cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

EOS R5 Overheating Issues - EOS R6 No Dual Card Video Recording

kimbulford
New Contributor

Multiple reports are coming in that the EOS R5 has major overheating issues. I was wondering how they were going to pull off 8K and 4K120FPS in such a small body with no active or even passive cooling. Hopefully these are just pre-production issues and they improve the processing efficiency to the point to where this does not become a production issue.

In other news it seems like both the R5 and R6 will have terrible battery life and the R6 at least will not be able to record video to both card slots....so I'm back on the fence with waiting to see where Panasonic goes with the GH6. The R6 also still has that 30min video recording limit.

 
 
all my favorite porn sites with hd content you can find here https://besthdporn.me/ 

 

 

 

 

 

14 REPLIES 14

Waddizzle
VIP

The overheating issues are way overblown.  It is a topic being hyped on social media platforms like YouTube.  It's click bait.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Doctor told me to get out and walk, so I bought a Canon."

Tronhard
Respected Contributor
Overheating issues are, as far as I know, only linked to video use, so may we take it your interest is in video? I would ask if you ARE a serious video-specific user, why not get an actual video camera?
cheers Trevor

"All the beauty of life is made up of light and shadow", Leo Tolstoy;
"Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase" Percy W. Harris
"A good swordsman is more important than a good sword" Amit Kalantri

Technique will always Outlast Tech - Me

WJM
Occasional Contributor

With all this video over heating hype . It would be nice at least for me not to have video at all. I just don't use it. And maybe the cost on the R5 and R6 would come down.

Tronhard
Respected Contributor
I agree and believe there is a market for a really good stills camera. It was for that reason that I went out and bought the Nikon Df, a fantastic unit that doesn't try to engage with video, but hearkens back to the classic film days, yet has a fantastic FF sensor.

Initially, it got rubbished by people who really didn't get the point, but it has gained much more respect as people have realized the point.

So, Canon - how about that? Make a STILL photographers' camera that strips out all the other video stuff and gives us the best solution for what we want to do???
cheers Trevor

"All the beauty of life is made up of light and shadow", Leo Tolstoy;
"Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase" Percy W. Harris
"A good swordsman is more important than a good sword" Amit Kalantri

Technique will always Outlast Tech - Me

wq9nsc
Respected Contributor

I agree Trevor.  Swiss army knives can be useful at times but purpose built tools are better at accomplishing specific tasks.  Between a 1DX, 1DX II,  1DX III, and 5DS R I have various video options but I hate shooting video with the form factor of a DSLR and for me the XF 400 camcorder is a great video solution that doesn't take up much room in a bag.  It also has forced air cooling so that it can shoot 4K high frame rate video for long periods of time in hot weather without concern.

 

To paraphrase from Michael Crichton's Jurassic park, scientists and engineers sometimes spend far too much time asking whether we can do something and far too little time asking whether we should do something.

 

Rodger

EOS 1DX M3, 1DX M2, 1DX, 5DS R, 1D M2, EOS 650 (film), many lenses, XF400 video

RobertTheFat
Honored Contributor

@wq9nsc wrote:

I agree Trevor.  Swiss army knives can be useful at times but purpose built tools are better at accomplishing specific tasks.  Between a 1DX, 1DX II,  1DX III, and 5DS R I have various video options but I hate shooting video with the form factor of a DSLR and for me the XF 400 camcorder is a great video solution that doesn't take up much room in a bag.  It also has forced air cooling so that it can shoot 4K high frame rate video for long periods of time in hot weather without concern.

 

To paraphrase from Michael Crichton's Jurassic park, scientists and engineers sometimes spend far too much time asking whether we can do something and far too little time asking whether we should do something.

 

Rodger


I too am tempted to agree. But I guess I'd like to know by how much the price of the camera would actually be reduced by the elimination of video. I suspect it would not be by very much. Like Trevor and Rodger, I seldom, if ever, use my cameras' video capability. But it's sort of nice to know it's there, just in case.

 

That said, the quibbling we often see about the extent of the video capability in a given film camera leaves me cold. If you have to worry about exactly what's included, you probably need a video camera.

Bob
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania USA

Tronhard
Respected Contributor

Hi again Bob

Yep, I have to agree with you here too. My thought is that in building a camera from the ground up for stills rather than video there could be considerable tweaking of the electronics and firmware to make an awesome stills unit. It would simply the interface (both physical and software) and some of that processing horsepower could go to other capabilities.

 

It seems to me that a lot of people throwing criticism at DSLR and MILCs are not, in fact, wanting to use them seriously as stills cameras, but they want them to perform like dedicated video cameras.  It needs someone to have the courage to put out a dedicated variant of each type - a great stills camera that does minimal video and a great video camera without the heat and time limitations of the current compromise.

cheers Trevor

"All the beauty of life is made up of light and shadow", Leo Tolstoy;
"Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase" Percy W. Harris
"A good swordsman is more important than a good sword" Amit Kalantri

Technique will always Outlast Tech - Me

The price reduction of removing the video component is negligible. The sensor, the processor, the main logic board, EVF, etc. would all be the same whether for straight photographic use or for use as a highbred. The only additional cost of adding the video component is in heat reduction (always a good idea, even for straight photography) and the additional software needed to tell the camera how to shoot and process video.

 

If there were significant costs, what company would not attempt to recapture that cost by keeping two cameras selling just like they did in the days of film? It wasn't that long ago that I purchased a Nikon D5000 for stills (it still did 720p) and a Canon Vixa HFM31 for video. I even "jerry-rigged" the same rig so that I could shoot both at the same time with a single shutter release. But if it were costly to make a highbred, they would protect the video camera the same way they do the professional line C200+.

 

However, what many still photographers are forgetting is how much of the sales of cameras in this rapidly decreasing market is coming in the video and YouTube market. Leading to "quantities of scale" keeping the prices more affordable to everyone, and the advances in technology at this point are coming from that environment at a faster rate than the pure photography market.

 

In fact from a photography standpoint, other than cost and video, what would a newer Canon have over a Hasse 5 series with a digital back if used in a fashion photography setting. In many ways, I would still prefer a 500C to almost any current camera in production today in a strictly photographic environment.

One thing I forgot to add in my earlier post.

 

I believe the EU "TAX" that increased the price for cameras that were seen as a "camcorder" expired in 2018. And newer cameras by both Sony and Panasonic do not have the 29:59 recording limit. Why Canon continues to embed this into their firmware is unknown except perhaps out of fear that the tax may be reinstated.

 

Still You could simply put in the code with a branch around the time limit, and simply remove the branch in a new version of the firmware and push out the update should the tax be reinstated. Just seems like a friendlier way to do it.