If you don't do video, you are fine. You might see one of the two temp indicator warnings for still photography (red then white?) if you shoot for a long period, but I have only heard of 2 times that photography was shutdown, both had extenuating circumstances.
TeamSpeed wrote:
If you don't do video, you are fine. You might see one of the two temp indicator warnings for still photography (red then white?) if you shoot for a long period, but I have only heard of 2 times that photography was shutdown, both had extenuating circumstances.
Now that there is a concern, people will torture test the camera to try to force it to overheat. Because that's how we people are.
Makes me wonder how many Porsche 911 drivers took corners beyond the limit to see if it was really prone to crashing backwards or not (reference to an old article in Car and Driver Magazine).
TeamSpeed wrote:
Now that there is a concern, people will torture test the camera to try to force it to overheat. Because that's how we people are.
For sure, there will always be some of that. Unrealistic tests.
I think however that most people can see through that kind of stuff. I'm more interested in photographers/videographers testing the camera in real-world scenarios.
I did find Matt Johnson's wedding simulation to be an honest review.
I didn't torture test the camera during a middle school baseball game (other than it being a middle school baseball game), but the camera was consistently warm - like no other camera that I've shot with. 1500 shots in an hour and a half is not the most / worst that I've done. I had the back display off, and auto sleep at 30s. It worked fine, but a hand warmer was the last thing I needed. Just saying.
stanj wrote:
I didn't torture test the camera during a middle school baseball game (other than it being a middle school baseball game), but the camera was consistently warm - like no other camera that I've shot with. 1500 shots in an hour and a half is not the most / worst that I've done. I had the back display off, and auto sleep at 30s. It worked fine, but a hand warmer was the last thing I needed. Just saying.
I’m curious what your point of comparison is. Having shot the A7rIII and A7III in Thailand last year in high 80s to low 90s humid heat, I can comfortably say that those cameras become incredibly warm in your hand.
Also, it may sound counterintuitive but the EVF is more stressful for the camera to run than the back display. It is more than 2x the resolution of the back display. I’m curious also if you were using “Smooth” mode for your EVF.
Dj R wrote:
going back to this post.
I am starting to seriously consider the thought that the card interface is the issue.
Interesting thought. How many MB/s does 8K video actually need? Maybe there is a way through firmware to slow the CFExpress card interface down some to make it run cooler, while still keeping it fast enough to handle 8K?
John_TX wrote:
Interesting thought. How many MB/s does 8K video actually need? Maybe there is a way through firmware to slow the CFExpress card interface down some to make it run cooler, while still keeping it fast enough to handle 8K?
A really big internal buffer.....
4K@120 and 8K are high bandwidth users.
And canon provides a solid codec as compared to others.
So you can adjust the codec at the expense of edit-ability.
The blackmagic is no different with there 6K on the BMPCC 6K.
There trick is to off load the files to an external ssd through the type c connector.
I wish canon could have followed the same path.
But no..... canon has their preverbial head up its butt on the entire save the cinema line.
Talk to any video shooter that does comercial work..... they realize the need for c200/c300’s.....
Hello canon..... you would be providing the entire workflow in canon land.
I feel very bad for Canon that this is happening to them. I mean I personally prefer other systems, obviously, but nobody can deny Canon is definitely trying their best, and obviously not doing a bad job, being the market leader, and obviously they are in the lead in several areas and equal or not too far behind in all other areas.
Though I'm confused as to why its happening. This is getting absurd. Not even Sony had this level of problems with overheating. Something went wrong at Canon, and I hope they can fix it.
Sauseschritt wrote:
I feel very bad for Canon that this is happening to them. I mean I personally prefer other systems, obviously, but nobody can deny Canon is definitely trying their best, and obviously not doing a bad job, being the market leader, and obviously they are in the lead in several areas and equal or not too far behind in all other areas.
Though I'm confused as to why its happening. This is getting absurd. Not even Sony had this level of problems with overheating. Something went wrong at Canon, and I hope they can fix it.
There is definitely an issue but I would advise against using EOSHD as a source for information on the matter - when someone has a hammer everything looks like a nail. In a previous article he claimed Canon was hiding the actual internal temperature from the user, until I posted to his forum about how to get the temperature from the EXIF. He's a walking example of hysterical blindness resulting from selection bias.
Sauseschritt wrote:
but nobody can deny Canon is definitely trying their best, and obviously not doing a bad job, being the market leader, and obviously they are in the lead in several areas and equal or not too far behind in all other areas.
Nah, Canon only do 'good enough' at whatever price tier. I would have previously said that they tried their best with the 1-series but now that they have to 'protect' the cinema line too I'm not sure that's true. Perhaps it holds just for the big white primes.
Sy Sez wrote:
Likely, the heat from the Card, and it's close proximity to the Processor, is elevating the Processor temp above limits?
No this isn't it. You can take the cfe card out and overheat the camera. The R6 doesn't even have a cfe card and doors the same, just different times.
This is a combination of things that are coming together to create this situation.
Using an external recorder doesn't tax the system as much. Turning off eye AF gives you several additional minutes of video recording. Shooting with the rear LCD on will increase the speed of overheating. Etc... This is why it has been difficult to figure out, there isn't a single answer.
stanj wrote:
I didn't torture test the camera during a middle school baseball game (other than it being a middle school baseball game), but the camera was consistently warm - like no other camera that I've shot with. 1500 shots in an hour and a half is not the most / worst that I've done. I had the back display off, and auto sleep at 30s. It worked fine, but a hand warmer was the last thing I needed. Just saying.
Jesse Evans wrote:
I’m curious what your point of comparison is. Having shot the A7rIII and A7III in Thailand last year in high 80s to low 90s humid heat, I can comfortably say that those cameras become incredibly warm in your hand.
I am trying to compare apples to apples: same climate (CA, summer morning), same stuff (kids baseball game), same yield (about 1300 photos in a game that's about 2h), same lenses (70-200, 28-70, the occasional longer glass), different Canon cameras (1DX2, 5D4, R, R5). Only the R5 was warm to the point of "damn this thing gets warm!"
Over the years of shooting the same stuff over and over again I can tell when something is unusual, just like decades of driving on the track has taught me to be able to tell when a tire is a couple of PSI low. Doing the same stuff over and over is boring and mundane but it has its benefits.
Is Canon aware of the numerous complaints of over-heating, even for stills? Has anyone spoken to Canon and are they trying to do something about this - or do they think the complaints are unjustified and they are taking no action?
I am still wondering if I should cancel my pre-order until the problem is fixed.
bobbytan wrote:
Is Canon aware of the numerous complaints of over-heating, even for stills? Has anyone spoken to Canon and are they trying to do something about this - or do they think the complaints are unjustified and they are taking no action?
I am still wondering if I should cancel my pre-order until the problem is fixed.
The way I see it, why reward Canon and buy their R5 if the camera doesn't live up to our expectations? If people would not buy the camera as it is, Canon would fix/remedy the problems. If people buy the camera as-is, they won't correct the problem.
It's a fantastic stills camera, but if that's all it is, it's way overpriced.
Even if you use only low quality 4k modes so that it doesn't overheat, it's still overpriced. It's basicly a 5D Mark IV in a mirrorless body.
I get that 8k overheats. I get that 120p 4k overheats.
What I don't get is why it takes hours to recover.
I also don't like their impossible-to-edit codec files.
Canon's done these things to protect their cinema line and it sucks.
I could have had this camera by now, but cancelled my order many weeks ago. I'm not about to reward Canon by buying an expensive stills camera.
IF they uncripple the camera in new firmware, I'll reconsider but I'm not buying this camera as-is.
I don't understand why there is so much complaining going on. If you want to be early adopters of this whizbang technology, animal tracking AF, 20fps 45MP, 8K etc. you have to accept that the first product is a little immature, that's how they start bringing it to customers and pay for further development. Then in a Mk II or Mk III version it is more mature and reliable, but the cameras will probably have larger housings and somewhat greater weight to accommodate the cooling systems needed to run it indefinitely.
When Nikon brought their first consumer-friendly priced high-resolution camera (D800) to the market, the AF wasn't good enough to get pixel-sharp images a lot of the time with a lot of lenses, but it was a huge commercial success. Later models (D810, D850) have fixed its problems to a large extent and offer much better functionality as well (improved controls, improved LV, less camera shake, faster fps rates, better buffer, clearer viewfinder, better quality at extremes of the ISO range, improved AF accuracy etc.). If I look at my D800 file directories, it's a shock to be reminded of how bad it was.
It seems to make a commercial success, the manufacturer cannot wait for the technology to be mature, they have to bring it out early and then charge for upgrades (4 and 8 years thereafter) for those who are left wanting for more. Once the product is mature, sales die out and they have to come up with a new mount to force people to buy all new gear. If customers behaved differently, i.e. paid less attention to specs and fantastic features, and more on the reliability and maturity of implementation, manufacturers would create products that match the customers' needs. But online reviewers criticise mature, reliable products for not doing enough new for the customer and not being real upgrades, those who read those reviews probably won't buy because they are led to believe the product is not worth the money. It's all about dazzling the customer, and not so much about creating reliable tools.
