Canon R5 Announced with 8k

I wonder if that would work with the heat too. The fan speed might be excessive for long use. Or insufficient for quick extraction.

Someone ought to try it, though. On their own $4,000 camera.
 
There's something hilarious about you referencing a tank. The Canon News article also said this, which makes me think the adapter can't save the R5:

"The camera does have to be properly built to handle heat transfer from the sensor to the lens mount, but this is certainly something Canon could accomplish"

My thinking is that canon literally played with fire by neglecting the heat dissipation of the R5. They wanted it to work poorly enough that anyone considering a C series camera for their A camera would still get a C-whatever, but that people who didnt have that much money or just wanted a B camera could still use it. But this is not like coding where you have full control of the functionality. You're battling physics and it was probably impossible to predict just how the camera would perform before it was fully built and tested.

People thought, "Canon is so good that they're owning up to this issue in advance," but the reality may have been that the overheating is so bad that they had to cover their liabilities
 
Last edited:
Having watched the video, it's probably not sufficient. Pressing the shutter won't be enough. It would need to be externally powered - maybe by the camera via the USB - with some sort of a sensor protector too. Sort of like a Roots type blower.
 
IMO, it wouldn't work unless the inside chamber had micro ducts for the airflow. I don't know if it does or not - weather sealing may imply it doesn't although a patent may imply it does - but I think it's pointless either way.

The bottom line answer for many is to buy another camera. Not me though.
 
The video eye AF wouldn't be a deal breaker...Sony's is excellent (in the stills cameras).

I just want to own a Canon again and it happens to just have a lot of features that are nice with presumably one very big problem that I will be able to avoid.
 
ahalpert said:
The good news for NorBro is apparently the R5 has better eye AF than sony: https://fstoppers.com/gear/eye-auto...e=FS_RSS&utm_medium=RSS&utm_campaign=Main_RSS

So versus the A7SIII it will have better AF, better IBIS, higher resolution and perhaps better color. The only thing wrong with it is that it overheats
Click to expand...

why would you assume that the r5 will have better AF than the upcoming A7SIII? i would expect sony to improve and advance on their AF & color. who knows with sony's IBIS but the r5's IBIS has its own issues so not near perfect.
 
ahalpert said:
... My thinking is that canon literally played with fire by neglecting the heat dissipation of the R5. They wanted it to work poorly enough that anyone considering a C series camera for their A camera would still get a C-whatever, but that people who didnt have that much money or just wanted a B camera could still use it. ..

People thought, "Canon is so good that they're owning up to this issue in advance," but the reality may have been that the overheating is so bad that they had to cover their liabilities
Click to expand...

The king of all cripples was Fuji's disabling the auto focus on XT3 a year after camera's release. Via the firmware "upgrade". After that, very little surprises me about the Japanese photo-video cartel.

"I shot on Fuji
But, I swear, it was in self-defense".

NorBro said:
IMO, it wouldn't work unless the inside chamber had micro ducts for the airflow. I don't know if it does or not - weather sealing may imply it doesn't although a patent may imply it does - but I think it's pointless either way.

The bottom line answer for many is to buy another camera. Not me though.
Click to expand...

It shouldn't be difficult to built a similar concept heat extractor. Inside the body, it's all metal. The rest will, obviously, depend on how successful it is. Heck, much like a free EF-to-RF adapter, Canon might want to include something like this with each R5 & R6. Let's say, you have to take the lens off, place the heat extractor on for ten minutes and then you have another half hour of 8K. A lot of people might go for that.
 
david_p said:
why would you assume that the r5 will have better AF than the upcoming A7SIII? i would expect sony to improve and advance on their AF & color. who knows with sony's IBIS but the r5's IBIS has its own issues so not near perfect.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the downvote. The R5 was an unknown quantity because Canon had never implemented IBIS and this was their first pro mirrorless camera. The A7SIII I expect to have AF and IBIS like the A7R4 and s-cinetone like the FX9. I dont care that much about IBIS but Sony's IBIS is generally considered an inferior implementation.

And yes, obviously the A7SIII has not been announced yet so this is all just speculation. But even if I buy an A7SIII, I see no sense in denying another camera's advantages
 
One advantage Sonys always had over the Canons was their competitive prices.

I was pretty sure it would be closer to $3K than $4K, but I guess not.
 
NorBro said:
One advantage Sonys always had over the Canons was their competitive prices.

I was pretty sure it would be closer to $3K than $4K, but I guess not.
Click to expand...

I'm guessing 3400-3500. And I think I may just get a tamron 28-75 and then later 70-180 and 17-28 if needed. Need to think about it. But the 28-75 is fast enough that I wouldn't really need faster lenses and f2.8 FF is pretty shallow as is
 
Your camera will hate you for that. This will make it feel better.

Plus, your clients will say: "No way, is that a GM?"

And you'll say: "Well, of course it is. Only the best for you."

GM 24-70mm.jpg
 
Hmm not so sure my camera would hate me. IQ seems fine. AF seems good. I don't think anyone will care that it's not a GM. IME even people who care don't care much past the camera body.

I'm not willing to spend a bundle on new lenses anyway. For the walk around lens it will either be Sony 24-105 or Tamron 28-75. Each has its advantages. I may actually like the character of the Sony more, and going wider is a big plus. But a Tamron 28-75 is half the cost of a Sony 24-105 + Samyang 45 f1.8
 
I have used the GM lenses. Before I would have scoffed at getting one, after using them I was impressed with everything about the lenses. The motors on the GM are so quiet and the zoom so smooth... Yes they're expensive. The 24-105 is slower but the focal range is very useful being able shot live event without swapping lenses. The 2.8 is nice but like you said with FF dof you don't want to be down there if you can help it. Then there's the size, weight and cost.
 
Last edited:
LOL. I'm just messing with you.

Actually Roger from LR thinks the Tamron SP 35mm f/1.4 Di is optically the best 35mm you can get right now.

(I'm assuming he means still lenses as I don't think he breaks down Zeiss or Cooke and the like manual/cinema glass.)
 
NorBro said:
LOL. I'm just messing with you.

Actually Roger from LR thinks the Tamron SP 35mm f/1.4 Di is optically the best 35mm you can get right now.

(I'm assuming he means still lenses as I don't think he breaks down Zeiss or Cooke and the like manual/cinema glass.)
Click to expand...

Tamron is doing good things. I have their EF 35mm 1.8 VC. If anything I thought it was too sharp. Frankly I like the Samyang look more (don't shoot me!). The samyang 45mm and 75mm FE look really nice and have good AF.

AFAIK, Tamron has only released f/2.8 prime lenses for the Sony system. But everyone raves about their zooms

I like Sony GM lenses more than I like their cameras. Although they are very even performers and a bit boring (Nice bokeh/OOF though). If the GM was the same price as the Tamron I would get it.

24-105 is a nice range to have but once I'm limited to f/4 it may make me want something faster sometimes... although the camera will be so good in low-light it may not matter for anything but aesthetic choices... no need to decide now. Who knows, the camera may suck for some reason anyway
 
You should probably reevaluate your game plan here at some point, and/or start selling stuff ASAP on Tuesday if it's warranted.

Can't end up with 5-6-7 EF lenses and then also 2-3-4 E-mount lenses (well, you can if you want).

I would get a great, fast medium prime to take advantage of the AF and use your EF lenses manually when possible.

Most of the time I could do everything with a 35mm or 50mm, and the wides (MF) are for establishing shots, and the zooms for distance coverage (which could be great with AF but not always necessary).
 
Hmm I'm not sure I need to reevaluate my game plan. You just described my game plan. Keep my EF lenses for MF use. Many of them are MF anyway plus the FS7 doesn't have good AF.

So what I really want is a gimbal lens with good AF (such as 24-105) and then maybe 1-3 fast primes. But I could probably get by with just one prime, a normal one. Or even none! So maybe it would make sense to sell some of my primes and replace them, but I still use MFT and EF cameras so those lenses will still come into play.

The name of my game is take advantage of AF while buying as few lenses as possible. So ideally a 24-105 or 28-75 + a 45, 75, and 70-180. But maybe I can make do with just a 24-105...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top