Howie4life wrote:
What's your video workflow for the R5 if you down mind me asking. With my old pocket 6k I use to trim the Raws with resolve media player without any quality loss to save on space. I would then transcode the clips the clips I didn't use in my movie to h265. Sony also provided a tool to quickly trim my A9 videos. I'm struggling to find a good workload on my R5 to limit storage. I love shooting 8k raw and my laptop can easily play it back in resolve in real time, but those files are huge. People keep saying current computers can edit the h265 R5 files, but mine plays everything back in resolve except 8k h265. ...Show more →
I am probably looking at DaVinci Resolve. I tried the Free version but it didnt work. Contacted support, and apparently they tried 8K Raw and a couple of other files and told me they worked. I probably need to do some more testing and then find a dealer in HK, take along my clips and get them to show me it all working before stumping up the cash.
For the moment, I shoot in whatever I can get away with based on the stills shooting.
I can convert from 4:2:2 to 4:2:0 and downsize to 4K using X265. I actually use Staxrip to do this (PC). I won't touch the 8K for the moment, until I have decided on an editor. Until the R5, I have only needed to use the lower end packages such as Corel VideoStudio, but much like DaVince Resolve Free, they reject the current R5 videos.
I suspect there is headroom in compressing the 8K files as you suggest using x265, but I just want to compare those outputs to know what settings will not noticeably impact quality. Since I am having some issues with CFE cards, then I am only doing UHS II which limits me to 8k30, but even then I am only doing clips as I am more stills oriented (so like 1 min clips). All in, I doubt those will amount to much more than a few TB for the moment, so nothing to concern me, and I can wait a little before purchasing an upmarket package.
for stills the R5 is great. which is why most of us wanted it. canon marketing dropped the ball on this one.
Yeah, Canon has a still shooter hit on their hands and they blew it by marketing half baked 8K video features that really no one wanted anyways (just look at how the video guys are praising the A7SIII which only does 4K). Canon could have come out marketing the 4K that works and marketing the stills camera and saved themselves all the bad overheating press that just tarnished the release.
I'm of the opinion after only using the R5 for one day that it is probably the best MILC out there if you could only buy one. There are others that are better for more specific use cases but the R5 does so many different things exceptionally well that it comes close to the top end when compared to the more specialized MILCs.
EDIT: I read further into the thread I found the battery grip stuff on and others are claiming it doesn't work that way. So unsure.
There is now a way to reset the timer for video modes without having to trick the battery door sensor. If you have the battery grip all you have to do is pull the battery tray out with camera still on. Put it straight back in and you will have another 15mins of 8K.
arbitrage wrote:
There is now a way to reset the timer for video modes without having to trick the battery door sensor. If you have the battery grip all you have to do is pull the battery tray out with camera still on. Put it straight back in and you will have another 15mins of 8K.
arbitrage wrote:
There is now a way to reset the timer for video modes without having to trick the battery door sensor. If you have the battery grip all you have to do is pull the battery tray out with camera still on. Put it straight back in and you will have another 15mins of 8K.
J.Marcus Photo wrote:
Cool! Are the video files corrupted?
I'm not sure about that yet. I had read one comment on DPR forum that with the battery door trick that you had to do it while the recording was still running and then the file gets cut off abruptly. They said it was still readable but seemed to be hard to edit?
That could be the issue with these battery workarounds because it is basically not letting the camera store the recording time that has passed in the internal memory on proper shutdown. So I assume you can't stop your recording and then pull the grip batteries as it may have then stored the shorter time
I don't think these tricks are intended as a real workaround for the limit for obvious reasons, but it is proof that the overheat shutdown and recovery is not based on any internal temperature readings, but rather on time and time alone. While this may be for valid reasons with regards to 'standard' situations, the arbitrary recovery times are the real issue here, and it doesn't make sense that recovery and limits are the same in a 95 degree day in full sun vs. a 32 degree day in the shade with wind.
Here is some discussion on file corruption. The final chunk will be corrupted but if you time things correctly it is a workable solution it seems. Of course there is no guarantee that at some point the camera is hot enough inside to do damage. https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4514631
Jman13 wrote:
I don't think these tricks are intended as a real workaround for the limit for obvious reasons, but it is proof that the overheat shutdown and recovery is not based on any internal temperature readings, but rather on time and time alone. While this may be for valid reasons with regards to 'standard' situations, the arbitrary recovery times are the real issue here, and it doesn't make sense that recovery and limits are the same in a 95 degree day in full sun vs. a 32 degree day in the shade with wind.
It's definitely a bad look.
I think some of the testing has been interesting but tests which have the potential to damage I worry if people will heed the warning.
The camera hasnt been out a month and I think even urgent firmware fixes take a couple of months to develop and then properly test before releasing. I know people are frustrated over the silence from Canon, but I don’t think they’re much different from any other large corporate. I think some new modes will be available with lower bit rates which may slow the heat build up.
With regards to timers and no temp, the exif data has a temp value, would that not suggest there is at least one temp sensor. Delkin CFE Card’s have a temp sensor which they use to throttle the I/o if required, I suspect others do also. Would not also the tests where the camera was cooled in the fridge and the freezer not indicate also that it has something more than a timer in its calculations.
Canon was burnt when the 1ds mk iii had af issues in the sun and heat. I suspect that they developed bodies for the 1dx which were heat resistant and thus made the weather sealing even better. And perhaps quite a chunk of that we see in the r5 and r6. We don’t know what design constraints they had, and I share the frustration on the recovery times and the fact that my stills shooting reduces what options I may have for video recording short clips. blowing cool air over the camera, despite what Canon may write didn’t work for me, so that body is a blessing when you are shooting in hot or cold conditions, but a curse when you want it to cool quickly.
I still won’t return my r5 as faulty, and if Canon can improve it by the end of the year I would certainly consider ditching most of my other bodies and buying a second one. Admittedly I do far more stills than video, and I can’t see me buying any more 1 series (my last was the 1dx) so the R1 will I’m sure be amazing, but not twice as good as the r5 for my needs.
arbitrage wrote:
I'm not sure about that yet. I had read one comment on DPR forum that with the battery door trick that you had to do it while the recording was still running and then the file gets cut off abruptly. They said it was still readable but seemed to be hard to edit?
That could be the issue with these battery workarounds because it is basically not letting the camera store the recording time that has passed in the internal memory on proper shutdown. So I assume you can't stop your recording and then pull the grip batteries as it may have then stored the shorter time...Show more →
I bet the new firmware will plug this “gap” quietly. Some will call it more cripple hammer, but I think it will stop people damaging an expensive bit of equipment.
sturgis wrote:
I bet the new firmware will plug this “gap” quietly. Some will call it more cripple hammer, but I think it will stop people damaging an expensive bit of equipment.
How are they going to plug that gap in firmware, as power removal is the first thing that happens to the camera when the grip is pulled?
Jman13 wrote:
I don't think these tricks are intended as a real workaround for the limit for obvious reasons, but it is proof that the overheat shutdown and recovery is not based on any internal temperature readings, but rather on time and time alone. While this may be for valid reasons with regards to 'standard' situations, the arbitrary recovery times are the real issue here, and it doesn't make sense that recovery and limits are the same in a 95 degree day in full sun vs. a 32 degree day in the shade with wind.
It's definitely a bad look.
From a different perspective. That camera will be used and abused all over the world. Sitting in hot vehicles and used immediately in hot ambient temperatures. Now you have people complaining why in Alaska it gets 35 minutes and in the Sahara only 20. They must of tested at the most extreme conditions, found a safe time limit and made that equal across the board. Some suggested that they may have been over cautious with this release. I would believe that.
I'm sure I'm not the majority but I'd rather know how much time I will get instead guessing and hoping. Also I'm curious to what is really going on here. Even if it works on a timer instead a heat sensor will the R5 be able to record safely at 8K for over one hour day after day? Most documentaries, programs are one hour so you need more time for editing.
Is all this over an extra 10 minutes of recording time worth it or do people want a professional cinema camera and not pay for it?
I also agree Canon's marketing could have be better. I'm also aware there are a few glitches that don't meet spec which hopefully are resolved with FW.
Zenon Char wrote:
Is all this over an extra 10 minutes of recording time worth it or do people want a professional cinema camera and not pay for it?
No...I am pretty sure all this is over the fact that the camera's high quality modes are not usable in hybrid situations the way things currently are. Considering you can be fully locked out of high quality video modes entirely simply by shooting photos normally over the course of an hour is a huge issue for anyone who wants to use these for hybrid work, and a lot of event shooters do that.
It isn't feasible to shut the camera down for 1-2 hours in order to gain video recording when shooting an event.
Sure, people who need to film production video are going to generally use a cinema camera. But that's not the issue here. The 'cool down' times are excessively long, and the recording length is majorly affected simply from the camera being on. That's the issue.
There seems to be speculation that Canon has been overly zealous in internal heat regulation, and that overriding it is an advantageous solution.
Basically, it's Fail-Safe system to prevent internal temperature's from reaching a point that pose harm,or shortened life to any internal component's, cause system malfunction, or user harm.
They determined a max acceptable heat threshold, employed a heat sensor, or sensor's for monitoring, and a device to shut the Camera down if the threshold is reached.
It wouldn't be practicable to allow the Camera to come back on with a drop of a “few” degrees, as it would just shut-down again in short order; so they've apparently selected a “ come back on” temp that would permit a “reasonable” amount of extended use.
The only purpose of the Timer is to give the User a “Heads Up” as to status of the temp, and approximately how much shooting time is left before the critical point.
I f there's a way hat Canon Service can detect that any safety feature of the Camera has been defeated, they would have every right to void the warranty.
Jman13 wrote:
No...I am pretty sure all this is over the fact that the camera's high quality modes are not usable in hybrid situations the way things currently are. Considering you can be fully locked out of high quality video modes entirely simply by shooting photos normally over the course of an hour is a huge issue for anyone who wants to use these for hybrid work, and a lot of event shooters do that.
It isn't feasible to shut the camera down for 1-2 hours in order to gain video recording when shooting an event.
Sure, people who need to film production video are going to generally use a cinema camera. But that's not the issue here. The 'cool down' times are excessively long, and the recording length is majorly affected simply from the camera being on. That's the issue....Show more →
The 1- 2 hrs was included in my glitches comment. Maybe glitch was not the best word to use. I agree that does seem extreme to me. Thanks for replying. This has bene going on so long and I lost focus as to what this was all really about. Perhaps it was never meant to be an 8K event camera?
Sy Sez wrote:
There seems to be speculation that Canon has been overly zealous in internal heat regulation, and that overriding it is an advantageous solution.
Basically, it's Fail-Safe system to prevent internal temperature's from reaching a point that pose harm,or shortened life to any internal component's, cause system malfunction, or user harm.
They determined a max acceptable heat threshold, employed a heat sensor, or sensor's for monitoring, and a device to shut the Camera down if the threshold is reached.
It wouldn't be practicable to allow the Camera to come back on with a drop of a “few” degrees, as it would just shut-down again in short order; so they've apparently selected a “ come back on” temp that would permit a “reasonable” amount of extended use.
The only purpose of the Timer is to give the User a “Heads Up” as to status of the temp, and approximately how much shooting time is left before the critical point.
I f there's a way hat Canon Service can detect that any safety feature of the Camera has been defeated, they would have every right to void the warranty....Show more →
That what I'm thinking about people sticking rice and screws in the battery compartment safety switch. That screw example already shows a body that has no warranty. That will leave scratch marks. Maybe Canon should develop a rice debris detector
I wouldn't bet on this but someone at DPreview said CSP told them there will be a FW update tomorrow. It is a little surprising that CPS would say this. It is usually a major announcement but we can hope.
