p.1 #1 · Canon R5: long delay between frames for Interval Timer sequences?
This has been a somewhat "known issue" for years, but I don't think many actually know or care about it, unless you regularly shoot night time-lapse sequences like I do. Figures it's worth bringing up again to see if there's anything new in the Canon world that I'm not aware of.
Anyways, the basic problem is that, at least for "older" Canon bodies like the original R5 and R6 (and all DSLR bodies), the camera imposes a minimum of 1-second delay between shots that have a "long exposure" time of 1s or more.
If the "official statement from Canon" from the 2nd thread is true, Canon has baked something into their cameras that is beyond user control. :-(
In my real world experience, this effectively means that when I'm setting up a Milky Way timelapse, I'm forced to into something like this:
- Shutter speed (per frame) = 3sec
- Interval = 5sec (in the R5's Interval Timer settings)
This means that for every 5 seconds in the real world, I'm only capturing 3 seconds of light, per frame. If I try to set interval = 4sec, the R5 will skip an entire cycle, and effectively only shoot 1 frame every 8s.
I have no idea why the R5 takes so long to process such frames. And believe me, I have turned-off everything that can be turned off (Long-exposure NR, High ISO NR, IBIS, AF, HDR, etc). And I'm shooting Raw, not something like Raw+jpeg. I've also updated the R5 firmware whenever one is released. It doesn't help (but then, the firmware notes makes no mention of addressing this).
I also happen to have a Fuji X-T5 to compare to. And on the Fuji, I can happily shoot 4.5s frames on an interval of 5sec. (A delay of only 0.5s or less). That effectively means that I'm capturing much more light for each 5 seconds in the real world.
Due to this, I'm using the X-T5 as my primary tool for shooting timelapses, and the R5 as a backup. It should be a the other way around.
Does anyone know if the newer Canon bodies (R5 mark2, etc) improves in this area? Or if I'm missing something about the R5 that I've somehow missed all these years?
p.1 #2 · Canon R5: long delay between frames for Interval Timer sequences?
That's strange. On the DSLRs you could use a 2 second exposure for example in continuous advance with the remote release locked and I don't recall any gaps more than a very short fraction of a second. It runs until the card is full or the battery is dead. I thought the R5 was like that also. Setting an Interval Timer on the camera is NOT how I ever did consecutive exposures. Do you have the traditional 3-pin remote release with the lock function?
p.1 #3 · Canon R5: long delay between frames for Interval Timer sequences?
EB-1 wrote:
That's strange. On the DSLRs you could use a 2 second exposure for example in continuous advance with the remote release locked and I don't recall any gaps more than a very short fraction of a second. It runs until the card is full or the battery is dead. I thought the R5 was like that also. Setting an Interval Timer on the camera is NOT how I ever did consecutive exposures. Do you have the traditional 3-pin remote release with the lock function?
EBH
Interesting... I've never had to use a traditional remote trigger or intervalometer since the R5 has a built-in one. However, I did a few tests just now at home, and the results are somewhat different than my in-the-field experiences. There's more gradations to this issue than my original post.
1) Setting drive to high speed continuous, and shutter speeds of 4s (and longer - 5s, 6s, 7s, 8s, etc), the R5 can almost immediately take the next frame without much delay (definitely less than 1sec of waiting).
- The LCD flashes "BUSY" for a brief moment and then quickly starts the next frame.
2) Using Interval Timer, with Interval = 5s, and shutter-speed = 4s, the sequence is able to reliably complete, with no skips.
- This is my most common combination for my night time-lapses. I have DEFINITELY tried this exact same combinations as above in the field, and the R5 fails; it can't do it. (Note: I'm testing with the same manual-focus lens)
Now I'm thinking that perhaps the outdoor cold temperatures might affect the performance of the R5 for timelapses.
3) Testing longer combinations of ShutterSpeed / Interval with a 1sec gap (5s / 6s; 6s / 7s; 8s / 9s); yields inconsistent results. Some consecutive frames are good, and some get skipped.
- This is what I experienced in the field, so to be safe, I impose a 2sec gap between frames for my R5 timelapses.
I'll have redo the above tests on my next outing and see what happens. However, given the success of the High-Speed-Continuous test, this gives me hope that I can work-around the issue with a traditional remote-trigger with the "hold-lock" feature.
p.1 #4 · Canon R5: long delay between frames for Interval Timer sequences?
I just returned yesterday from WY where I was shooting night sky/landscape using the R5. I used both manual lenses and RF-native lenses. My intervalometer was the Canon TC-80N3. For milky way shots, I was taking 30-second subs, with a 1-second delay between exposures. No issues whatsoever with that. Temperatures were in the mid 20s Fahrenheit during the imaging sessions.
In using the TC-80N3, I did not use the "hold/lock" feature. i set the exposure time, delay time (1 second) and number of exposures, pressed "Start/Stop" and went to the car to keep warm.
p.1 #5 · Canon R5: long delay between frames for Interval Timer sequences?
kirbic wrote:
I just returned yesterday from WY where I was shooting night sky/landscape using the R5. I used both manual lenses and RF-native lenses. My intervalometer was the Canon TC-80N3. For milky way shots, I was taking 30-second subs, with a 1-second delay between exposures. No issues whatsoever with that. Temperatures were in the mid 20s Fahrenheit during the imaging sessions.
In using the TC-80N3, I did not use the "hold/lock" feature. i set the exposure time, delay time (1 second) and number of exposures, pressed "Start/Stop" and went to the car to keep warm.
It does seem the delay is a problem with the R5's built-in Interval Timer feature, not an inherent limit of the camera's actual capabilities...
