EOS 5D Mark IV
- Oct 18, 2011
See, not nice at all
I'm talking about low heat temperature burns from prolonged skin contact. Is that not a design constraint?---
At around 5 watts consumption for the ARM Cortex A5 and another 10 watts for the RAM over 16 hours you are looking at about 35 Celcius to 45 Celcius (120 F) at the stainless steel plate side of things which is a tad warm but not overly so, assuming the plate was at least 2 cm by 2 cm and 5mm thick.
Canon can use the camera tripod mounting plate as the out-to-air heat dissipation item. Just make it 2x2 cm or 3cm by 3cm and at least 5mm to 1 cm thick using high nickel content stainless steel (i.e. I would use 316L Grade Stainless Steel which is very corrosion resistant and has HIGH HEAT transfer capability)
Attached to an internal set of heat sinks that combined thermal dissipation and tripod mounting plate would basically let the camera work for the 12 to 16 hour days typical of news reporters, sports photographers and documentary videographers. I could do a thermal analysis and get a full thermal profile in about 48 hours if I wanted to change say a 1Dx3 over to an R5 sensor and a more powerful Octo-core CPU!
I know its easy to joke this away but there is a bigger picture here imagine there is a poster that an admin takes a dislike too they change the posters words to insult or be abusive to ligitimise a ban. We trust that would never happen right?That's frowned upon
Sure they do but this site and ones like it are privately owned, there is no ‘right‘ for the users to be able to speak nor for there opinions to be accurately represented. We choose to be here and if we don’t like the way we are monitored or the way the site is run we can delete our posts and leave.I know its easy to joke this away but there is a bigger picture here imagine there is a poster that an admin takes a dislike too they change the posters words to insult or be abusive to ligitimise a ban. We trust that would never happen right?
Nonetheless, we can also express our opinions about a situation.Sure they do but this site and ones like it are privately owned, there is no ‘right‘ for the users to be able to speak nor for there opinions to be accurately represented. We choose to be here and if we don’t like the way we are monitored or the way the site is run we can delete our posts and leave.
So I can tell you right now, as much as I want a massive resolution increase over the current 1DXIII, it will prevent many photographers from buying it. Unless Canon comes out with a better alternative to cRAW and allows us to shoot in smaller, more preferred resolutions, I and many others will struggle to justify making this our $6,000+ camera in the bag.
I was one of the first photographers in "my little slice" of the publishing industry that bought the R5. Several friends waited for my results before they pulled the trigger themselves and many of them shared my same criticism - 'I don't need 45mp to cover a race/event/wedding/real estate, etc.' I was quick to identify this and purchased the R6 to partner with my R5. Weddings in particular don't benefit from 45mp, it's more of a burden than anything else. At least in motorsports photography I can use that resolution for additional flexibility for cropping, in print or advertisement...but there is zero value in a 8192 x 5464 pixel dancefloor shot or cake cutting, so I lean on the R6 after the portrait session has concluded.
This is something many of us identify as a shortcoming of the R5 and it's rather upsetting. I hope that Canon reconsiders the importance of cRAW and can bring back an mRAW format that keeps things in the 12-15 and 20-26mp sweet spots. The argument of always shooting at the maximum resolution isn't exactly true for all of us. When I cover events I can shoot thousands of images a day for 3-4 days at a time and have to turn those around same day...and I still want the benefits of RAW, just not the resolution or file size. Yes, cRAW is roughly the size of a standard 20mp RAW out of the R6, but those images do NOT process easily in software like 20mp, as it chugs along to read the 45mp file format, versus blazing through a normal CR2/CR3 RAW...not sure why, but please give us back smaller RAW.
The forum is d.o.o.m.e.d
Seriously though, altering peoples 'words' without any sort of marker or disclaimer is a pretty sh!tty move in my opinion.
Edit: Wow, even putting spaces in between is not enough! It got changed to 'the greatest'. If there has to be censorship, at least mark it as such, instead of secretly changing the opinion people are expressing into the opposite!
I'm talking about low heat temperature burns from prolonged skin contact. Is that not a design constraint?
It's interesting to see your thoughtful post, Harry. But I don't think that you can rely on any camera to be put on a tripod in order to disapate enough heat to make it a needed element to cool an otherwise too-warm camera. The reason is that it will often not be put on a tripod and then you are back to square 1. Canon could have routed their inner R5 heat sink metal strips to the tripod socket, but to my recollection the lensrentals teardown indicated that they did not bother to do so.--
In North America, UL (Underwriters Laboratories) and CSA (Canadian Standards Association) would normally take a look to see if the operation of a camera would cause a big hazard and either label said item a true hazard requiring engineering changes OR they would suggest specific warnings.
In my opinion, adding a simple removable silicone rubber cover with tiny holes in it to a heat dissipation plate that is part of the camera/tripod mount system would be a VIABLE SOLUTION to heat removal issues.
When mounted to a tripod, the plate would act as designed removing heat to the atmosphere via simple thermal radiation. With a silicone rubber cover on, the user can handle the camera as normal with only a general warning to users needed.
35 to 45 Celcius is definitely doable in a consumer product IF the rubber cover was installed for handheld use OR a secondary heat plate guard that had extra space between it and the user was installed. I do believe MOST USERS would move their hands out of the way as temps on the heat dissipation plates got to 35+ Celcius so I don't see that as being a huge safety issue.
I mean the biggest feature of the A1 far and above is the electronic shutter that enables 1/200 s flash sync. That e shutter is the main draw.
But as long as the R1 can replicate or improve upon that (we all hope for a global shutter) then I would say that Canon is not the best.
No need for a shutter to fail if there is no mechanical shutter ie if they implement a global shutterWhat do you think of the size of a 1 series grip larger than the R5 yet smaller than the DSLR 1's? That's how I envision the body size of a mirrorless 1 series. Dual orientation, larger battery, moderate mp's (30+ but not over 45) tough as nails with more than 500k+ shutter actuations.