Leaderboard

Just in case anyone missed it here is the hack methodology in full: https://www.eoshd.com/news/this-is-my-canon-eos-r5-recording-8k-video-50-minutes-straight-until-empty-battery-video-evidence/ Here’s what I did during the 50 minutes 8K test: 00:00 – Power on the EOS R5 normal from cold 01:00 – Remove battery card door, camera powers down but power switch remains in “on” position 01:30 – Insert small screw in the battery door sensor as pictured below. Camera turns back on. 02:00 – Set video mode to DCI 8K resolution (IPB codec) to SD card. 02:10 – Hit record 17:00 – Roll to approximately 17 minutes (“overheat” warning icon will be flashing) 17:05 – At this point pull battery during recording 17:15 – With battery disconnected remove SD card and put freshly formatted SD card in the slot instead 17:20 – Push battery back in and power will return, overheat warning is gone and timer is reset 35:00 – Record for another 17 minutes! 50:00 – End of test I could go until the battery died, basically.

Like I said in the article, I have approached everybody I know who works for Canon, and one of them is Michael Bravin, ex-ARRI, so we are not talking about the regional chinless wonder junior sales reps but people who have clout, who could make a difference and who I assume to be ethical people willing to help. Let me tell you... I have got nowhere fast. The same with Canon UK. I believe they are probably just sticking their heads in the sand or probably don't even understand the depth of customer anger there is about this. Or maybe we are a niche who don't make them the extra billions they are targeting so fuck us. Just one of the reason's we've a right to be very angry. Everybody who has spent $4000 on this camera (or even more in many regions) has a right to an honest explanation, and an apology, and most certainly a fix. I do agree that maybe a less harder, pro-corporate position would make for a more harmonious relationship between EOSHD and Canon. But I cannot sacrifice my principals - The right strategy at the moment is to simply carry on speaking the truth to bullshit, with factual evidence to back it up and as many deep technical discoveries as possible ideally with the help of Magic Lantern. We must pool our knowledge. Then Japan can do what the like to be quite honest. The ball has been in their court since day one and will continue to be. If we don't like what they have done, the onus is on us to stop being nice little easily-led consumers and to spend our money elsewhere! Perhaps even in the high end smartphone camera market instead.

Just tried it for a longer video, this time 10:00, to test two splits and it still works. Two perfectly-good .MP4 files, each approx 4GB and 4:41 in length, and an RP with amnesia after powering it back on. The only limitation of this technique is 32GB, since Canon cameras format all cards > 32GB as exFAT, even though FAT32 supports volumes up to 2TB. But there's a workaround for that as well - format the >32GB card on computer instead. Windows 7/10 wont let you format cards > 32GB to FAT32 but there are third-party utilities that will. I just used http://www.ridgecrop.demon.co.uk/index.htm?guiformat.htm on a 64GB card and the camera accepted the card with no complaints. Recording to it right now on my RP to test splits for a very long video. And while Windows wont let you format >32GB cards to FAT32 it will mount them just fine.

Because as an hybrid photo/video shooter in wild/extreme sport environment, it’s the best tool (would be) for the job. It’s an extreme frustration to have to go through what Canon is doing right now, but I would shoot myself hard in the foot if I would use something else should they fix the issue. However I have done my part. Since the 5D3 I stopped shooting Canon and never gave them a cent because of their crippling. I have a dozen people around me who listen to my camera/tech advice (mostly for beginner camera stuff) over the last few years. I all made them buy Nikon for photography and Sony for video. Now for me the R5 is a million step above anything else just because it combines FF + no crop + 4K120 + 10 bit + best ergonomics + 45mpx + best colors + best AF + best in class IBIS. The AF on Panasonic is not usable for me, the Sony you have to carry 2 cameras to have both still and video which I cannot do, and so on. So I am ready to give again Canon my money, if they fix it of course. It sucks what they do, but it would suck more to use anything else. In the end, what matters most is if someone correct is fault or not. I will not forgive them, but I’ll buy the R5 if that software limitation goes away. Let’s be realistic though, I am afraid all they will give us is 50% more recording time and 50% faster recovery or some BS like that. I hope I am wrong.

Late.

I think I've found out why the video playback is blank and the there's no audio. The MP4 header has 'stsz' and 'stco' atoms that are indexes into the actual video and audio data in the mdat atom. Those atoms are used by players/NLEs to correlate time to video/audio frames. Since I copied the entire MP4 header from the "good" video those indexes will be wrong for the "bad" video and have to be rebuilt. I found an open-source tool named uncut that does this (https://github.com/ponchio/untrunc), documentation here. Built and ran it but it wasn't able to find any of the frames in the files. Will be looking into the code to see if it can be tweaked to work on these files

Hurray at least. This is the important thing, that it gets out there and prompts Canon to rescue the situation as they should And that it gets out there credited to the right people, unlike with TONEH, even better. Never under estimate the power of embarrassment! Firmware update in T minus 10,9,8...

I have been a long-time follower of Roger's blog at Lens Rentals, which gives us not just a rare glimpse inside camera gear, but also an expert eye on construction quality, weather sealing and the repairability of it all when you drop it! To celebrate Roger's latest article I had the chance to put some questions his way, to dive into his thoughts on the 600mm, the potential for a 'universal' mirrorless mount and of course the EOS R5 overheating controversy. Read the full blog post and interview here: https://www.eoshd.com/news/an-interview-with-roger-cicala-of-lens-rentals-on-canon-rf-600mm-teardown-and-more/

Daniel I agree 100% We are customers at the end of the day and deserve some respect and to be levelled with in an honest way!! It really drives me up the wall, the fact that I can break all this news on the blog and in Canon's eyes - I AM the villain right?!!? ME! The guy who said Canon had finally turned a corner, rushed out to give them my hard earned £4200 only to find all my worst suspicious were true. The fact they have not apologised to me or to customers like you after all this investment is a DISGRACE. If a class action happens I would support it 1000% I cannot believe the depth of stupidity at the senior management level in Japan. Why do they feel it is ok to release a product with an "official overheating problem" let alone an artificial one?! It would be industrial level sabotage if it wasn't so self inflicted. I cannot believe how slow they have been to respond with an apology and promise to investigate and fix the firmware. They are actually standing their ground on this?? WHY? Out of fear they might lose a few sales in a niche business division that deals with expensive camcorders? The EOS business is surely bigger and should be pulling the strings, not the other way round.

Made a lot of progress on understanding the .DAT files. Using my Canon RP as a test bed, I recorded two 1:00 videos, one regularly and the other power-interrupted. I then copied the entire SD card for each case as a file image to my system for analysis. Prior to recording video each SD was prepared by fully wiping it with dd, then formatting in the camera. I also went back to FAT32 because it's easier to analyze those structures than exFAT. This yields two very similar filesystem images. For the regularly-recorded video SD image I see a single data file (MVI_0478.MP4 in this specific case). However if I analyze the directory entries in the FAT32 structure I see a second file that's been deleted, named ?VI_047.DAT. The '?' is there because the file has been deleted (0xE5 is the FAT32 marker to indicate a deleted directory entry), meaning its original name is MVI_0478.DAT. Even though MVI_0478.DAT has been deleted its FAT32 cluster location and most-recent file size is still available in the directory entry. Looking at the contents of the .DAT I see an "mdat" field. This is the raw MP4 data holding the video/data of the video - it's called an "mdat atom" in MP4 container parlance. The size of the .DAT file is exactly 128KB less than the size of the .MP4. What's more, the on-SD location of the .DAT is exactly 128KB after the .MP4, which means the two files are actually contiguous with each other. So the camera wrote the .DAT first (while recording the video) but left 128KB before it pre-allocated in the FAT32 cluster table. When the video recording stopped it then wrote the 128KB before the .DAT, which contains all the other MP4 atoms necessary to represent the file, including the 'moov atom' which was reported missing when trying to recover the .DAT as .MP4 earlier using open-source recovery tools (failed because it's missing the full 128KB .MP4 header). The 128KB MP4 container header stuff + mdat atom content represents the full MP4 file. So the .DAT files we're seeing for the interrupted recordings on the R5 are the actual raw video/audio data sans the proper 128KB MP4 header area. On my Canon RP the .DAT directory entry is missing for the interrupt recording. However if I go to the location on the interrupted-SD image as where the .DAT file exists on the good-SD image I see the mdat data. So it appears that on my RP the camera writes to this area during recording without first setting the directory entry to reflect that area is allocated. If you're able to see the .DAT files from your 1DX that means the behavior of that camera is different. Not sure how the R5 acts. Either way, recovering the .DAT file for my RP is trivial because I know what cluster it begins on by comparing it to the good-SD image. I found the .DAT area on the interrupted-SD image and spliced in the 128KB MP4 header from the .MP4 from the good image. The file plays...and I hear a quick snippet of sound, but no video. So there is work to do there. But at least it demonstrates the basic integrity of the full MP4 is in place. To get this working on R5 images we'd have to determine how to build the proper 128KB MP4 container header, the same as how the camera builds it when the user ends a video recording. This might be as simple as splicing from a "good" .MP4 image, but probably requires a lot more effort, and then graft that 128KB header data with the the .DAT file to reconstruct the full .MP4

It has yet to be proven that 8K RAW goes indefinitely, but yes it is very impressive hardware. There may be thermal throttling or lock-ups somewhere during long sessions, we don't know - but what is now proven without a shadow of a doubt is how artificial the 15 minute limit is and how it counts down on a timer rather than a high maximum temperature cut off point. My opinion gets stronger every day that all this is about segmenting it from the Cinema EOS cameras. But we all know this is a stupid business decision, because most Cinema EOS camera owners wanted to buy an EOS R5 as a b-cam, second body, third body, handheld rig, you name it. In my opinion Canon seems to want to sell every professional shooter a minimum of 2 very expensive cameras for the same shoot - one single hybrid camera at $4000 plus very expensive high margin optics is not enough it seems. Shoot stills? Buy EOS R5. Shoot video? Buy C500 Mark II. Shoot both. Buy both. Yup it is terrible for us who just want to buy the EOS R5 for it's amazing hardware and cinematic images. We're always the one to get screwed it seems. This is why Canon, in my opinion, has been losing video users for years. It is faulty thinking, throughout the company. I don't know which part of Canon is most to blame - USA or Japan? Both? EOS or Cinema? Maybe both? Or do the EOS guys secretly really dislike the politics that the Cinema business has brought to the company and the restrictions it has placed on their products and all the stupid segmentation? Either way, they must change. I am up to 1 hour of 8K H.265 which is very special from a 45MP full frame sensor. It makes it even more frustrating that Canon has turned it into a lemon then! If Canon chose to lie to their customers about limitations on a $700 consumer camera that was boring and unexciting, the passion wouldn't quite be as strong to uncover the truth and fix it... That it is a very expensive flagship camera and the first of its kind in the world, makes it a hugely emotional topic for me & you, and rightly so.

Exactly - if nothing to hide, come out and say it... I honestly think they fear the legal consequences of this. And are uncertain on how to proceed policy wise. Canon are a big committee and do not move quickly on important decisions. It seems obvious to us - Just apologise and fix the problem, give us the impressive camera hardware as the engineers intended it and not crippled version with a firmware timer. For $4000 we are within our rights to request it. But to Canon it is probably all out political nuclear war and all sorts of manager arguments, in multiple departments and even multiple regions. I am sure some in the company are absolutely ashamed of what has happened. But they are not going to go above the level of the CEO and come out and say it publicly. Hierarchies are VERY strict in corporations, especially Japanese ones. We should give them yet more time to respond. It may be that Canon choose to ignore all their customers for 1-2 months completely and then just spring a firmware update on us. Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me if we never get an apology or really any honest answers.

On Friday, I received a message from the lead developer at Magic Lantern. An interesting theory was being put forward by one of their open source contributors, which he believed could defeat the so-called overheat timer on the Canon EOS R5. Initially I was skeptical as to whether it would work! Mainly because the initial real-world tests on my own EOS R5 did not reset the timer. But then, a break-through. Magic Lantern just became Magic Screw! Read the full blog post here: https://www.eoshd.com/news/canon-eos-r5-so-called-overheat-timer-defeated-by-a-single-screw-in-battery-door/

You sir win the internet today. I just tried it on my Canon RP, which like the R5 forgets any changes to the camera's settings (like exposure settings) if you pull the battery in the middle of the recording but will remember the changed settings if you stop a recording normally. Procedure: Tape down the door sensor and leave the door open so the battery is accessible Put a 32GB card in the camera and Turn the camera on and format the card. It will automatically use FAT32 cards with a capacity <= 32GB Start a video recording, in this case I used 4K 24P, which has an average total video/audio bitrate of 14.43 MB/s. Shoot a video whose length will exceed 4GB. For my 4K 24P that's any video longer than just under 5:00. I shot one for exactly 5:00 Pull the battery Check the card and verify there's a single .MP4 file Reinsert the battery and verify the camera "forgot" the previous session's settings We know the camera saves its settings whenever it has successfully recorded a video. The question is whether @Jn- idea will avoid that save for the FAT32-case of splitting up a video file at 4GB/each (FAT32 limit), provided we still pull the battery at the end of the recording. In other words, will the camera save NVRAM for each intermediate 4GB-split file or only for the final file after properly stopping a recording? Drumroll...It works! My RP's aperture was f/4 when I turned it on for step #3. I changed it to f/11 for the test. After reinserting the battery my RP's aperture reverted back to f/4! Andrew, please test this ASAP on your R5 and see if it matches my RP's behavior of forgetting the settings, the most important of which is of course the thermal timer.

Screw Canon. Waiting for the Sony or Panny

Whilst the hope is that Canon will fix this properly, the probe app (which we made after the temperature monitoring one) can be used to restore the majority of user preferences, not a big deal to get it to chain them into one big faux preset to send back to the camera.

Canon deserves a good hammering in court.

Unfortunately, maybe it is the case. In the stills foruns that I look, people are giving a damn about the issue and just wanting to know when they could buy it. Only chance is a class action suit - japanese people do not like that kind of thing.

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 A CLASSIC.

I'm sorry, but this just isn't the case. People buy C-line video cameras for a plethora of reasons and for many use cases there's no way they would swap out a full-control, fully specified professional cine camera for a hybrid body. The form factor of a hybrid just wouldn't cut it in a wide range of professional working situations. Codecs, resolution and so on are important, but they really are only one part of the considerations that apply to choosing a working tool.

We already have 5K in the GH5. There's only one mode that uses it, but it's there and is used for downscaling in most of the other modes of course. I'm much more interested in a camera that does 4K and 1080p better. I'd take Dual-ISO or eND over any increase in resolution any day of the week. We already have 400Mbps 4K 422 10-bit ALL-I, there aren't many people who can claim much benefit for a "better" output file than that, especially considering that the 4K killer mode is also already downsampled. EOSHD seems to be one of the most technically savvy and demanding community of GH5 users and have a look at how we're delivering. Resolution is not the answer.

Signed and shared. Considering putting money on advertising it as well. I don’t like the description though, it’s not strong enough. You should say there that It has now been demonstrated that the R5 limitations are based on a timer and that with simple tweeks the R5 can record 8K and any video mode for much longer than advertised. Those artificial limitations are an insult to us customers and we require a software fix and nothing else (not a press release or whatever pure BS from Canon as said in the petition).

Whoever is saying that... ask them which camera they specifically like... then ask if that camera is on Netflix's approved list. Then if they dont know.... point it out that the Panasonic S1H is.... who is stupid now?

Did you miss the Sigma L mount 85mm F1.4? Looks great.

Hold on a minute and listen. We do not have a monster at all. It remains crippled. And in dire need of a firmware update. The actually reliable video modes are line skipped mush. But most of all think about your principals. It pisses me off to be honest when a company has been shown to cheat their customers, but then the customer just goes "ah what the heck" and rewards them anyway to the tune of 4 grand. If you really feel strongly about the fact that Canon have lied, or have even been "tricky bastards" - why would you then rush out to reward them for that with $4000 on a new camera?

At the end of my video linked above I am showing a neat trick that I found out. If the overheating timer shows 00:00 it is still possible to start recording within a few seconds. Here's how: Power down the R5 normally. Press the record button and keep pressing it the whole time. Switch on the R5, and as soon as it finishes its startup process It will start recording. Once it starts recording you can stop pressing the record button. I am showing this a couple of times at the end of my video linked above. This leads me to believe that the overheating timer was slapped on in the last instance of the development process, at least the timer procedure kicks in very late in the startup process, after reading out user commands apparently. Very odd. The trick is not very useful though, it only records for a couple of seconds to at most a minute. It appears the overheating timers are very precise, the time it records before it shuts down due to 'overheating' correlates with the time since the previous time it shuts down from overheating.

This was obviously focused separately from the prime lens. There doesn't seem to be any mechanism for synchronizing focus with a prime lens. Dual focus didn't die out until the late 60s, especially in Japan. I remember seeing an interview with Kurosawa's DP talking about how they had to have two ACs pulling focus on Yojimbo because of the double focus set-up. This lens was probably used with 50mm lenses and up. Probably 75mm and 100mm too, but not too far beyond that. European attachments like Franscope and Totalscope functioned the same way.

The question is will some of the heavy-hitters out on YT and the web sites will call Canon out on this? They should if they're not biased. It's nice to see most who have already started the drum beat are crediting Andrew as well as others. Well deserved.

The Olympus 45mm f1.8 sounds nice. The Olympus Pen F 38mm f1.8 is a personal favorite of mine. Cheap, sharp and full of character. Other wise I use machine vision c-mount lens.

Your on! Baby Hypergonar locked and loaded.

Sure will do. I'll send you these via Wetransfer soon - do you want 10bit HEVC or 8bit H.264 - or both?

They barely even spoke of stills during the promotion of the R5 so no that isn't sufficient. They sold us video.

No. Not easy to manually focus with two side handles.

hehehehe. Interesting, dont recall any problem with it but let me actually give infinity a bit more of a proper test. WE'LL DO A SHOOTOUT!! scifi-Old-west style, pewpewpew (anamorphic laser-beams)

I know that there were different series of the Kowa anamorphics with the designation 35-X. The most common series is the 35BS, but there was also 35B, 35BR, and 35BE. The housing on this lens resembles the early 35B series, so this was probably an additional adapter that was used for B-camera and second unit photography on Japanese films. It's double focus obviously, and at the time (circa 1964), combined block lenses were almost universal, so this probably wasn't used much.

Quite frankly after seeing these tests - this is just an incredible hybrid camera engineering feat. I get why its crippled, but holy hell Canon absolutely smashed all competitors with this. You can bet Nikon is picking this apart to see how they brought it all together. If it remains artificially crippled I'm staying far away from anything Canon. A simple firmware fix can make this the beast Canon originally advertised. Unleash the beast and I'm back in. Chris

Willing to bet they added glow/had a filter to smooth the skin tones and dropped the exposure on all the greens. Bottom shot definitely added a mask to the main character and dropped the exposure on the entire background. Additional one where I lowered the contrast in the background.

@kye @Trek of Joy Attached are screen shots from a typical project for me, lifestyle promo video shoot for a new multi-family community. I picked a scene where all three cameras were used (GH5, GoPro, DJI Drone). GH5 is the side shot, GoPro underwater, obviously drone from the aerial view. Cameras Drone - Natural profile Sat/Sharp/Contrast set to -5, WB Daylight GH5 - Cinelike D profile modified as per the Leeming LUT guide, WB Daylight GoPro - Flat Profile, WB Daylight Color Grade GH5 - Leeming LUT + slight WB shift to magenta to match the drone Drone - Expanded WFM to add contrast, sharpening 47, color boost +20, WB shift to warm GoPro - Expanded WFM to add contrast, color boost +20, WB shift to warm Time Spent on Color Grading all 3 cameras - Less than 2min. I forgot to extend the adjustment clip over the sample clips to show Noam Krolls LUT, but I went with a very subtle LUT that looks like it just adds a little more contrast. Project Details - the rest of the project was shot during sunrise but as the lighting got cooler during the day I wanted to keep the warm sunrise feel (plus it was a really ugly grey day) so I moved everything towards the warmer side. I have yet to find a generic LUT that I like for the drones or the GoPro so I just do the exact same WFM grading process each time then throw a Noam LUT over everything. The Leeming LUT I use on the GH5 if it works; I've had it do some weird things due to the GH5's terrible highlight rolloff so when there are hot spots in a scene I grade the clip by hand or I will get weird green skews and orange skin tones using the Leeming LUT. So yea, that's my whole process, very simple, very quick, probably far from perfect, but for my target customer base they are happy with the results. To your point though @kye when I shoot with the C200 and can properly light the scene and shoot in CLOG3 the results are just incredible. CLOG3 and the S35 sensor of the C200 is so easy to work with compared to my usual run and gun scenario with no control over anything except the camera settings. Exposing the GH5 properly for the Leeming LUT is so difficult, I never really know if it is right until I am grading it later. I'm always trying to retain the highlights somehow without underexposing the talent or the rest of the scene.

Thanks @wolf33d. The petition now states "We, the undersigned Canon customers, demand a reply to this request - before our 30-day returns period expires." Please add your comment to the petition to give colour. IMO Canon know what they did. A petition can only add pressure, not force admission. There's little to be gained from a petition masthead that forces Canon to deny claims that are improperly worded without a lawyer’s drafting. This salvo is a reasonable customer request for comment. Each of us can add our own personal views in the petition comments, make our own claims based on personal experience with the camera, swear, and state that we're taking our business elsewhere, to add further pressure. If Canon don’t respond within the 30-day returns period then the legal letters that may follow from customers, drafted by a lawyer, will be strongly worded. Evidence of timers etc can be submitted to courts later. IMO it won't come to that, Canon won’t respond directly (that would be admission) and apologise, but they can and should at least add a firmware update that helps make it right. Given their options now, from their POV (even if they don't give a hoot about their customers), surely they'll decide on "a bug fix" - or whatever they could call it - as the path of least resistance to salvage their company's reputation. Need way more signees and comments - please help and share. https://www.change.org/canonR5fix

Thanks Kaylee!! I think we should get a new guinea pig meme going.

Very good point! I am pretty sure the REAL temperature is checked by the ARM CPU and other components though, if not by Canon's firmware... And if the camera gets too hot it will likely hang or crash, so we'll have prior warning if there's trouble. I had no issues whatsoever doing the long 8K stints. Back did not get hotter after the first 10 minutes. By 50 minutes it was the same.

Delusion is strong here. Canon is gonna try to go out of their way not to give us shit. If anything they will close all the loopholes in using these features professionally and claim it’s to protect the camera. Maybe they will give in a little and give us something like 10 more minutes but they are not going to suddenly let this camera loose and out perform their 10k+ cinema cameras.

Amazing job Andrew!!!, now we have a monster of a camera, shame on Canon, tricky bastards, now I am really thinking to get a R5, if I can shoot unlimited 8K that's paradise in my dictionary.

Can’t believe already 5 assholes dislike the video. Please the whole EOSHD community go like and share the video. This needs to make noise. Imagine the face of those decision makers at Canon. Freaking ridiculous lol, those should resign and vow to never ever work again for any company. What do this clowned thought? That nobody would ever notice? How can you be dumb enough to implement such limitation and expect people to never find out? Lol. A big pros to the engineers who designed this camera though. Without software limitation decided by whoever it’s clearly the camera of the decade!

keep pressure them. you doing good work ! i mean if they got nothing to hide. why not just answer us? even when lousy excuse. this was canon "debute" camera and all this shit? never seen so many creative way to use the camera as this one. If so then canon should made a manual for "other way to make it work".

I have been insulted also on other forums, when I explained why I strongly believed it was a Canon limitation on purpose (once we got various bits of info like the camera keeping same behavior regardless of temperatures etc) on the early days. Those people / other sites shut their mouth now. But who cares... I and a lot of other people appreciate the digging you have done. Don’t worry about Canon their image is impacted you can be sure of that. Tons of people around me are just like me maintaining their preorder because they have a chance to make it right but if they don’t they will go fuck themselves with their camera. A lot of people at Canon need to be fired. It’s a big mess. They just have to make it right... but those Japanese you know what it means for them loosing the face.... All they need to do is a small SW update to make it the best hybrid on the market. If they don’t fix it that means somewhere between 80-99% of hybrid shooters (= who care about video) will go elsewhere. I won’t buy their EOS 70 cine mini camera. It won’t be good in photo. Give us the god damn hybrid photo video tool we need.

That is solid work pal.