I bought a Canon EOS R5 - potential overheating solutions

[Adrian Bacon]

5 minutes ago, SteveV4D said:

This is the nonsense I see on DpReview.  Apparently the camera is excused for not working reliably as its not a Professional video camera

It’s not a professional video camera. If it were, Canon would have released it under their Cinema line. They didn’t. they provided some basic recording limits information if using the higher end video features so people don’t run out and buy it thinking that it’s a replacement for a real cinema camera. 

personally, I’m more interested in seeing how the standard 4K stacks up against their 4K Cine cameras.  If the Image quality difference is negligible, then the higher end video features are nice to haves, and can possibly be improved upon With firmware, but ultimately unnecessary to get a job done if looking to match other canon cinema cameras.
 

For all we know, there’s an RF mount Cine version of this camera in the pipe and the cripple hammer is Still in full effect

[BrooklynDan]

This camera is such a colossal failure, even if the issues get miraculously fixed somehow, I would not touch it with a ten foot pole. Not even for personal projects. There are way too many good options out there to justify spending $4K on a glorified hand warmer.

I honestly think that one of the reasons for this debacle is the entire marketing culture than has sprung up that demands flashy specs over rock-solid reliability. I also think that the race to miniaturize cameras has created new challenges for engineers, and this in turn creates conflicts. One of the reason why the Panasonic S1H is so good as a professional tool is the sheer size and heft of the thing. It doesn't feel like a toy that can be slipped into a pocket. Professional tools should be built like hammers. A little bit of weight is not a big deal. It's still a far cry from a 16mm film camera or a Betacam. Get a bigger gimbal and a beefier tripod.

[SteveV4D]

12 minutes ago, Adrian Bacon said:

It’s not a professional video camera. If it were, Canon would have released it under their Cinema line. They didn’t. they provided some basic recording limits information if using the higher end video features so people don’t run out and buy it thinking that it’s a replacement for a real cinema camera. 

 

I know its not a professional video camera.  Neither is the A7sIII or the S1H or a number of other mirrorless hybrids out there shooting quality 4K without line skipping for longer recording times than the R5.  If the S1H isn't constrained by being a hybrid and not a cinema camera, why can't the R5 follow that example?  Canon made very clear who the R5 was intended for and it was filmakers as well as Photographers.  Its not for you to say they were mistaken just to justify the cameras deficiancies to yourself and others.  If Canon now put their hand up and say, yes we were wrong.  The R5 isn't for video, its a photo camera not a hybrid, then fair enough.  But when they made statements about the R5 complimenting the C300 on a shoot, it is clear that although not a Cinema C series camera, it was considered a perfect companion to one.  And not I assume for taking photos on set. 🤣🤣

[Mandalorian]

9 minutes ago, Adrian Bacon said:

It’s not a professional video camera. If it were, Canon would have released it under their Cinema line. They didn’t. they provided some basic recording limits information if using the higher end video features so people don’t run out and buy it thinking that it’s a replacement for a real cinema camera. 

personally, I’m more interested in seeing how the standard 4K stacks up against their 4K Cine cameras.  If the Image quality difference is negligible, then the higher end video features are nice to haves, and can possibly be improved upon With firmware, but ultimately unnecessary to get a job done if looking to match other canon cinema cameras.
 

For all we know, there’s an RF mount Cine version of this camera in the pipe and the cripple hammer is Still in full effect

There are (rumored) RF cine cameras coming out, but if Canon could fix this overheating issue with a firmware fix, but doesn't then I don't see how anyone in good conscience could buy the R5 or R6.

These cameras are clearly being marketed as hybrid cameras. Canon could leave in the 30min continuous record limit to create some market segmentation.

However, firmware crippling the R5 & R6 to such a degree that they are unusable except for very short clips is unconscionable.

[Andrew Reid]

2 hours ago, Adrian Bacon said:

All manufacturers marketing is designed to get you to part with as much money as possible, and therefore should never be taken at face value, which means that by definition it is a lie. I’m not defending it, just stating reality. It doesn’t matter if you like it or not. Every company does it in some form or another.

with respects to usage, canon pretty clearly laid out generic overheating record times to act as a guidepost. It’s up to the user to decide if that will fit into their intended usage or not, and/or conduct their own tests. I’m not seeing a foul on Canon’s part there.

again, just because it doesn’t do what you think it should doesn’t mean it’s a bad camera, it’s just not a good fit for your intended usage.

You are wrong.

I cannot legally advertise a product I've made as a professional cinematography camera, when it is in fact a banana.

I cannot please my customers or make good business selling something as "8K capable" when it isn't.

To say every company does it is just not true. In fact if they tried it, they'd be on wrong side of the law and wrong side of their customers.

Can you imagine the fury if your iPhone started overheating 1 hour into the day and you had to turn it off for 30 mins?

I am very baffled as to why you think Canon can get away something similar... because it's a camera.

No, they advertised it a certain way, and even the late admission of heat limited recording times is misleading because of how the camera behaves 10-20 mins after being switched on, or 30 mins into a stills shoot.

[Video Hummus]

4 hours ago, Adrian Bacon said:

however reviews are showing that it’s not that camera, at least not in current firmware form, so if anybody is stupid enough to buy anything based solely on manufacturers marketing (Not just Canon), then they kind of deserve to get what they get. This is why independent reviews exist.

But this is exactly what/is happening. Not to mention very few independent reviewers got their hands on it prior to the Pre-orders and those that did were allowed to talk about certain aspects. They were all almost exclusively “first looks”, “previews”, and “first hands on” type videos and content. Not proper reviews!

Canon really messed up the marketing of this camera. They heavily leaned into the whole 8K and 4K120p 10-bit recording specs monster to sell this camera. 

[Adrian Bacon]

2 minutes ago, SteveV4D said:

If the S1H isn't limited by being a hybrid, why can't the R5? 

Does the S1H have an 8K sensor in a weather sealed body? 
 

if the standard line skipped 4K output has a negligible image quality difference to a C300 mark whatever, then what’s the problem? We won’t know that until those tests are done.

[Andrew Reid]

18 minutes ago, Adrian Bacon said:

It’s not a professional video camera. If it were, Canon would have released it under their Cinema line. They didn’t. they provided some basic recording limits information if using the higher end video features so people don’t run out and buy it thinking that it’s a replacement for a real cinema camera. 

personally, I’m more interested in seeing how the standard 4K stacks up against their 4K Cine cameras.  If the Image quality difference is negligible, then the higher end video features are nice to haves, and can possibly be improved upon With firmware, but ultimately unnecessary to get a job done if looking to match other canon cinema cameras.
 

For all we know, there’s an RF mount Cine version of this camera in the pipe and the cripple hammer is Still in full effect

This guy would make a great Canon rep.

Honestly it is exactly this kind of attitude which is leading the company's reputation and profits into the gutter.

They advertised the 8K all over the place and played heavily on the creative possibilities of it, even as a side-kick to a C300 III on a professional shoot. They made all sorts of claims as to how it performs and what it can do... Then when it turns out they're pretty much all a lie, people like you pop up defending them.

It's completely maddening.

Ask yourself the question Adrian.

Do you find this ethical even in the slightest? Or are you happy to support misleading advertising?

If I released a LUT that claimed to make your camera shoot 8K, but it didn't perform like that, would you back me up too?

Or are you only backing up Canon because you work for them??!

[Elias]

If Canon indeed did this on purpose I will be another one joining the camp of users jumping ship (probably to Sony or maybe going back to Nikon).

This is not the way a company should treat its customer base. We pay dearly with our hard-earned cash just to be sold an obviously defective product.

And do note that I’m an engineer by trade and this issue of not using any thermal solution in the CPU is either a monumental engineering error (which should *not* have happened as this is a basic error not event a recently-graduated engineer would do) which should result in Canon firing whoever is behind these stupid designs, or something very fishy which smells to having been done on purpose, in which case Canon deserves to be sued.

 

[SteveV4D]

7 minutes ago, Adrian Bacon said:

Does the S1H have an 8K sensor in a weather sealed body? 
 

if the standard line skipped 4K output has a negligible image quality difference to a C300 mark whatever, then what’s the problem? We won’t know that until those tests are done.

It has a 6K sensor in a weather sealed body.. which allows people to film with it.  I know, that's quite the novelty for a non cinema camera by your standards.  Still you're saying how good the R5 video features are with 8K, even though its a photo camera.  If you can praise its video features, then why can't others criticise them too.  You want your cake and eat it with the R5 video.

If the worse 4K on the R5 is as good as the C300, then I feel sorry for the C300.  

[Andrew Reid]

Just now, Elias said:

If Canon indeed did this on purpose I will be another one joining the camp of users jumping ship (probably to Sony or maybe going back to Nikon).

This is not the way a company should treat its customer base. We pay dearly with our hard-earned cash just to be sold an obviously defective product.

Exactly, we pay the money for a product described a certain way and we expect it to work.

Also, Canon used the spec sheet to generate a wave of positive hype and good publicity ahead of the pre-orders.

Then they slipped us the shitty little note about limited recording times due to heat, and assumed we'd all accept it and go "ah, gotcha!"

What kind of company is this?

And why should I ever trust them again??

Just now, Elias said:

And do note that I’m an engineer by trade and this issue of not using any thermal solution in the CPU is either a monumental engineering error (which should *not* have happened as this is a basic error not event a recently-graduated engineer would do) which should result in Canon firing whoever is behind these stupid designs, or something very fishy which smells to having been done on purpose, in which case Canon deserves to be sued.

Yep, as I said in my article... You would not even build a budget PC with no thermal paste!!

Yet Canon build a $4000 camera without it on the main CPU.

It's fucking disgraceful.

[Adrian Bacon]

4 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

You are wrong.

I differ in opinion.

5 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Can you imagine the fury if your iPhone started overheating 1 hour into the day and you had to turn it off for 30 mins?

If I where using it as designed, yes. The fact of the matter is that canon disclosed up front that there are recording limits. They can not anticipate every single usage scenario, so provided generic guidelines.. it’s not realistic to expect them to know how every single user is going to use their camera.

6 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Do you find this ethical even in the slightest? Or are you happy to support misleading advertising?

I’ll answer with a question: do you find yourself implicitly trusting every advertisement you see? I don’t and I seriously doubt that you do.

[BrooklynDan]

Analogy time: If you paid half a million for a Lamborghini that was advertised as having a 200+ top speed, but could not actually maintain that speed for more than a few minutes and in fact couldn't go more than 100 MPH most of the time and would overheat constantly and leave you stranded on the side of the road, would you be satisfied with your purchase? Your expensive italian supercar just fried its own V12! 

That's basically what's happening here. There's a considerable gap between what's advertised and what was actually delivered. This didn't happen overnight. The fact that people kept using Red and Black Magic cameras despite serious reliability and built quality issues has emboldened companies like Canon to overpromise and under deliver. The difference is that the aforementioned companies are upstarts and Canon is a 100-year-old imaging behemoth. People expect industry leaders to put out solid products and not pull shenanigans like this.

Oh well. There's still Sony, Panasonic and Fuji. Oh, and Arri for the folks with deep pockets.

[Adrian Bacon]

12 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Or are you only backing up Canon because you work for them??!

Nope. I do however have an R5. My intended usage is shooting stills, and for that it’s one of the greatest cameras Canon has ever made. The fact that it can record any video at is a bonus.

[SteveV4D]

1 minute ago, Adrian Bacon said:

 

I’ll answer with a question: do you find yourself implicitly trusting every advertisement you see? I don’t and I seriously doubt that you do.

I don't believe all I read in the papers.  Yet newspapers can still be held for liable if they are found to publish something not true.  Marketing still has to conform to guidelines.  Yes, it is allowed to push the positives, but misleading marketing is still something a company is accoutable for.  

Maybe I should tell my clients I work a 16 hour day yet only work 10.  After all, they should know advertisment is often misleading.  They can't hold me accoutable for it..   Oh, but of course, actually they can.  😄

[Andrew Reid]

6 minutes ago, Adrian Bacon said:

I differ in opinion.

No, it isn't a matter of opinion actually.

It's a matter of objective fact and you're wrong.

6 minutes ago, Adrian Bacon said:

If I where using it as designed, yes. The fact of the matter is that canon disclosed up front that there are recording limits.

Where does it say in the disclosure up-front that the camera overheats in the Wifi menu waiting for a connection?

Where does it say that you only get 5 mins of 8K recording after leaving the camera turned on doing nothing for about 10-15 minutes?

Where does it say that the recovery times are extremely long and that not even applying ice to the back of the camera or freezing the body speeds the process up? It's a completely baloney situation. Electronics do not need 1 hour to cool down enough to get back to normal performance.

You do not have to leave your laptop for an hour if the Intel CPU is thermally throttled.

These are not my opinions by the way and if you want you can go and educate yourself on the factual side of semiconductors.

6 minutes ago, Adrian Bacon said:

They can not anticipate every single usage scenario, so provided generic guidelines.. it’s not realistic to expect them to know how every single user is going to use their camera.

I’ll answer with a question: do you find yourself implicitly trusting every advertisement you see? I don’t and I seriously doubt that you do.

Is a specs sheet count as "an advert"?

What about the product description at B&H?

It is not an advert in the sense of Red Bull gives you wings.

It is completely unethical to say it has certain specs, but it's defective if you try to use it that way.

[Video Hummus]

Just now, Adrian Bacon said:

The fact that it can record any video at is a bonus.

Someone should tell Canon’s marketing department that.

[Andrew Reid]

8 minutes ago, Adrian Bacon said:

Nope. I do however have an R5. My intended usage is shooting stills, and for that it’s one of the greatest cameras Canon has ever made. The fact that it can record any video at is a bonus.

This gives us all a clue as to why the faulty video capabilities don't bother you then

But I bet you'd change your tune in an instant if it overheated on a stills shoot. Would you defend it for shooting only 100 frames in 45 megapixel mode? Then it shuts down and forces you to use JPEG only at 12 megapixels!? Get a grip man.

It's unbelievable how lacking in empathy and objectivism some people are.

[cameraeye]

But it’s not a bonus. Even if they didn’t market the video the way they did. You literally can’t use your “bonus” most of the time. You don’t sell someone chocolate and say actually you can only eat that for 3 seconds and then you have to wait to eat a little bit more. And you don’t include 8K RAW VIDEO if the design is inadequate to actually operate it. If it was a stills camera first, then you simply don’t include those video features at all. Basically what they did with all their other 5D cameras.

[Adrian Bacon]

5 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

This gives us all a clue as to why the faulty video capabilities don't bother you then

It’s all a matter of perspective.