R6 (and maybe R5) overheating issue

https://www.canonrumor​s.com …os-series-of-cameras-cr2/

Once you add the cost of high quality ND filters, matte box, external batteries, external monitor for false color, XLR audio recorder, cages and rigging required for, etc, the cost isn’t that much different and the set up is bulkier.

For those complaining about the R5 for video, the R300 and the lower end R200 when it is released will be the cameras for you...if you actually record decent video for a living though.

Looks like the size will possibly be something like a Zcam but with better stability. I’m pretty excited for this release. Hopefully it comes with all the DPAF II improvements and processing power of the R5 when it comes to autofocus.

idkdc wrote in post #19111478
https://www.canonrumor​s.com …os-series-of-cameras-cr2/

Once you add the cost of high quality ND filters, matte box, external batteries, external monitor for false color, XLR audio recorder, cages and rigging required for, etc, the cost isn’t that much different and the set up is bulkier.

For those complaining about the R5 for video, the R300 and the lower end R200 when it is released will be the cameras for you...if you actually record decent video for a living though.

Looks like the size will possibly be something like a Zcam but with better stability. I’m pretty excited for this release. Hopefully it comes with all the DPAF II improvements and processing power of the R5 when it comes to autofocus.

Probably WHY the R5 overheats with video use

Canon wants you to buy video cameras for video needs

Betting this is software and designed into it from canon

umphotography wrote in post #19111539
Probably WHY the R5 overheats with video use

Canon wants you to buy video cameras for video needs

Betting this is software and designed into it from canon

I beg to differ and (from my perspective and experience) can tell it's most definitely hardware, and you're right, DoP's, camera operators, and independent businesses want video cameras for professional video needs. I just explained that an R5 (and the A7III) would need to be rigged and would increase the cost to $6000-8000 for proper video tools. Specs are specs, and real world usage is another reality, and frankly, more important to purchasing customers. The R300 and R200 will make us happier than whatever hackneyed rig with mirrorless cameras can. I've been there and done that already.

I can certainly understand corporate 'politics', and the need for one business entity to impose performance limits on its products, so as to not cannibalize the product sales of another business entity.

But I cannot understand using 'overheating' -- which apparently starts when just turning on the camera, and not using any video features at all -- as the apparent limiting factor. It just makes the R6/R5 designers and product planning teams to both look like fools, as if it were a design oversight and not a deliberate placement of a performance ceiling on the product (to be a good corporate cousin).

Wilt wrote in post #19111561
I can certainly understand corporate 'politics', and the need for one business entity to impose performance limits on its products, so as to not cannibalize the product sales of another business entity.

But I cannot understand using 'overheating' -- which apparently starts when just turning on the camera, and not using any video features at all -- as the apparent limiting factor. It just makes the R6/R5 designers and product planning teams to both look like fools, as if it were a design oversight and not a deliberate placement of a performance ceiling on the product (to be a good corporate cousin).

I think you just have to walk over to the R5 user page where actual users are taking plenty of photos without overheating issues.

I am not speaking of taking stills only...I am writing about the video segment maximum time which is decreased even if you are not doing anything but shooting stills. I
mplementation makes the 'crippling' done for the cinema camera business look instead like a design error on the part of the R5/R6 team.

Wilt wrote in post #19111572
I am not speaking of taking stills only...I am writing about the video segment maximum time which is decreased even if you are not doing anything but shooting stills. I
mplementation makes the 'crippling' done for the cinema camera business look instead like a design error on the part of the R5/R6 team.

The camera already works in several video modes regardless of how much heat has built up. I already covered them in a separate post: 4:2:2 10 Bit non-HQ with C-Log, Super-35 mode, etc. Indefinitely with an external recorder in 4K DCI 4:2:2 10 Bit 60P. How is this crippling when no other 45+ megapixel still camera offers this even in much larger bodies with venting? This might be easier for you to understand if you have worked with any of the mentioned video codecs and frame rates before that I've mentioned.

If I want a dedicated video camera with indefinite record times at max bit depth, I pick a dedicated sensor camera for that purpose (24 MP S1H, 12 MP A7S III [In shade, not direct sunlight], 8.85MP Canon C200, 9.6 MP Canon C300 Mark III).

So what if no other camera does 8k yet?! If the specs claim 30 minutes of 8k video, it ought to the able to achieve that limit no matter what circumstance...the 8k video stops recording at 30 minutes, like the specs claim. What the competition can or cannot do is irrelevant in the inability of the camera to achieve its printed specifications!

The fact that no other brand camera CAN shoot 8k video merely buys Canon a bit of time in correcting its cameras not achieving their printed specs.

Wilt wrote in post #19111578
So what if no other camera does 8k yet?! If the specs claim 30 minutes of 8k video, it ought to the able to achieve that limit no matter what circumstance...the 8k video stops recording at 30 minutes, like the specs claim. What the competition can or cannot do is irrelevant in the inability of the camera to achieve its printed specifications!

I'm saying that
1. It sounds like you aren't the target customer for Canon video.
2. No one really cares about 8K video. The ones who can make effective use of it already know there are limits given the size of the body and consider those limits fair for the price, or will have read the documentation that Canon has been transparent with at the beginning. This is an introductory model to whet the industry's appetite for another push in resolution for Hollywood (which keeps the lights on for a camera company).
3. Canon listens to its users...who actually record video.
4. Crippling and product segmentation is in the eye of the beholder, and frankly, a moan and groan term used by people who want more for less money. We can use it to describe the Macbook Air vs. the Pro 13 vs. the Pro 15 vs. the iMac Pro vs the Mac Pro. Apple advertises that you can edit video on the Macbook Air. Does that mean you, as a consumer or professional, should go and buy it to edit 4K and 6K RAW video? Probably not, that's completely on you to do your research and purchase the right tool for the job.
5. You can buy a Windows PC and get a much better specs for the money. Does this matter to all professionals who buy into the Mac ecosystem that have more to do with their time than fret over "crippling"? Probably not.

Put simply, Why does the new Canon camera NOT MEET SPECIFICATION???

It does not matter if I or someone else is not the target for this Canon...that is up to us as individuals to decide for ourselves the suitability of any product.
But why does it not simply shoot video for the time limitations printed, and then simply stop that movie recording... Without regard to issues like overheating?

Would you tolerate a camera that could not achieve 20 fps still image capture, where the specs claim that...when using a lens that Canon claims will work at 20 fps with that camera body?

Wilt wrote in post #19111578
If the specs claim 30 minutes of 8k video, it ought to the able to achieve that limit no matter what circumstance...

Just like the cars should be able to achieve their advertised 0-60 times or MPG ratings going up a mountain...?

mccamli wrote in post #19111591
Just like the cars should be able to achieve their advertised 0-60 times or MPG ratings going up a mountain...?

Well, no one claims specs on anything but level ground, so to expect otherwise is expecting too much.
Would you accept a car that achieves the 0-60 mph time on level ground...once, before it overheats?

That, BTW, isn't the same as a camera that shoots 8k for 30 minutes, but only if the camera has not been turned on at all for any length of time. Otherwise it only shoots 8k for 5 min (or whatever time before it locks you out)...

Since Canon has apparently always limited its highest spec video to 12 min (or later) 30 min. it is not the 30 min. itself that is at issue. Why can it achieve 8k 30 min video, but not if it was turned on and shooting stills for an hour?
A pro might want to shoot a video of the precessional to the altar, but is prevent from doing that if shooting the groom's party while waiting for the bride to arrive.

If it is a timer limit imposed on video (rather than temperature sensing), why does the timer run even in stills mode>

Wilt wrote in post #19111596
Well, no one claims specs on anything but level ground, so to expect otherwise is expecting too much.
Would you accept a car that achieves the 0-60 mph time on level ground...once, before it overheats?

That, BTW, isn't the same as a camera that shoots 8k for 30 minutes, but only if the camera has not been turned on at all for any length of time. Otherwise it only shoots 8k for 5 min (or whatever time before it locks you out)...

Since Canon has apparently always limited its highest spec video to 12 min (or later) 30 min. it is not the 30 min. itself that is at issue. Why can it not achieve 8k 30 min video but not if it was turned on and shooting stills for an hour?
If it is a timer limit imposed on video (rather than temperature sensing), why does the timer run even in stills mode>

Tesla Model S and Model 3 base packages have a 0-60 time, but not sustained track times and overheat due to battery limitations compared to a dedicated Internal Combustion Engine track car. Should they stop advertising their 0-60 time and performance badges? Anyone who actually races on a track competitively or for pleasure should be able to do their research to know that an expensive purchase will not work for their particular purpose, and Tesla shouldn’t have to worry about plastering cancer-warning-style disclaimers on their marketing about their limitations unless every other manufacturer / competitor does the same and is held to the same standards.

You may not want to believe everything you read on the internet. If there is a overconservative temperature limit, there will be a firmware update. Again, RTM and note that the camera records continuously in several modes that are much more than usable (I list them over and over, and you don’t seem to record video, so you probably don’t know what those modes are) that are more than usable to actual filmmakers who understand what they’re getting into. Canon backs its products instead of forcing you to go through third parties to repair, so it’s in their and consumer’s interests to be conservative at first for a product that is intended for the still camera market. A 12 minute limit for 8K, or shorter limit for 4K 120P is more than reasonable and completely standard (and even unprecedented) for the video industry.

Any additional HQ modes are really icing on the cake that Canon didn’t need to provide us. They literally gave the internet what it wanted, and get nothing but vitriol in return. I don’t think actual still camera customers or video makers (with sustainable business models and real world industry experience) who know what they are doing actually care.

I don't get the apologetics for Canon that so many seen to have. If a product is advertised and marketed to have capabilities at its list price, it better meet those specs.

Canon should have just said these cameras have experimental video modes that can in limited situations give you 8k and 4k120, and that future firmware upgrades may enhance this further.

It would have been better in the long run. But nope, they marketed this to film makers, never staying ever that you can get about 20-30 minutes every 6 hours.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #19111602
I don't get the apologetics for Canon that so many seen to have. If a product is advertised and marketed to have capabilities at its list price, it better meet those specs.

Canon should have just said these cameras have experimental video modes that can in limited situations give you 8k and 4k120, and that future firmware upgrades may enhance this further.

It would have been better in the long run. But nope, they marketed this to film makers, never staying ever that you can get about 20-30 minutes every 6 hours.

Let’s tell Elon Musk to remove the performance badge and marketing from several vehicle models because they didn’t provide giant asterisks about racing the car on the Nuremberg track, something I’m sure all their aspiring customers do on a regular basis.

At the same time, let’s not hold older models from competing brands to the same standards who have repeated the same issue over and over before with absolutely no controversy.