Administrators Andrew Reid Posted August 20, 2020 Administrators Share Posted August 20, 2020 "Math Class" on Baidu now has extensive infrared thermometer readings of the camera's mainboard with the back off, showing they correspond closely to the temperature reported in the EXIF data and don't rise above 64C. His next finding is that if you remove the internal battery it resets the so-called overheating limitations. So who is telling the truth now, Canon? You can view the most recent findings here by the user "Math Class" (Google translated) Read the full article on EOSHD: https://www.eoshd.com/8k/removing-internal-battery-resets-eos-r5-overheat-timer-are-canons-pants-now-completely-down/ andrgl, BWV656, Mandalorian and 6 others 2 6 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
User Posted August 20, 2020 Share Posted August 20, 2020 Lights, camera, mini screwdriver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted August 20, 2020 Author Administrators Share Posted August 20, 2020 Sometimes I lose faith in the camera industry completely and think about moving on. Maybe do smartphone camera reviews, now they are at enthusiast level and really quite unique in some regards. But then I realise there is just so much immorality, face saving and arrogance everywhere I look. On the streets, in people's personal lives, in businesses up and down the country, around the world, small and large, that any efforts to correct this or open people's eyes in any small way is basically a teardrop in the sewer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
User Posted August 20, 2020 Share Posted August 20, 2020 Understandable. But we all appreciate what you do Andrew. Hang in there. You mentioned heading out to India. Once Covid clears... I'd give that a go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emanuel Posted August 20, 2020 Share Posted August 20, 2020 What extent this can work out as mod letting the camera flow as a regular capture device as any other camera, now? mechanicalEYE 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oliver Daniel Posted August 20, 2020 Share Posted August 20, 2020 Apart from the artificial crippling, the consensus is the camera doesn’t actually overheat? What voodoo is in there that the S1H doesn’t have? (which needs a huge vent). Thing is, if Canon didn’t do this I would of been a customer of 2 bodies and a bunch of RF lenses. Plus I would of likely picked up an RF cine cam in the future. Just doesn’t make much business sense to me. gethin, Xavier Plagaro Mussard and mechanicalEYE 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emanuel Posted August 20, 2020 Share Posted August 20, 2020 It does : ) C line cameras cost much more, we've been shooting with one (C500) these days... Aside the fact Panasonic built a tank instead ; ) Once Panasonic customer, their client forever. E :- ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted August 20, 2020 Author Administrators Share Posted August 20, 2020 I don't know why it doesn't go above 64C. We are not semiconductor engineers at the end of the day There are probably thermal throttling things to add into to the mix, the situation is probably complex. But there is now mounting evidence that Canon has been completely bullshitting us. And just to have these limitations in the first place is disappointment enough and loses them a ton of business. Zero apology. Possibly shifty, secret recall. Saving face. Lying. Honestly I don't feel like giving any more money to them, do you?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noone Posted August 20, 2020 Share Posted August 20, 2020 Wait! Why does there even need to be a battery in there and how long will it work before needing replacement? Emanuel 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
User Posted August 20, 2020 Share Posted August 20, 2020 10 minutes ago, Oliver Daniel said: Thing is, if Canon didn’t do this I would of been a customer of 2 bodies and a bunch of RF lenses. Plus I would of likely picked up an RF cine cam in the future. Just doesn’t make much business sense to me. Yes. But if Canon didn't do this, it could be your last camera purchase. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stronz Posted August 20, 2020 Share Posted August 20, 2020 Good to see more physical evidence validating the EXIF data Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Totten Posted August 20, 2020 Share Posted August 20, 2020 If I were Cannot, I'd pray to God that I have security measures in place in the R5 to block it from being firmware hacked by the Magic Lantern guys. If somebody can hack and unlock the R5 software?...customers would be left with one HELL of a nuclear bomb 8k monster beast camera that would TERRIFY Cannot's marketing execs and cine EOS managers. Yeah....you better pray the R5 does not get hacked. Emanuel 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katrikura Posted August 20, 2020 Share Posted August 20, 2020 On several occasions I have indicated that he will have to make a short documentary about this defective product, a product of the protection policies that Canon has with its line of film cameras. I see it difficult for Canon to apologize, since there is an army of complacent (or paid) youtubers and this audiovisual piece would remain for posterity, reminding us that we must be critical as consumers and showing how fanaticism for brands allows this type of bad practices. A short documentary that serves as an audiovisual memory. Andrew Reid and majoraxis 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emanuel Posted August 20, 2020 Share Posted August 20, 2020 This is not a defective product, just a crippled one, let's call it the right terminology. noone and mechanicalEYE 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katrikura Posted August 20, 2020 Share Posted August 20, 2020 You're right. Sorry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emanuel Posted August 20, 2020 Share Posted August 20, 2020 C'mon, no need to you apology : ) This is a big company, I doubt they would ever do it. They simply don't give a damn. You don't want it, don't buy it. As simple as that in their mind. And they will even address a smile to you in the end. That's the way it works. User 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
User Posted August 20, 2020 Share Posted August 20, 2020 24 minutes ago, Cliff Totten said: If somebody can hack and unlock the R5 software? - Is Canon currently recalling shipped units? Hmmm. Weld that battery in place for the next batch? 18 minutes ago, Katrikura said: A short documentary that serves as an audiovisual memory. Or a nightmare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Members BTM_Pix Posted August 20, 2020 Super Members Share Posted August 20, 2020 Remember this ? So, again, I find myself thinking that tonight's tweet is a very funny way to spell "Boy we were wrong about this and our sincerest apologies to Andrew for trying to incite you all to pour scorn on him when he raised this on day one". Shameless. mechanicalEYE, noone, deezid and 2 others 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nautical Posted August 20, 2020 Share Posted August 20, 2020 This is obviously ridiculous on Canon's part and they should be called to account in the court of public opinion (and possibly actual court under consumer law for misleading information). But..... You are telling me I can have an unlimited 8k Raw camera (in 20 minute cycles) with DPAF for $4k if I permanently remove the battery? And the inconvenience is a couple resets of date each time. I tend not to modify my menus very much anyway. Honestly given how buggy Magic Lantern was, not sure the set up time is that different. Hmmm.... Vacillating between fury and intrigued. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Members Popular Post BTM_Pix Posted August 20, 2020 Super Members Popular Post Share Posted August 20, 2020 I am absolutely not saying that someone who had an R5 could use a good old fashioned CR2032 battery eliminator in the camera then bring it out through the camera enabling them to provide a switchable power source to it to effectively remove/re-insert it without taking the camera apart each time they want to reset the recovery time. I'm absolutely not saying that. Someone else might say that. But, just to be clear, I'm not saying that at all, OK? Katrikura, ntblowz, Nautical and 8 others 1 1 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.