The loose/wobbly top plate on R5 and possible sealing issues

[Dmitri_Kahm]

Hi everybody!
I have noticed that the central part of the top plate around the hot shoe ( it covers wi-fi modules, hyroscope etc) is slightly wobbly at the far edges and does not fit tight with the rest of the top plate near the lens mount ( its edges protrude slightly above the rest of the plate around 0,5 mm). I can press it by the sides with fingers and see how it plays a bit. I have attached a photo, where I circled the slightly protruding part ( the photo shows the plate from one side only, but the other side is the same). I have asked CPS and they say that it is normal. I, however, doubt it and am afraid of potential sealing issues.
I would kindly ask the r5 owners to check if their plates are the same. Please check before you say "zero play in mine" ) ( there are always people who say about zero play, when there is obvious play due to construction like with the IBIS rattle of stabbed lenses and bodies)

Thanks!

 

[rbielefeld]

Hi everybody!
I have noticed that the central part of the top plate around the hot shoe ( it covers wi-fi modules, hyroscope etc) is slightly wobbly and does not fit tight with the rest of the top plate near the bayonet ( it protrudes slightly above the rest of the plate around 0,5 mm). I can press it by the sides with fingers and see how it plays a bit. I have attached a photo, where I circled the slightly protruding part ( the photo shows the plate from one side only, but the other side is the same). I have asked CPS and they say that it is normal. I, however, doubt it and am afraid of potential sealing issues.
I would kindly ask the r5 owners to check if their plates are the same. Please check before you say "zero play in mine" ) ( there are always people who say about zero play, when there is obvious play due to construction like with the IBIS rattle of stabbed lenses and bodies)

Thanks!

I checked mine and it seems very solid. It may flex a tiny bit but almost impossible to tell.

 

[Dmitri_Kahm]

I checked mine and it seems very solid. It may flex a tiny bit but almost impossible to tell.

Thank you! Does the central part protrude a bit like mine ? ( see the attached pic, I circled the place where mine is not in line) Please note, that I am talking only about the edges of the central plate close to the lens mount. This apples to play as well.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I can deflect lower the front left corner of the plastic piece that covers the radio and possibly EVF screen. it does not affect photographs. The joint of the cover is not perfect, a fingernail can feel the difference, mine is well within any reasonable fit specification.

If you feel yours is beyond what you expect, contact canon and arrange for a repair. Its a fact that molded parts can shrink or warp due to various manufacturing factors. Trying to push parts thru the machine faster than the process specifies is a common cause of inaccuracies'. I doubt that a very tiny error would be rejected by inspectors.

There is no real way for us to compare what we see, for me, its a tiny deflection with a lot of pressure but it does move. There appears to be no way that that joint on both the left and right corners would seal against moisture intrusion unless there is something inside I don't see. Canon relies on fit to resist moisture intrusion and it does look like a definite weak spot in that regard. Its not a 1 series camera, and I'd use a cover for any significant wet weather photography. Warranties don't cover water intrusion.

 

[Dmitri_Kahm]

I can deflect lower the front left corner of the plastic piece that covers the radio and possibly EVF screen. it does not affect photographs. The joint of the cover is not perfect, a fingernail can feel the difference, mine is well within any reasonable fit specification.

If you feel yours is beyond what you expect, contact canon and arrange for a repair. Its a fact that molded parts can shrink or warp due to various manufacturing factors. Trying to push parts thru the machine faster than the process specifies is a common cause of inaccuracies'. I doubt that a very tiny error would be rejected by inspectors.

There is no real way for us to compare what we see, for me, its a tiny deflection with a lot of pressure but it does move. There appears to be no way that that joint on both the left and right corners would seal against moisture intrusion unless there is something inside I don't see. Canon relies on fit to resist moisture intrusion and it does look like a definite weak spot in that regard. Its not a 1 series camera, and I'd use a cover for any significant wet weather photography. Warranties don't cover water intrusion.

Thank you for such a detailed reply! Well, I guess then it is just the manufacturing tolerances and I'd better use a cover for rainy weather. Roger Cicala from Lens Rentals also mentioned that this part is the weakest sealing point in camera in his post where he disassembled the body.

 

[Bdbtoys]

I can deflect lower the front left corner of the plastic piece that covers the radio and possibly EVF screen. it does not affect photographs. The joint of the cover is not perfect, a fingernail can feel the difference, mine is well within any reasonable fit specification.

If you feel yours is beyond what you expect, contact canon and arrange for a repair. Its a fact that molded parts can shrink or warp due to various manufacturing factors. Trying to push parts thru the machine faster than the process specifies is a common cause of inaccuracies'. I doubt that a very tiny error would be rejected by inspectors.

There is no real way for us to compare what we see, for me, its a tiny deflection with a lot of pressure but it does move. There appears to be no way that that joint on both the left and right corners would seal against moisture intrusion unless there is something inside I don't see. Canon relies on fit to resist moisture intrusion and it does look like a definite weak spot in that regard. Its not a 1 series camera, and I'd use a cover for any significant wet weather photography. Warranties don't cover water intrusion.

Pretty much same thing here... just checked.