p.3 #1 · Any Issues With Firmware 1.0.3 on a R5MkII?
semmmyq wrote:
Likely a firmware quirk or settings drift. Try:
Reset AF settings (or full camera reset).
Check subject detection priority (People vs Animals might conflict).
Test different lighting (firmware may tweak low-light thresholds).
If no fix, report to Canon—R5 II’s new AI AF is still being optimized.
I didn't notice this at first with v1.03 but after the update the rear screen was always off no matter what setting in the "screen/viewfinder display". I saved my settings to the card, did a full camera reset, restored the settings and magically screen was functioning again. Shot some HS soccer tonight but I need to review the photos still, so inconclusive yet but I'm hopeful.
One thing for sure with multiple subjects on the field it still has stickiness issues, nothing has changed there since day 1 but that's another topic.
p.3 #3 · Any Issues With Firmware 1.0.3 on a R5MkII?
2nd body arrived yesterday and it seems to be in flawless working condition (as it should be, no power switch issue). It came with 1.0.1 which I immediately upgraded to 1.0.2. I took a few random shots around the house. I don't own duplicates of any lenses but I swapped the 35 1.4VCM and the 24-70 2.8L between the 2 bodies and just shot random things and did not notice a difference between either body (one with 1.0.2 and the other with 1.0.3).
But none of what I shot was as challenging as BIF, sports with other players/objects crossing in front of the intended target, etc. Whenever my next BIF opportunity arises I'll take both bodies and swap my 100-500 between them and just give general impressions of keeper rate. Since I don't own two 100-500s and also can't clone myself, there won't be a true A/B.
p.3 #5 · Any Issues With Firmware 1.0.3 on a R5MkII?
Carlo_M wrote:
2nd body arrived yesterday and it seems to be in flawless working condition (as it should be, no power switch issue). It came with 1.0.1 which I immediately upgraded to 1.0.2. I took a few random shots around the house. I don't own duplicates of any lenses but I swapped the 35 1.4VCM and the 24-70 2.8L between the 2 bodies and just shot random things and did not notice a difference between either body (one with 1.0.2 and the other with 1.0.3).
But none of what I shot was as challenging as BIF, sports with other players/objects crossing in front of the intended target, etc. Whenever my next BIF opportunity arises I'll take both bodies and swap my 100-500 between them and just give general impressions of keeper rate. Since I don't own two 100-500s and also can't clone myself, there won't be a true A/B. ...Show more →
I'm surprised you received such old stock with 1.0.1. I've used about 6 copies of the 100-500 and they are quite consistent for a zoom. Slight differences will mostly be in the optical alignments but that should not affect AF unless they are substantially off. I have not seen a bad copy out there, but of course it can happen. But 2/6 had bad tripod collars.
p.3 #7 · Any Issues With Firmware 1.0.3 on a R5MkII?
You're missing my point. I am blaming peoples settings MORE then actual firmware updates. That would prove it one way or the other. In the factory setting if it were to perform admirably and essentially perfectly sure would point a finger at setting changes made. That was my entire point. IN my case the settings I altered (not a ton) have not made this any less of an astoundingly perfect camera for fast action tracking be it people or animals. I'm getting things my former Z9 and A6700 didn't get. So no complaints regarding using a R5MkII along with a 100-500L or 24-105 f4L. using the 1.0.3 firmware. I loaded it right after getting the camera and charging the battery. I have no experience with 1.0.2 or others. Just saying this camera setup with the 1.0.3 has not failed me one bit.
p.3 #8 · Any Issues With Firmware 1.0.3 on a R5MkII?
dcisive wrote:
You're missing my point. I am blaming peoples settings MORE then actual firmware updates. That would prove it one way or the other. In the factory setting if it were to perform admirably and essentially perfectly sure would point a finger at setting changes made. That was my entire point. IN my case the settings I altered (not a ton) have not made this any less of an astoundingly perfect camera for fast action tracking be it people or animals. I'm getting things my former Z9 and A6700 didn't get. So no complaints regarding using a R5MkII along with a 100-500L or 24-105 f4L. using the 1.0.3 firmware. I loaded it right after getting the camera and charging the battery. I have no experience with 1.0.2 or others. Just saying this camera setup with the 1.0.3 has not failed me one bit....Show more →
In my case it is 100% the firmware or the camera has developed some issue. I've spent more time than I should on the river this year with Ospreys and after the update the camera went bonkers. My camera will see the bird, put a box around it, follow it and never pull into complete focus, at least 25 % of the time. The other 75% when it works, its just phenomenal. I am challenging the AF system to the max though! I do the same with my R1 and Z9 and maybe get one or two frames slightly out just as I'm acquiring the subject. I've changed every focus setting In real time with the same results. One thing i have noticed though, is the camera works perfectly fine with shorter glass! The 70-200, short primes and zooms don't seem to have any issues. Mine have strictly been with the super teles. But I shoot long glass the majority of the time! all firmware is current on my lenses..
Oof, I don't know if I want to test that out. The reason I may not have noticed it is because I generally reduce the power saving features because I shoot a lot of video, so I actually don't want the camera going to sleep/low power mode very often especially when I'm trying to set up a scene or shot but not actually recording (if I don't disable low power settings it just goes to sleep).
I get that he says toggling those settings introduces/eliminates the bug, but at this point I don't want to risk it maybe introducing it and then not being able to remove the bug.
This weekend may be the first one where I can take the 100-500 out for testing on the two bodies (1.0.2 and 1.0.3) and if so, I'll try to see if there's a discernible difference. I have shot around the home/neighborhood with the 35 VCM, 24-70 2.8L and 70-200 2.8 and not found a detectable difference in AF performance, but the CR author is clear that it's affecting him with his 100-500L (and a 50 VCM which I do not own).
p.3 #12 · Any Issues With Firmware 1.0.3 on a R5MkII?
EB-1 wrote:
I'm surprised you received such old stock with 1.0.1. I've used about 6 copies of the 100-500 and they are quite consistent for a zoom. Slight differences will mostly be in the optical alignments but that should not affect AF unless they are substantially off. I have not seen a bad copy out there, but of course it can happen. But 2/6 had bad tripod collars.
p.3 #13 · Any Issues With Firmware 1.0.3 on a R5MkII?
skibum5 wrote:
Mine from a couple months ago had 1.0.1 as well.
When I think back on most of the devices or components that I buy with regularly updated firmware or software (motherboards, GPUs, cameras, iPhones, iPads) the majority of them did not come with the latest firmware/software. Even when I get iPhones on release date of the new model, Apple usually drops updated software day-of, if not within the first week.
My guess is that the majority of R5mk2 out there able to be bought are running 1.0.1 (with maybe a smattering with 1.0.2) out of the box for a few reasons.
1) $4K DSLRs probably don't sell as fast as we might think they do. Outside of the initial launch month, I can't recall a time when retailers were out-of-stock for the R5mk2. So it's not like the iPhone market on new release month where they are basically going from production line to consumer hands within a week or so.
2) Companies likely take a conservative approach to their production line in terms of using at least a one, if not two "prior version build" just in case something is found out to be wrong with their newest version. 1.0.2 was released in December 2024. It would be prudent of Canon not to put 1.0.2 into the production cycle of new bodies being manufactured until the software had been out for at least a few months, with feedback re: bugs gathered from the user community.
I'm betting Canon takes a similar approach to what I describe in #2. 1.0.1 was released at the end of September 2024. Using that logic, it's likely that cameras shipping with that firmware were likely assembled somewhere between December 2024 - March 2025.
p.3 #14 · Any Issues With Firmware 1.0.3 on a R5MkII?
David83 wrote:
My camera will see the bird, put a box around it, follow it and never pull into complete focus, at least 25 % of the time. The other 75% when it works, its just phenomenal.
Exactly what happens to me. BTW awesome osprey photo.
p.3 #15 · Any Issues With Firmware 1.0.3 on a R5MkII?
So, over on the Canon Rumors site there seems to be some folks that are finding a bit of a fix for this issue with focus consistency on the R5MkII. They are finding "Disabling" of the Auto Power OFF setting has been seeming to fix the issues. Personally I never noted any issues with the 1.0.3 thus far using a 100-500L. But for those that have, I'd suggest they verify in their menu that this Auto Power OFF is set to DISABLE and see what happens. Run some tests and see if indeed it has an effect on allowing the consistency of focus to return as it supposedly was in 1.0.2 and before. Please do report back. That would be a very interesting bug. But in some ways makes a little sense as effecting the power delivery to the board involved with focus could mess things up. We'll see. Out of pure suspicion I set mine to Disable just in case ;-)
p.3 #16 · Any Issues With Firmware 1.0.3 on a R5MkII?
Funny almost tragic story. I just connected my 2nd R5ii to CanonConnect App on my iPhone. I almost accidentally clicked on the "new firmware available, update now?" because I thought 1.0.4 might have come out until I remembered this is the one I'm keeping on 1.0.2
p.3 #19 · Any Issues With Firmware 1.0.3 on a R5MkII?
Not a huge fan of the app. But in a pinch and when traveling light (like just camera, lens and phone) it's the easiest way to get photos SOOC to the phone for IMs.
p.3 #20 · Any Issues With Firmware 1.0.3 on a R5MkII?
dcisive wrote:
So, over on the Canon Rumors site there seems to be some folks that are finding a bit of a fix for this issue with focus consistency on the R5MkII. They are finding "Disabling" of the Auto Power OFF setting has been seeming to fix the issues. Personally I never noted any issues with the 1.0.3 thus far using a 100-500L. But for those that have, I'd suggest they verify in their menu that this Auto Power OFF is set to DISABLE and see what happens. Run some tests and see if indeed it has an effect on allowing the consistency of focus to return as it supposedly was in 1.0.2 and before. Please do report back. That would be a very interesting bug. But in some ways makes a little sense as effecting the power delivery to the board involved with focus could mess things up. We'll see. Out of pure suspicion I set mine to Disable just in case ;-)...Show more →
Thanks. I think there may be something to this. I set my auto power off to 10 min -- didn't want to completely turn it off because I have a bad habit of forgetting to turn off after a long outing. Anyway did a couple multi-hour outings Thurs. and yesterday and this seemed to have "fixed" the problem I was having where the camera AF system was showing the subject in focus and tracking it as well but the lens AF remaining frozen -- like the two were not talking to each other. No missed shots either day due to the firmware issue w/ the power off set to a long delay, just the usual human error -- sometimes I think I need a firmware update.
