For those who shoot mainly stills, they are mainly tweaks, and I haven't been able to google with it. I haven't noticed any real improvement in tracking or AF, though it did recognise cars, as mine has been excellent all along - no complaints from me. What I want is to be able to change the fps in ES shutter and have a pre-burst mode, which would make a difference for me.

 

[David - Sydney]

For those who shoot mainly stills, they are mainly tweaks, and I haven't been able to google with it. I haven't noticed any real improvement in tracking or AF, though it did recognise cars, as mine has been excellent all along - no complaints from me. What I want is to be able to change the fps in ES shutter and have a pre-burst mode, which would make a difference for me.

No doubt that there are a few things that would be simple to change in firmware that Canon (in their wisdom) hasn't.
Arbitrary 30 minute record limit can be added to the list.
Being able to remap the Rate button and high res pixel shift shooting should be simple to add.
Ultimately, the arbitrary list is pretty short though.

Fixing banding under indoor lighting in eshutter would be very useful.
Pre burst would hit battery life I think.

 

[Del Paso]

I’d love to see canon make the r52 for photography or a separate model just for photography. I don’t need or want any video capability out of a camera. In 2 years of owning an r6 I may have recorded 4 minutes of 120 just for and giggles

I have never shot a single video, and do no expect to change in the future.
The video possibilities don't bother me, I just do not use them.
But: the day I'll sell my camera, chances are extremely high the next customer will need those features.
On the other hand, Leica didn't implement video in their new M 11, but only because their customer's feed-back told them hardly anybody used an M camera for video. This isn't the case with CaNiSoPaFuOlPe, or even with Leica's SL.