How would the camera know when you're going to end an exposure in bulb mode until you decide to tell the camera to end the exposure at the end of the exposure?
Upvote
0
Way Too Soon: A Canon EOS R5 Mark III Wishlist
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
-
- Tags
- eos r5 mark iii
How would the camera know when you're going to end an exposure in bulb mode until you decide to tell the camera to end the exposure at the end of the exposure?
At least you no longer have to also dig out the film's data sheet to check how much to adjust due to reciprocity failure! (the Schwarzschild effect)
Upvote
0
Good luck with that. Canon's decision makers think in Japanese.
In Japan a hardware engineer has similar status to a heart surgeon in the U.S.
A software engineer, on the other hand, has about the same status as a bus driver in the U.S.
Upvote
0
Most shutter times are rounded. The number the camera is actually targeting should all be powers of 2, starting at 2^0 = 1.
I don't know about the newest R series cameras, because haven't tested them in this regard. But virtually all of the older cameras from Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc. use actual power of 2 exposure times for exposures longer than 1 second. The number scale we use is rounded in ways that aren't always logical to us. But at the time those scales were "standardized", the shot to shot variability of spring actuated mechanical shutters was more than the difference between, say, 1/125 (0.008 seconds) and 1/128 (0.0078125 seconds).
"1/15" is actually 1/16. "1/30" is actually 1/32, "1/60" is actually 1/64, "1/125" is actually 1/128, "1/250" is actually 1/256, and so on. Also "15s" is actually 16s and "30s" is actually 32s. Of course with film this was massively complicated by the varying influence of the Schwarzschild effect, commonly referred to as reciprocity failure, based on the characteristics of each film's unique emulsion.
Look at EXIF info with a viewer that shows both "exposure time" (the number you set your camera to, i.e. 1/1000) and "shutter speed value" (the number the camera actually targets, i.e. 1/1024.)
The same is true of f-numbers. They're rounded to mentally easy to use numbers. They're all based on powers of the square root of two. Every other value in the list is an irrational number based on the odd numbered powers of the square root of two (√2) that has been rounded to two significant digits. Taken to twenty (20) significant digits, √2 is 1.4142135623730950488...
f/1.4 is a rounded version of √2 and so are all of the other f-stops that include odd-numbered powers of the √2: f/2.8, 5.6, 11, 22, etc. are actually (carried out to 16 significant digits) f/2.828427124746919, 5.65685424949238, 11.31370849898476, 22.62741699796952, 45.25483399593904, 90.50966799187808, etc.
Notice that f/5.6 actually rounds closer to f/5.7, f/22 actually rounds closer to f/23, and f/90 actually rounds closer to f/91. We use f/5.6 instead of f/5.7 because when we double 2.8 (the number we use to approximate 2.828427124746919...) we get 5.6. We use f/22 instead of f/23 because when we double 11 (the number we use to approximate 11.31370849898476 because when we double 5.6 we get 11.2 and then reduce it to two significant digits) we get 22. We use f/45 instead of f/44, which would be the doubling of 22, because the 'actual' f/45 is greater than 45, and even though 22 doubled is 44, 45 is a "rounder" number to a species with five digits on each hand. These differences are totally insignificant because all but the most precise laboratory grade lenses can't control the aperture precisely enough to create that small of a difference anyway.
Upvote
0
Yes, please. Even if keeping the embedded JPGs they could add an extra pseudo-image file that would have three values: under-range, in-range, and over-range. They resolution would just have to be the same as for the preview jpg.
My "workaround" do a judgement call based on the about of blinkies. Few blinkies = I'm good. Massive blinkies = adjust and reshoot.
Upvote
0
Dang! That's dark. How are you metering/setting exposure?
Even here in backwards Alabama at youth league fields I can get away with ISO6400, f/2.8 and 1/640-1/800 and only need to push it about 1/2 to 2/3 stop in post, where I'm also backing off the highlights to prevent blowing out the details of the white jerseys. If I exposed a half stop hotter the highlights of the white jerseys would be unrecoverable, anyway. I shoot at ISO3200, f/2.8, 1/1000 in most area high school stadiums and gyms.
At the nearest mid-to-large college stadium with TV grade lights I pull it back to ISO1600 to avoid blowing out the white jerseys, since that's always a road game for the team I do.
Upvote
0
The biggest drawback of the R5 Mark II is the idiotic way of how buffering works. First and foremost, in 2024/25 memory prices should be cheap enough to just stuff that image data into internal RAM for a duration that feels like infinity. Secondly, give the body a CFexpress interface that just moves the data to the memory card without delay. I haven\'t computed data rates etc., but I guess the latest CFexpress standard (which the R5II doesn\'t embrace, shezzz) should handle that. The current buffer stall is just lame on a premium body.
Clean up that AF mess in the menus. While I do like Canon\'s menu structure more than that ion other manufacturers, it has become bloated. It takes a Ph.D. to understand AF functionality. I think AF complexity has reached a point where user friendliness should be prioritized. Maybe that old school menu structure doesn\'t cut it anymore. Think of how Apple would have solved it (now that you reached the same price points this comparison sounds fair to me.)
Software quality. Get your software tested before shipping it. And yes please fix my cooling grip that renders an err70.
And as we are speaking of 2025: No GPS? Are you serious?
Besides that, it\'s a fantastic body.
The faster you let the memory card write, the hotter it gets...
Upvote
0
please stop using actual personal data to prove a point
Wait? I thought neuro says personal experience is merely anecdotal and not representative of the total market Canon knows better than anyone else?
Upvote
0
The sheer amount of data being shifted at {edited } 30fps/14bit/45mp is significant... ~18.9Gb/s or 2.4GB/s if my calculations are correct.
Leaning on the shutter button would fill a 256GB card in <2 minutes with no buffer issues.
Buffer memory costs money and there would be cost envelopes to hit during technology meetings.
The CFe-B v2 cards are close to ~1.5GB/s sustained write speed for the fast ones. V4 standard would be double the rate but has some thermal throttling to mitigate the generated heat as the biggest drawback plus would cost more.
Sony's A1 doesn't use Type A cards and with half the speed seems to be better able to manage the heat.
The R1 needs to effectively have an unlimited buffer as a pure sports/wildlife specialist vs the 5 series as a generalist body so 24mp make sense from that perspective.
One alternative is to use cRAW to reduce the data transfer volume or even jpg/HIEF as the pro shooters do
I know a few pros who always shot JPEG in the past who are now shooting raw sometimes. Wi-Fi bandwidth at major stadiums is a lot faster than in the past. At least here in the U.S. it is. At the same time, fewer media folks with access to the stadium's non-public Wi-Fi are covering all but the biggest games, reducing the demand on the bandwidth.
A friend who shoots for a Gannett owned newspaper covers sports in his area for USA Today. For something like the SEC women's softball tourney he sends his selected raw frames (commercial breaks between innings are almost as long as programming time in some college sports these days, gives him time to chimp) to a colleague photog several hours away where there's no game to cover that day who is sitting at a desk who crops/straightens/color manages (albeit fairly coarsely), and then pushes them to the company wire. That kind of system used to require the second guy to be in the stadium media room (or in a truck in the stadium parking lot) and connected to the photog via wired ethernet.
Upvote
0
I can't speak for the R series, but the latter 5D series embedded a full resolution jpeg and a postage stamp size jpeg in CR2 raw files. Some of the earlier models, from before around 2010 or so, used a 1/4 size JPEG (1/2 width x half height) instead of full size plus the tiny thumbnail.
Upvote
0
Does any manufacturer use anything other than 8-bit renderings for in-camera histograms, blinkies, zebras, etc.?
Upvote
0
This is one of my life's mysteries.
I'll never understand how one can use the rear LCD for focusing, picture composition, exposure setting in M...
I'm just unable to use it other than for setting basic adjustments. For me, the rear LCD is useless for taking pictures.
I have a little Olympus Cilc-Clic camera without EVF, but cannot use it without an accessory EVF.
So, I'm always surprised when quite many forum members are wishing for a camera without EVF...
PS: I once tried to use the LCD for macros. Please, don't ask for the results...
Upvote
0
tomscott
Photographer & Graphic Designer
Noise is an important one. One disappointment with this camera, otherwise I love it.
With no non Canon lens option you either have the crazy price primes or slower zooms/primes. There isnt an in-between option.
I would love Canon to bring back a max F5.6 zoom.
I praise canon for experimenting as they have some really interesting affordable options, but in places where light is often low like the northern hemisphere, is does make things more challenging.
Options are slim you have is the 100-300 which is out of the reach of most and limited in reach. 100-500 which is ok but 7.1 isnt that fast, 200-800 F9 awesome reach but slow, 100-400 F8 again same thing. 600/800 F11. All the Zooms are a stop slower than they used to be.
Back in the DSLR days shooting wildlife 6400 was pretty normal for me in the UK with the 100-400 F4.5-5.6.
Essentially with the R5II your ISO 2/3s of a stop worce than the R5. Add the lens options you are roughly a stop worce with aperture so were probably in a similar position of noise perfromance from the 5D4 days which is a 9 year old camera. Unless you can afford the 10+k primes Canon sells.
Big gap in the lens range atm, yes you can fill with EF lenses but from an investment perspective the MKII prime support could be discontinued at any time making them a risk. The MKIII the price is high and for longevity might as well move to the RF but then the 600 RF is pretty much the same lens optically for significantly more money.
Not ideal.
With no non Canon lens option you either have the crazy price primes or slower zooms/primes. There isnt an in-between option.
I would love Canon to bring back a max F5.6 zoom.
I praise canon for experimenting as they have some really interesting affordable options, but in places where light is often low like the northern hemisphere, is does make things more challenging.
Options are slim you have is the 100-300 which is out of the reach of most and limited in reach. 100-500 which is ok but 7.1 isnt that fast, 200-800 F9 awesome reach but slow, 100-400 F8 again same thing. 600/800 F11. All the Zooms are a stop slower than they used to be.
Back in the DSLR days shooting wildlife 6400 was pretty normal for me in the UK with the 100-400 F4.5-5.6.
Essentially with the R5II your ISO 2/3s of a stop worce than the R5. Add the lens options you are roughly a stop worce with aperture so were probably in a similar position of noise perfromance from the 5D4 days which is a 9 year old camera. Unless you can afford the 10+k primes Canon sells.
Big gap in the lens range atm, yes you can fill with EF lenses but from an investment perspective the MKII prime support could be discontinued at any time making them a risk. The MKIII the price is high and for longevity might as well move to the RF but then the 600 RF is pretty much the same lens optically for significantly more money.
Not ideal.
Upvote
0
Personal data are a perfectly valid response to a question that begins with, “How often are you…?“ In that context, they provide a better answer than a qualitative response such as, ‘ a lot’ or ‘all the time’.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
I think that was an attempt at humor. Dual CFB meaning two College FootBall games instead of two CF (express type) B as you clearly meant.
Sometimes both humor and sarcasm fail to come across well online.
Upvote
0
Agreed. Seems to be a problem with your R5ii. I haven't seen this issue raised in general so is it specific to your body?
Are you expecting a 5 series (jack-of-all-trades) with twice the mp of a R1 to perform like a sports/wildlife specialist body? I get that it is a wishlist but horses-for-courses...
An A1 may get you what you want but at a significant cost increase.
Upvote
0
