"So in a nutshell here is how one should go about using the EOS R5:
If you need to reduce rolling shutter and want the most reliable performance with no heat-issues – select the non-HQ 4K modes at 30p, 25 or 24p.
If you want to improve image quality in 4K, but are happy to have the camera stop working in the middle of a shoot (potentially) – choose 4K HQ mode.
If you need RAW, you have to select 8K. There is no 4K RAW mode unfortunately. 8K has a 20 minute thermal cut off on average.
The 4K/60p and 4K/120p will always be subject to “thermal throttling” – the camera cannot sustain this speed for long periods and will cut off after 15 minutes in 120p and 30 minutes in 60p.
There are two schools of thought on the EOS R5 overheating controversy and both are correct in their own way. Canon could have played it safe and not offered 8K, 4K from 8K or 4K/120p at all. They could have kept to just the lower-power 4K modes, pixel binned from the 45 megapixel sensor in the same way the Leica SL2 and Sony A7R IV produce their 4K images. Instead, Canon felt the advantages of advertising the EOS R5 with 8K and 4K/120p outweighed the disadvantages in terms of reliability and practicality.
The other school of thought is that Canon should improve their technology so that it’s possible to do high quality 4K and 8K in a small mirrorless camera without overheating problems. The Sigma Fp has a much smaller body than the EOS R5 and manages to do internal 4K RAW recording and output 12bit 4K RAW sensor data to a USB C SSD or external recorder. This is quite some efficient sensor and processor design, especially when you consider it runs from a small Panasonic GH2 battery. It isn’t power hungry and it doesn’t get too hot. There’s also an innovative thermal design going on with the Fp, and Canon seem not to have done the same with the EOS R5.
I understand the criticism of this blog made by some Canon fans – for so long I’ve been criticising Canon for not implementing exciting video features. Now finally they have and I am still complaining. The difficult position I am in is that I couldn’t stay silent about serious limitations and let big name websites or YouTubers hype the camera while underplaying the negatives. This would have been a disservice to those who will pay a lot of money – upwards of £4000 minimum – for a camera system that is key to their professional lives. Going uninformed into such a big purchase, only to find out that it stops recording during a shoot with lost take after lost shot, is not the kind of service either EOSHD or Canon should be offering filmmakers."
I'm glad they included all the higher-end options. I'd rather have the ability to choose to record sub-20 or sub-15-minute videos at higher res if I want to. I especially don't understand the opinion that 4K/120 shouldn't have been included. If you're using that for slow motion, don't you take short bursts since it stretches out so far on the timeline once you slow it down?
I'm glad to see Canon including all they can and then giving us the choice as to if and how to use it. If they'd played it safe, we'd have another release everyone was calling "feature-limited" and Canon would be criticized for "finally just catching up with everyone else".
The opinion to play it safe sounds like the old Canon management style that is gone. I'm glad it's gone.
I think the argument is more that they are clearly marketing this as an 8K professional grade video camera, which, with the current overheating issues, it isn't. It would be like BMW trying to market a new car as having some killer feature which causes the engine to unexpectedly shut off after a few minutes of driving.
I don't think so. I think this is a non-issue since Canon clearly isn't targeting the C300 crowd except as a B-cam, in which case, they will have three of four of these lined up to get around the thermal limits the same way they have four REDs lined up for when they crap out, and they do.
To me, 20 minutes or less of 8K RAW or 4K/120 sounds reasonable. A 512 CFExpress card holds about 20 minutes of 8K RAW, and the 1 and 2TB CFexpress cards have iffy reviews and mixed reports on compatibility with various camera. The 512 SanDisk is the only SanDisk approved for 1DX3, so it may be the same for R5. Maybe there's a larger approved brand, but I trust SanDisk.
I'm still trying to find the guy who was planning on shooting an entire wedding in 8K RAW – 4 hours of footage is what, 6TB of data on twelve 512gb CFExpress cards at $600 each, so that's $7200 worth of cards? Maybe that's manageable in post if you delete the originals after rendering out the finals or something.
Canon said it shoots 8K RAW, and no one thought that was even possible regardless of a time limit. People thought the camera would catch fire after 5 minutes of shooting. 20 minutes is better than I expected.
Glad you're happy to be their beta tester.
Whatever, dude. Sure.
Jul 12, 2020 at 10:40 PM
Previous versions of highdesertmesa's message #15281642 « Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6 »
