EOSHD testing finds Canon EOS R5 overheating to be fake

[wolf33d]

2 hours ago, noone said:

The thing is, if they DO fix this and own up it will be a fantastic camera and many many people will instantly forgive them.

And I will be one of them. I could not care less about Canon, Sony or any other business and how they treat their customers. 
If Canon give me the camera I want which NO other manufacturer can offer me, I'll buy it even if they initially lied about overheating. It's not like they killed children in Africa. 
They are little bastards trying to make us buy their big Cine cameras by crippling the R5 but that's about it. If they offer the best I'll buy the best. I am not gonna buy a much inferior A7S III just to punish Canon lol. 

Now that's if they make it the best, which means removing that software limit. If they keep it as is, the R5 is then the inferior product and is good for a return and other companies can take my money. 
Consumers have no mercy. I can tell you that if they don't change that they will loose all video shooters on the R5. Maybe they don't care and won't change it, if they want that money they will change it and people will buy it. Maybe 2 or 3 people won't for punishing the bad Canon but ultimately they are punishing themselves from not using the superior product. 

There is no way around it. Fix the god damn camera so we can buy it, or sell it to photographers only and go F yourself Canon. 

[horshack]

On previous Canon bodies the temperature report in the EXIF is from what's called the "EFIC temp" (source), which is a secondary, low-speed chip responsible for the lens interface and speedlites. Canon actual documented this chip in their 1DM3 technical whitepaper (page 33), where Canon refers to it as follows "EFIC as the interface for the lens and external Speedlite" and explicitly states it's located on the camera control board, separate from the image sensor and DIGIC. If the R5 follows this arrangement this means the temperature in the EXIF is not of the sensor or DIGIC, which explains why it plateaus quickly and doesn't correlate to the video-recording thermal shutdown events, which instead are likely related to the temperature of DIGIC and/or the surrounding support chips like DDR.

[Matt Shockley]

Great work Andrew! I hope they are taken to the cleaners for deception and everyone refunded a better camera or their money back. 

[gethin]

Does the camera have any kind of hard reset that could reset the cripple timers?

[ND64]

1 hour ago, horshack said:

On previous Canon bodies the temperature report in the EXIF is from what's called the "EFIC temp" (source), which is a secondary, low-speed chip responsible for the lens interface and speedlites. Canon actual documented this chip in their 1DM3 technical whitepaper (page 33), where Canon refers to it as follows "EFIC as the interface for the lens and external Speedlite" and explicitly states it's located on the camera control board, separate from the image sensor and DIGIC. If the R5 follows this arrangement this means the temperature in the EXIF is not of the sensor or DIGIC, which explains why it plateaus quickly and doesn't correlate to the video-recording thermal shutdown events, which instead are likely related to the temperature of DIGIC and/or the surrounding support chips like DDR.

Camera control board shouldn't report 65c in 8k recording. 

[tweak]

Thank you @Andrew Reid.

I'm starting to think Camera Conspiracies YouTube isn't as satirical as I first thought...

[kye]

5 hours ago, noone said:

The thing is, if they DO fix this and own up it will be a fantastic camera and many many people will instantly forgive them.

I'm not sure if this is adding a layer of pessimism or removing one, but could this be a PR strategy?

I mean, put out a camera with huge specs, then cause huge controversy due to overheating, then issue a "sorry, we've fixed it now, honest mistake!" firmware update, and watch the sales roll in.....

Look at how many people are talking about the 12K Ursa vs the 8K Canon - the headline didn't last but this is keeping up the emotion and sensation.

It's the best of both worlds - play the fanboys off against the Canon-bashers, and either no-one finds the cripple hammer and it pushes the cine line or someone does find it and it blows up again....    and all PR is good PR.

[Yannick Willox]

I have this feeling this is all just a result of reduced timelines and segmented R&D.

What  if Canon intentionally did a bad thermal design, to have a thermal cripple hammer. What if, just months before the release, they realised the new sensor and cpu are so efficient, they do not really overheat as much.

The overheating timers seem like an afterthought, implemented too quickly, by a five year old !

They will now engage a 12 year old for the firmware update, respecting the previously leaked time tables for the video modes.

Anyway you look at it, they are utterly incompetent.

[noone]

I think it is more likely a combination of massive cock up (and maybe more than one) as well as a bit of cripple hammer.

Truth is they might just have made TOO good a camera for video and thought that it might kill some of their "proper" video cameras and the premium those bring.

 

[KarlL]

Very interesting stuff! I'm a hobbyist Canon shooter myself, but I'm still on the EOS 6D since until now I couldn't find anything that really pushes me towards a new camera. The R5/R6 might be the one that actually catch me. However, after reading all of this, I get doubtful.

Besides that I'm an engineer for embedded software / electronics (in automotive) and I would like to share some of my knowledge here.

1. As horshack already pointed out the temperature written in the EXIF might not be the temperature of the main controller, but the one of another chip that's supposed to be a "good"/"reasonable" representation for the inner camera temperature.

2. From our electronics I know that we usually measure 4-5 temperatures from different chips and the differences are quite astonishing sometimes. While the main chip under "heavy duty" might be at around 90°C within a few minutes, peripheral chips show the temperature increase with a (for me) surprisingly high delay of a few minutes. This is partly due to the fact that thermal operations take quite some time, especially if the heat distribution medium is air. This depends on the placing of the chips of course.

3. The issue might not be overheating of the main controller, but of another chip, e.g. of the sensor read out circuit

4. There has been some discussion about maximum temperatures of electronic chips. It is correct that 90°C is still in the comfort zone of most electronic chips. However, you have to take into account that there is a maximum allowed temperature for surfaces is 65°C (Metal) and 85°C (Plastic) due to safety reasons (Source, as an alternative google "safety standard maximum heat surface", Alternative Source). The second source even limits to 55°C for prolonged usage and 60°C for "Short periods only".

I saw some videos in which they managed to shoot 4k HQ continuously for hours, by removing the cards from the camera. If I combine the "safety" stuff with this I get to the conclusion that the issue might be the memory card getting too hot in terms of safety regulations. Here's my scenario: I record for let's say 45 minutes, before my CFexpress card is full. I want to switch cards quickly -> I directly open the card slot and pull out a card that has a temperature of ~80-90°C. This is not acceptable by means of safety.

The only thing that bothers me then is that the temperature should go down much much faster than what's seen here. Especially, if you look at the "tests" that Jordan from dpreview did, in which he removed cards and battery completely. After that the temperature should go down much faster. Something I can imagine here is that they cannot directly measure the temperature of the memory cards. Due to this they use a formula for calculating cool down times. This formula does not take opening the card slot or changing the card into account.

I hope Canon will release detailed information about this. Because even though I'm a stills shooter only, I don't want to be tricked. And I must admit I'm on the edge to switching to Sony, anyway.

[Django]

Yikes what a messy situation.

Although I guess the good news is no recall necessary. The rumored firmware update will probably “fix” the issue. They’ll claim a “bug” messed up recovery times and software “optimizations” will enhance heat management & recording times.

 

[wondo]

if andrew is right, the big question that remains is why did they do it??? and why did they do it in such an excessive way?

if the camera had a hardware flaw and they would do a lot of pr to downplay it i would totally understand that.

but crippling a camera by firmware to a point where it becomes unusable does not make any sense.

limiting it to protect cinema eos sales?, ok, limiting it to protect sales of the next model?, ok, but totally ruining it?

development of this thing must have cost tons of money, and even if they wanted to protect cinema eos sales, there is still a bit of math do be done to understand whether this is reasonable by any means.

cinema eos cams are pretty much a niche product and i don`t see why they would protect them at such a high cost?

andrews findings are shocking, and if true, i`d really like to know the reason they did it?

there are a lot of statements on here about how much of a scandal this is and how bad canon is behaving, and given the fact that canon is not a chinese two man brand run by lunatics makes me even more eager to get to know the "mechanics" behind this...

[Cliff Totten]

I talk to so many people who literally don't get the concept or strategic tactic of camera crippling. They say "The R5 does not compete with Cannot Cine EOS models!!" Then they turn right around with "But I don't understand why Cannot DID this..."

[Sigh]....YES!,...the R5 "CAN" compete with EOS Cine models....if Cannot allowed it to!!!

They will NOT allow this to happen. Hence, we have our reason for all of this.

Please people. Don't say "Oh this was just an oversite or accidental mistake on Cannot's part"....people. Wake up. This is 100% completely intentional. And if you think that Cine EOS managers didn't care about the R5 and were NOT in the R5 development meetings?...you are crazy! LOL

[wondo]

i think there`s a guy above the r5 AND cinema eos guys, and he surely owns a pocket calculator.

canon is a company that is on the stock market and that rules out that decisions are made just because somebody is too proud or too vain. 

[crevice]

3 hours ago, wolf33d said:

And I will be one of them. I could not care less about Canon, Sony or any other business and how they treat their customers. 
If Canon give me the camera I want which NO other manufacturer can offer me, I'll buy it even if they initially lied about overheating. It's not like they killed children in Africa. 
They are little bastards trying to make us buy their big Cine cameras by crippling the R5 but that's about it. If they offer the best I'll buy the best. I am not gonna buy a much inferior A7S III just to punish Canon lol. 

Now that's if they make it the best, which means removing that software limit. If they keep it as is, the R5 is then the inferior product and is good for a return and other companies can take my money. 
Consumers have no mercy. I can tell you that if they don't change that they will loose all video shooters on the R5. Maybe they don't care and won't change it, if they want that money they will change it and people will buy it. Maybe 2 or 3 people won't for punishing the bad Canon but ultimately they are punishing themselves from not using the superior product. 

There is no way around it. Fix the god damn camera so we can buy it, or sell it to photographers only and go F yourself Canon. 

My thoughts exactly. Fix the issue and I honestly won't give a shit. I prefer RF mount, I prefer RF lenses, I prefer Canon colors, I prefer their dual pixel autofocus for video and I just prefer how canon footage looks compared to Sony. So like you said, me putting my foot down and going to another brand to "teach them a lesson!" only screws me over, since I would be switching to a camera that I personally do not want and in my eyes is inferior compared to the R5 as a true hybrid 50/50 photos and stills camera. Though to be honest, if they just leave the external recording at near unlimited - I am prob fine as is. Still, they need to say something and do something - they are getting absolutely roasted by everyone and rightfully so. I am hoping soon we see a firmware fix, because at the end of the day, I just care about my camera working to its potential. The crazy thing is Canon has so much going for them, but they keep shooting themselves in the foot. RF mount is already being adapted by folks like Red and it is a mount that can be used for years to come. Their RF lenses are absolutely incredible, with the 50 1.2 RF being the best prime lens I have ever used. Their rumored RF cinema cameras seem amazing and with great price points. And on paper the R5 is the best hybrid mirrorless camera ever made.

But yet, here we are because of their bullshit and because of this they once again are losing business. Canon seem to think folks are going to buy the R5 if its too good instead of their cinema cameras , but now they are just losing business all together, with folks avoiding ALL of their cameras in general. I wish I could just shake them and tell them to quit worrying about their damn cinema line, it has absolutely ruined their brand to a large growing group of filmmakers who are very very vocal. This is the same thing apple did when they turned their back on the pro community, hate started to grow and grow by creative folks and their brand took a huge hit with the people that actually influenced who bought their computers and made them popular to begin with - creative folks. Luckily, apple have slowly started to rebuild their image in creative circles with better Macs. So with Canon, they need to realize the people that are going to buy their cinema line are going to buy it no matter what, because they need ND, better DR, XLR, a fan, etc. 

[visionrouge]

Canon Designer's team:
How long do you want this camera to record?
Canon Marketing team:
Don't bother about heating issue; we will put a timer to shut down the camera anyways and call it "overheating"
Just make sure we can put a 8K logo on our poster.




 

[MrSMW]

Wow. Looking increasingly like this was not only intentional, but also that they will flick a magic switch and "ta da!", all will be well.

A handful of people will still not buy, but the much much much greater majority will and this particular storm in a teacup will soon fade away.

I am sitting firmly on the fence.

The question I always ask  myself in this kind of scenario is who would my course of action hurt the most?

If a product was the best solution for me, but they were sneaky bastards with dubious business practices, but hadn't actually killed any children, then I might overlook their poor practice.

However, that would make me one of those, "ah, but if every individual had that attitude, then there would be no collective..." selfish types, but you know what, the world doesn't owe me a living and I don't own it anything much, but ultimately in this case, it's just a camera.

I support 100% though the people such as Andrew who want to run with this kind of thing, in principle, if not always with my wallet.

I have already ruled it out regardless as it doesn't have 'enough' to warrant the investment from me.

It just seems stupid to me that anyone would behave this way in the first place. I can't stand bullshit...but often have to live with it because it's easier to do so.

[Joris Maas Visuals]

9 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

EOSHD testing finds Canon EOS R5 overheating to be fake, with artificial timers deployed to lock out video mode. In this test, we will probe my Canon EOS R5’s actual internal temperature in Celsius, as reported by the firmware.

This week CDA-TEK and I are developing an Android app for the Canon EOS R5, which connects to the camera via the Canon API...

Please read the rest of the article on the blog carefully before commenting below

 

8 hours ago, BWV656 said:

Yes. I agree. But let's be real. We are dealing with Canon here. I am 99.9999999% sure that will never happen.

I am not sure if Canon won't fix this. Looking at the information about a Cooler for the back from a third party and a native RF adapter with built in fan it looks like crippling the camera is just part of a marketing strategy. BUT now it's basically investigated (and it all directs to Canon being doing all this crap on purpose....I am not a conspiracy type of person but how on earth is it possible that you have products ready just after the launch to deal with heat dissipation???). To me the ONLY correct answer of Canon is step forward and come clean with what they did do and if they did do it on purpose (especially the firmware settings as it comes shipped with the R5).

[Joris Maas Visuals]

2 hours ago, noone said:

I think it is more likely a combination of massive cock up (and maybe more than one) as well as a bit of cripple hammer.

Truth is they might just have made TOO good a camera for video and thought that it might kill some of their "proper" video cameras and the premium those bring.

 

It's a fact: in the past some products were crafted too well (i.e. they never broke whatever customers did with it so the company had to wait a long time before the customer did find a legit reason to upgrade since the original piece of equipment was just so good and sturdy). BUT in this era, Canon has everything to win in my opinion since the competition actually offers just (close to) non overheating camera's that do both pretty well (albeit non-8K). In my opinion Canon should have an answer to the Sony A7III right after Sony introduced it and come up with a full frame Canon MILC within a couple of months in order to not lose customers (which happened, several sold all their Canon gear and jumped ship to Sony). 

[Andrew Reid]

6 hours ago, arant.joseph said:

As a side note, even though the chip may operate at 95C, whatever plastic components on the body in proximity would not fair so well...

Plastic melting point is 170C