There are still surprises in store for the Canon EOS R5 announcement [CR2]

Chz

EOS 90D
Nov 19, 2014
157
53
Having the camera in manual mode, and setting ISO to auto only has very few use cases.

You will have to manually control the exposure with Exposure Compensation to keep it from blowing out highlights when it cannot go lower than 100 (50) ISO. It means the auto ISO only helps you if you deliberately keep your ISO around a much higher number, absolutely don't want another shutter speed, absolutely need to keep background blur, ánd don't have vastly changing conditions.

For most pictures I find dynamic range and noise much more important than background blur or shutter speed. So I'd use Av or Tv. It's such a small area of use cases that ISO is actually not important.
Simple. Increase the shutter speed if ISO is at it’s lowest value. In manual mode, I can control the DOF I want and the shutter speed to ensure no motion blur.
 

Kit.

EOS 5D Mark IV
Apr 25, 2011
1,919
1,262
To call it ’manual’ when the camera is setting one parameter is a misnomer, how can manual mode without auto iso and manual mode with auto iso be called the same thing?
The same as with two Av modes and two Tv modes.

There actually appears to be conflicting information on how DGO works from Canon. TDP has a quote from Canon's last digital event about it, that suggests to me the two image halfes are involved. Which also seemingly contradicts their other marketing. And of course, he only mentions that there are no temporal artifacts, but stay quiet about those from parallax.

"How does it do that? Each pixel on the sensor is split into two different diodes. Those diodes are always taking two frames of the exact same image. Now for Dual Pixel autofocus, it's using those two frames for phase detection. However, the Canon engineers realized that they can use those two different frames and value them at different gains in order to expand the dynamic range. And so what is happening here is that off of diode A you have one image that is low gain and low noise. Off of diode B you're getting a frame that is of higher gain, but it satisfies the pixel's need for saturation. So, these two separate frames that are of the same image of the exact same point in time but at two separate gains are combined and then dumped out of the sensor. Because these frames are of the exact same point in time and of the exact same image, there is absolutely zero temporal artifacting happening in this" (Source)
Ah, "Paul Hawxhurst, senior professional market specialist".

One would be better asking engineers.

Of course it's possible that the existence of the follow up is an indirect way for Canon to say "we have put out false information in the past". But I would like to see a more technical description of how it actually works. Do they really amplydy each diode twice? So, both diodes per pixel, amplify each twice, combine the two high amp values, combine the two low amp values and then merge those two for the HDR output? Or is it different? I am mostly just curious. But if it does indeed come with parallax artifacts due to amplifying the two halves differently, I can't see it coming to stills.
I don't see how it could be different if they still want their DPAF to work in the areas where the higher-gain ADC overflows.
 

Kit.

EOS 5D Mark IV
Apr 25, 2011
1,919
1,262
I wonder that too. You didn’t answer my question though, if M and M mode with auto iso are not the same thing why should they both be called manual? Or put another way, if the camera is setting one of the three metrics for EV how is that manual?
It's not fully manual anyway. The camera still does autofocus and automatic film advance. And automatic white balance too.

The M mode is about manually setting aperture and shutter speed. It has no notion of ISO. ISO, to some degree, could be fixed later in processing. Even with some slide films, such as Fuji RMS.

ISO dial in manual mode is little more than awkward "WYSIWYG EVF brightness" dial, especially with an ISO invariant sensor.

But wether you agree on the definition of manual is irrelevant, in your definition (with auto iso) you still only need three dials, one for aperture, ss, and EC, in my definition (actual manual) you need three dials, one for aperture, ss and iso. There is no combination of exposure modes where you need four dials so from an ergonomics point of view it is redundant and inefficient. Even with only two dials changing any of the four metrics can be done effortlessly with one hand and a couple of digits, maybe that’s why they do it like that?
Actually, as film Rebels were showing, one dial is enough.

If it is in the R5, we certainly will hear more about it next week. Somehow I don't feel like it will be in there though.
At the moment, I wouldn't expect DGO in a 8K passively cooled camera.
 
Last edited:

Kit.

EOS 5D Mark IV
Apr 25, 2011
1,919
1,262
Having the camera in manual mode, and setting ISO to auto only has very few use cases.
Even one use case would warrant its existence:

Given a known subject magnification:
Aperture for subject's depth of view (like, head size), shutter speed for subject's movement speed, and ISO for "ETTR".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chz

koenkooi

EOS R
Feb 25, 2015
1,168
961
Even one use case would warrant its existence:

Given a known subject magnification:
Aperture for subject's depth of view (like, head size), shutter speed for subject's movement speed, and ISO for "ETTR".
That's how I used it last week, I have a sequence of shots of a dragonfly perching on a weed in "high" speed continuous (RP, so "high" is relative) where ISO bounced between 200 and 2500 due cloud movement.

ISO 2000

20200628-IMG_2763.jpg


ISO 800

20200628-IMG_2758.jpg


Seeing them side by side I notice that I forgot to match the white balance between the two. With the small AF point and evaluative metering I rarely had to tweak EC or fix ISO to get a decent exposure. I'm way too used to using flash for macro, so not doing 1/sync speed, f/11 and ISO100 is a huge change and takes more mental effort than it should right now.
 
Nov 3, 2014
698
507
I wonder that too. You didn’t answer my question though, if M and M mode with auto iso are not the same thing why should they both be called manual? Or put another way, if the camera is setting one of the three metrics for EV how is that manual?

But wether you agree on the definition of manual is irrelevant, in your definition (with auto iso) you still only need three dials, one for aperture, ss, and EC, in my definition (actual manual) you need three dials, one for aperture, ss and iso. There is no combination of exposure modes where you need four dials so from an ergonomics point of view it is redundant and inefficient. Even with only two dials changing any of the four metrics can be done effortlessly with one hand and a couple of digits, maybe that’s why they do it like that?
Hate to interject but I'd like to see a unique "manual with auto ISO" mode just like Auto Aperture and Auto Shutter speed so that you can use the same control sytem for all three semi-auto modes. Apologize if someone already said that. Canon backed onto the current system and It's clunky. The are clearly enough users operating in auto ISO to justify a new mode. If it was a mode you'd be able to switch between them with a single action.

edit: ....without having to reset the ISO.
 
Last edited:

koenkooi

EOS R
Feb 25, 2015
1,168
961
Hate to interject but I'd like to see a unique "manual with auto ISO" mode just like Auto Aperture and Auto Shutter speed so that you can use the same control sytem for all three semi-auto modes. Apologize if someone already said that. Canon backed onto the current system and It's clunky. The are clearly enough users operating in auto ISO to justify a new mode. If it was a mode you'd be able to switch between them with a single action.
The printless mode dial on the R and M6II would allow for new and/or custom modes. And for renaming C1/C2/C3, maybe even with your own icons. A spider icon would be a lot clearer to me than 'C1'.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vjlex

SteveC

R5
Sep 3, 2019
1,122
888
And if it isn’t then why Canon put the M on the mode dial??? The M has always been Manual since the film day as Degios said. Adding Auto ISO doesn’t mean the M is no longer the case. You still have independent aperture and shutter speed adjustments.

Again, you are missing the point or just ignored my use case. I prefer to have dedicated dial for each of the triangle (Aperture/ShutterSpeed/ISO). Plus 1 for exposure compensation. I set the mode dial to M (Look up the user manual for definition if you like) and ISO to Auto. I set my preferred Shutter speed and Aperture. it’s much quicker for me to fine tune the exposure by turning the exposure compensation dial. You may prefer to change the ISO setting from Auto but first you need to check what is the ‘current’ ISO value then pump it up and down to get the exposure you want. Then you have to move the ISO back to Auto. Where I simply turn the exposure compensation up or down for the shot then turn it back to the ‘0’ on the metering indicator.
Your first paragraph made me think of something...that may be related to your point.

There's a Tv (or S, on some cameras) mode for the shutter speed.

There's an Av (or A, on some cameras) mode for the aperture.

but there is NO Iv or I mode. One can fake it by going to P and nailing the ISO in place and letting the other two go auto, I suppose, and it's certainly doable in Fv mode as well.

I don't think I've taken my M6-II OUT of Fv mode since I got it. Eventually I'll probably define a C1 or C2, I suppose.
 
Nov 3, 2014
698
507
The printless mode dial on the R and M6II would allow for new and/or custom modes. And for renaming C1/C2/C3, maybe even with your own icons. A spider icon would be a lot clearer to me than 'C1'.
Custom modes are great but switching to a custom mode resets a lot more than just the top level EV mode which may mean having to reset even more functions than the current method. Plus, I hate to give up a custom mode just for that. I don't have an R so I'm not sure what Fv is all about.

IMO "Manual with Auto ISO' in no different than Av and T and should be treated the same. Somebody more clever than me can come up with a name for it.

edit; functionally it's not a big deal, it's more of an aethetic thing I suppose. Overall the control system on Canon's DSLR's is excellent IMO. Hope they don't screw it up for the new R's. The fact that we haven't seen the top/back of the R6 makes me a little nervous.

Mode "G" for auto gain might work. If anybody at Canon is reading this you can thank me with a complimentary R5 and a nice selection of RF lenses. ;)
 
Last edited:

koenkooi

EOS R
Feb 25, 2015
1,168
961
[..] I don't have an R so I'm not sure what Fv is all about.[..]
The basic form:
  • Back wheel cycles between selecting shutter speed, aperture, exposure compensation and ISO
  • Front wheel changes the thing you selected with the back wheel
  • Trashcan resets the selected thing to 'auto' (or 0 for EC)
Leaving everything in auto and selecting aperture makes it equivalent to 'Av', setting that back to auto and selecting shutter speed, that's the same as 'Tv', etc.
I still can't wrap my head around it, I'm too used to moving my thumb over one wheel and moving the mode dial. And the trashcan button is too far away. All this can be fixed by using it exclusively for a week or so and remapping a few buttons, but I haven't found the motivation for that yet.
 
Nov 3, 2014
698
507
The basic form:
  • Back wheel cycles between selecting shutter speed, aperture, exposure compensation and ISO
  • Front wheel changes the thing you selected with the back wheel
  • Trashcan resets the selected thing to 'auto' (or 0 for EC)
Leaving everything in auto and selecting aperture makes it equivalent to 'Av', setting that back to auto and selecting shutter speed, that's the same as 'Tv', etc.
I still can't wrap my head around it, I'm too used to moving my thumb over one wheel and moving the mode dial. And the trashcan button is too far away. All this can be fixed by using it exclusively for a week or so and remapping a few buttons, but I haven't found the motivation for that yet.
Thanks. Interesting idea. I'd have to give it a try but my muscle memory for the existing system is pretty strong. I'd have to see a benefit to want to change and I'm not sure that I could while I was also using Canon DSLR's.
 

canonnews

EOS RP
Dec 27, 2017
665
1,037
Canada
www.canonnews.com
There actually appears to be conflicting information on how DGO works from Canon. TDP has a quote from Canon's last digital event about it, that suggests to me the two image halfes are involved. Which also seemingly contradicts their other marketing. And of course, he only mentions that there are no temporal artifacts, but stay quiet about those from parallax.

"How does it do that? Each pixel on the sensor is split into two different diodes. Those diodes are always taking two frames of the exact same image. Now for Dual Pixel autofocus, it's using those two frames for phase detection. However, the Canon engineers realized that they can use those two different frames and value them at different gains in order to expand the dynamic range. And so what is happening here is that off of diode A you have one image that is low gain and low noise. Off of diode B you're getting a frame that is of higher gain, but it satisfies the pixel's need for saturation. So, these two separate frames that are of the same image of the exact same point in time but at two separate gains are combined and then dumped out of the sensor. Because these frames are of the exact same point in time and of the exact same image, there is absolutely zero temporal artifacting happening in this" (Source)

Do you have a better source for how Canon has pulled off DGO? I would be very interested, as the marketing I've seen seems somewhat lacking as far as proper explanations go.
this is what i read to.

however canon europe says that DGO is compatible with DPAF - which seems to indicate it's two separate things.

There's an image, going around that shows DGO - and it's implying that the SAME pixel is NOT read twice - I don't even think that is possible - you'd need a memory cell.
Drafts_2020-04-20_at_13.12.21_2x-500x312.jpeg


but .. yes, my mistake on thinking they did the halfs - I guess I read that wrong as well since it certainly seems to be another way of doing it. I'm not sure how applicable this is to stills, but I'm sure canon's pulling off some magic there.
 

Joules

EOS R
Jul 16, 2017
910
1,007
Hamburg, Germany
however canon europe says that DGO is compatible with DPAF - which seems to indicate it's two separate things.

There's an image, going around that shows DGO - and it's implying that the SAME pixel is NOT read twice - I don't even think that is possible - you'd need a memory cell.
View attachment 191113
Thanks for that image! I guess it is from the video of the last digital event? Without context it does suggest to me that the two diodes of the same pixel are indeed amplified differently for DGO. I don't think that being compatible with DPAF means they aren't using different gains for the two diodes in each pixel for DGO. I guess for AF they still have the ability to simply amplify them equally. Obviously the image may oversimplify things. But if that is how they do it, I'm curious how they deal with artifacts if they do release a stills version.
 

privatebydesign

I don't preorder, I'm not a paid beta tester!
Jan 29, 2011
8,824
2,752
120
Hate to interject but I'd like to see a unique "manual with auto ISO" mode just like Auto Aperture and Auto Shutter speed so that you can use the same control sytem for all three semi-auto modes. Apologize if someone already said that. Canon backed onto the current system and It's clunky. The are clearly enough users operating in auto ISO to justify a new mode. If it was a mode you'd be able to switch between them with a single action.

edit: ....without having to reset the ISO.
Why not just call it auto iso mode? Calling it manual with auto iso is stupid because it is not manual.

i actually use the mode and like it, but to keep calling it manual when the camera sets the exposure value is rediculous.
 
Nov 3, 2014
698
507
Why not just call it auto iso mode? Calling it manual with auto iso is stupid because it is not manual.
Because the mode is set to manual? I agree it's stupid but that's techically what it is. It is posible to use auto iso when set to other modes (Av, T ) although that would be an odd way to work in my opinion. Of course as soon as I say that somebody will say they do it all the time. I think it should be a separate mode since, as you say, it's not really M if the ISO is floating with the meter but it's still M mode. I'm voting for a new "G" mode for auto gain.
 

privatebydesign

I don't preorder, I'm not a paid beta tester!
Jan 29, 2011
8,824
2,752
120
It’s only “technically what it is” if you believe what is written in a translated manual by somebody that doesn’t know cameras, kinda like “Master and slave flashes” which have now been dropped.

If on the other hand you have an ounce of common sense then manual means the user sets the ss, aperture, and iso. Let’s use some common sense here, if the camera is setting the EV based on its meter it isn’t ’manual’ mode.

As for those saying the camera still does focus and WB so it isn’t manual, well it Only does AF of you tell it to, it only does auto WB if you tell it to, auto iso is the camera working out what to do so by the very definition of the word it isn’t manual.

I wonder how many others like me are out there? I use true M mode, set a manual Kelvin WB and mostly use non auto focus lenses, but that is because those settings are best suited to the majority of what I do. I am happy to use AF, auto WB especially the newer AWBw, and I’ll happily use ‘manual mode‘ with auto iso, but when I do I also understand the camera is setting the EV value and I have to adjust that via EC just as I do in Av and Tv modes. And if I do that I could only possibly ever need three dials to do so because there are only ever three values to change.

To my addled brain if the camera is setting the EV value it isn’t in Manual.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: dcm

canonnews

EOS RP
Dec 27, 2017
665
1,037
Canada
www.canonnews.com
Thanks for that image! I guess it is from the video of the last digital event? Without context it does suggest to me that the two diodes of the same pixel are indeed amplified differently for DGO. I don't think that being compatible with DPAF means they aren't using different gains for the two diodes in each pixel for DGO. I guess for AF they still have the ability to simply amplify them equally. Obviously the image may oversimplify things. But if that is how they do it, I'm curious how they deal with artifacts if they do release a stills version.
I honestly don't know. I'm honestly not sure how they are implementing DGO - and Canon's quite closed mouthed on it.. they usually do whitepapers on stuff like this or even peer research papers, and there's nothing. Other sources cite that Canon is amplifying each pixel twice. which is unusual, and difficult. I'm surprised they can even do it without it being a stacked sensor.