Johnnie Behiri from CineD.com had the chance to interview Katsuyuki Nagai-san, Product Management Director of Image Communication Business at Canon Europe and flat out asked about the marketing and perception that both the EOS R5 and EOS R6 aren't true hybrid cameras.
Johnnie also touches on hacks as a workaround for the overheating and cooldown times, as well as the notion Canon purposely crippled these cameras to protect the Cinema EOS line.
A snippet from the interview:
Johnnie – CineD: To some people, it seemed as if Canon was trying to protect their professional EOS camera line by restricting recording times. That might have caused some trust issues between potential customers and the company. Is there anything you would like to highlight in order to reassure people that whatever was done, was not intentional but to technically protect the camera?
Katsuyuki Nagai-san – Canon: This is an accusation we’ve seen before which belongs on the conspiracy theory pile. It is simply not a sensible business idea as users are more likely to switch to competitor systems than buy a much more expensive camera to get a certain feature.
Read the full interview at CineD.com
I get that people want to extend recording times for 8K/30 and 4k/120. I suggest that waiting for Canon's firmware release with lower bitrates (probably compression/Cinema raw light) and externally recording wth no cards will increase record times for those desperately needing it. If that isn't good enough then there will be hardware hacks with drilling holes and peltier coolers etc for a specific use case - otherwise get another 8k video camera that does the job they want.
The main thing for me is short clips for 8k raw (30 fps frame grabs) or maybe some 4k/120 short clips but HD/120 would be enough without triggering overheating. It works to specifications and I am happy to live within them. Just waiting for H265 hardware acceleration to be available before upgrading my PC
1. the idea of a hybrid camera, in the R5/R6 is pretty good.
2.Canon dropped the ball on what it can do. The marketing was wrong and misleading
3. We do look at other manufacturers and we do feel like canon could make something a little more inline with what content creators want
E.g. longer record time, really great 1080 and 4K without having to be limited in anyways, A GOOD AUDIO SOLUTION and a decent dynamic range.
I do feel that the camera(s) that the have released are great and check many of the boxes we wanted but those cameras did Mia the mark slightly. The glass and auto focus are great. The ability to navigate through the menus are great but those aspects alone won’t make us not look at Sony. I love canon but Sony is listening. Like why no 1080p 120 or 240 frames. That’s easy to do through firmware.
I wish canon would stop “anticipating” what we want and actually listen to what we want
4.These are great cameras. Great hybrid cameras and we are happy Canon made them.
5. we are still waiting for ourCanon holy grail camera for creators. One that looks good and doesn’t have many “artificial” limitations.
A camera we can be proud to endorse to other creators and friends without having to give a disclaimer before recommending the camera.
#2. The R5 performs to specifications. The marketing wasn't wrong. It was accurate but the 6 month hype blew expectations out the window. No other hybrid camera can do 20 minutes of 8K raw. Future firmware with reduced bit rates may allow external recording with no cards and perhaps some additional record time. How much is enough for you is your expectation.
#3. If you want unlimited video and audio then buy a video camera. R5 has unlimited 4K but not unlimited HQ4K. There has been no complaints about DR and CLOG is available
HD/120 is coming in the next firmware release. HD/240 is not easy and requires readout speeds which the R5's sensor probably can't do. Get a camera with a smaller sensor that can do it if you need it.
#5. There is no "holy grail"... that's the definition of "holy grail". Work within the limitations of what is available.
I don't need to recommend any camera to anyone. My R5 works for me and maybe doesn't work for you. I am proud of my work with it and that is all I need.
Artificial limitations are only limited by your expectations of what you think it should be. The only artificial limitation I can see is the 29:59 limit but that doesn't exist with external recording.
Roger Cicala's teardown/thermal imaging provides some unbiased information and you can make of it what you like but I appreciate the time he put into it for everyone.
Shamelessly copying another contributor's brilliant summary of the R5 marketing announcements...
Internet: Canon could never put 8K full frame in to a mirrorless camera. They don't have the technical capabilities to do that. The last time they innovated was when 5d mkii was born.
Canon: Our next 5 series will have 8K and demonstrate what we are capable of.
Internet: (spits coffee on screen) Yeah right. Maybe 8K timelapse mode
Canon: No, 8K video
Internet: Er no, 8K like 15 second movie burst mode then, because you know overheating would happen in such a small body. Do Canon engineers not know anything about physics? That's why refrigerators exist....
Canon: No full 8K video
Internet: Yeah right.... hahaha. It's not possible. So no AF or IBIS then. You won't be able to use the full technologies of the camera/
Canon: No. 8K Full frame, AF and IBIS enabled.
Internet: It's not possible, because you know.... overheating is a thing with technology in such a small package. If it was possible then Sony would have done it.
Canon: Hold our beer.....
Post launch
Internet: I demand a full unconditional apology from Canon. I demand immediately that they give us unlimited 8K full frame video for $4.99 and stop hiding behind this "overheating" scenario to protect their other cameras. I’ve never felt so personally insulted by a camera company as I have by Canon. To me honest behaviour is very important. I recognize that the only person that is perfect is me and people make mistakes. The important thing is to admit that and not to sell us totally unusable technology like this…
ok you guys missed the fact that I praised these two cameras but had a few small griefs with the camera. I love canon and will always love canon. All of my cameras have been canon but that doesn’t negate the fact that canon could have made this a more useable video camera at the price point of ~$4K.The focus should have been put on the HQ 4K and the camera being stable in many conditions as most of their cameras have been,
It's not about loving Canon. I am used to a Canon system and it would be painful to change. Even moving to RF has been painful enough for me with just 1 RF lens (so far). There is nothing that I need that my system that another system would make it worthwhile to move. I am amazed how many people state that they are changing systems. Underwater housings are really expensive so I am in for the long haul with the R5!
The future second hand market for R5 will be a concern due to potential overheated circuitry. Even the Canon Australia 5 year warranty won't cover that.
The R5 will push Sony/Nikon etc to have better options and perhaps address the R5's limitations... or perhaps they won't push the performance limits to avoid poor publicity about thermal limits. Or maybe the youtubers will change their mind like they did from "the R6's 20mp is not competitive" to "you can take great shots with 12mp in the A7Siii - it isn't all about mp"
But you seem to ignore that in order to improve upon these limitations while still keeping the same price point, something else would have had to be less developed. The IBIS, AF, sensor and stills speed are all literally best in class. The weather sealing seems to be up there as well. For high res video, there's plenty of options that no longer require a massive crop. These are the aspects that are most interesting to the majority of the market. Making compromises on the design or cost of these aspects in order to manage heat better, which only limits a subset of the video modes in the first place, is not such a logical thing as you make it out to be.
Please don't see this post as rejecting your criticism. It isn't. The R5 has aspects worth criticizing. A good Form of criticism is constructive criticism. But that is only good, if the suggestion on how to improve the critized aspect is a valid and well thought out advice. Much of what you can read on this subject does not fall into this category.
The issue is not saying that the R5 has limitations that cause it to be ill suited for certain applications (your personal work flow, for example). The issue is saying that as a fact it could have been something better. Maybe you know your stuff and can elaborate. But you also have to understand that there have been a lot of armchair engineers that made the forum at large weary.
they actually HAVE to anticipate what customers want because it's just not possible to give them what people say they want on internet forums. Not at the price level the R5 is at (if we just forget about the crazy pricing here that is). They made a camera that easily outperforms the competition only to have the internet compare its 8K capabilities to the 4K capabilities of a similarly priced low-resolution video-specialized body from a competitor. Had Canon done it the other way, giving us a body with less-than-8K video and resolution to match that while outperforming the video-oriented MILCs, the very same people would instead be comparing it to a high-resolution body with video specs that are close enough for most (so 4K30) and complaining about the low resolution.
Or they could have made it better and let the body size as well as the price go up significantly and everyone would be complaining about that.
Just listening to customers does not really work. Of course they keep tabs on what people say they want on various forums but they also need to anticipate the things that people don't say they want because they simply don't know they want it yet. If they hadn't anticipated it, we still would have no 8K. We wouldn't have the impressive lenses. People said they wanted small cameras, that this was the reason for mirrorless. They then did not buy those small cameras in enough numbers to keep those systems alive because that was not really what they wanted and needed in the end, they just hadn't figured that out yet.
I know it's a made up quote and Henry Ford never actually said it, but: “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.”
I wish you (and some others) stop presuming what others want as if they were the only voice to listen to...
This is just reading from the card so I would expect even more heat when writing.