Canon EOS R5 firmware update [CR2]

[EricN]

Thanks. I was using the new RF 28mm f2.8 which I really like, and here a list of my settings that could potentially matter in this case:

AF operation: Servo AF
AF method: Face + tracking
Subject to detect: People
Eye detection: Enable
Continuous AF: Disable
Servo AF Case: Modified 2 (sensitivity: -2, accel/decel: 0)
Switching tracked objects: 0
Initial Servo AF pt for face + tracking: Initial AF pt set for face + tracking
Also,
Back-button focusing with AF-ON set as: AF operation: servo, Af method: face+tracking, servo AF characteristics: -

Are you taking single shots or multiple photos?​

 

[David - Sydney]

It would be foolish to view code as something that is completely interchangeable regardless of the hardware design. Different hardware has different capabilities. The R5 for instance has custom coding in it to lower performance when battery power drops below a certain level. Other camera's may need that but the code may need to be tweaked to reflect different power requirements and capabilities.

It is also not the goal of every software solution to develop code in modules, that is what a total noob to software engineering would say. Software shouldn't be modularized for the sake of being modularized, it should be modularized according to the teams that are working on it. If a single developer is making a bunch of modules, they're just making a bigger and stupider mess.

Perhaps I should have been more careful in using the word "every". I am not a full time SW engineer but have done enough coding to see the advantages of modularisation. A custom solution makes sense where it makes sense. Your point about "tweaking" is exactly my point that it is a small change rather than total re-development. I would suggest that code for heat management and battery management would be essentially re-used if there are heat sensor(s) in the body and for the 3 types of battery that Canon uses.

HW will have different capabilities so developing an algorithm for AF detection will work on one processor but not all in their fleet. Clearly the code for the RP will be different to the Digic X platform.

KISS

 

[Far]

Are you taking single shots or multiple photos?​

I was on one of continuous shooting modes and took 3-5 photos (have deleted the worst ones, so not sure about the sequence). But unfortunately the tracking was very sticky on the wall, perhaps because of my settings to make it sticky (yay, finally it worked)! Or perhaps because I started shooting when I was further away from the subjects, the camera in the widest shot was not able to identify the people, and it got stuck with the wrong identified object as I got closer. I am just trying to give R5 the benefit of doubt on AF here, but I really do hope a potentially updated R5 or R5 II will be much smarter than this with AF.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Could be the dumbest conversation of my life

Do you find those types of conversations seem to have a common denominator?

I really hope Canon doesn't waste a bunch of time on APS-C garbage cameras but I can see that is what is probably going to happen. APS-C low resolution donkey camera for kids now with more donkey. HEE HAW.

I'm starting to think you're just trolling

You were saying something about the beam in thine own eye?

 

[Del Paso]

I don't know why you're still talking about this LOL. Could be the dumbest conversation of my life with someone who isn't even a SW engineer. I'm starting to think you're just trolling so I won't bother with any further responses.

You weren't spoonfed with politeness when you were a kid, were you?

 

[AlanF]

I don't know why you're still talking about this LOL. Could be the dumbest conversation of my life with someone who isn't even a SW engineer. I'm starting to think you're just trolling so I won't bother with any further responses.

That is totally unnecessary rudeness to a regular contributor who is always polite and generally very informative and constructive.

 

[David - Sydney]

I don't know why you're still talking about this LOL. Could be the dumbest conversation of my life with someone who isn't even a SW engineer. I'm starting to think you're just trolling so I won't bother with any further responses.

I’m happy to learn… perhaps sharing your knowledge would be more valuable than insults

 

[mennonac]

Now the R5 mk II is heavier in the rumors, would we see any R5 firwmare updates with features/improvements. (bugfixes will always be fixed if any)

Hope there will be something... i just bought the R5....

 

[fr34k]

I find internal focus stacking, DOF-preview, separating tracking from AF-field, false color etc. not something that could be limited by hardware on the R5. Sure new algorithms for tracking might as the NN might have gotten larger.
I don't expect groundbreaking stuff, but anything that is not hardware limited to be ported.
Simple: QoL (Quality of Life) improvements.

 

[Michael Clark]

I have made 2 generational leaps in body.. from 7D to 5Diii and then to R5.
There was an interim move to 5Div but that was second hand and had a net zero cost when sold. The 5Div was definitely better than 5Diii but incremental rather than a big jump.

Given the additional cost of a housing, I won't be moving to a R5ii so maybe a R5iii (or second hand R5ii later on) if it still fits the housing.
Lenses are a different story and I can see myself moving to RF14-35/4 and RF100mm macro or at least second hand versions later on but that also means adjusting my port length to suit the different physical length of the wide angle (50 vs 84mm)

I guess it all depends upon the use case.

The 5D Mark III did not have flicker reduction.
The 5D Mark IV did have flicker reduction.

For anyone shooting sports under flickering stadium or gym lighting, the difference was revolutionary.

 

[Juangrande]

Thanks. I was using the new RF 28mm f2.8 which I really like, and here a list of my settings that could potentially matter in this case:

AF operation: Servo AF
AF method: Face + tracking
Subject to detect: People
Eye detection: Enable
Continuous AF: Disable
Servo AF Case: Modified 2 (sensitivity: -2, accel/decel: 0)
Switching tracked objects: 0
Initial Servo AF pt for face + tracking: Initial AF pt set for face + tracking
Also,
Back-button focusing with AF-ON set as: AF operation: servo, Af method: face+tracking, servo AF characteristics: -

Hmmm looks good but maybe increase the sensitivity since you have it at -2

 

[Juppeck]

Perhaps I should have been more careful in using the word "every". I am not a full time SW engineer but have done enough coding to see the advantages of modularisation. A custom solution makes sense where it makes sense. Your point about "tweaking" is exactly my point that it is a small change rather than total re-development. I would suggest that code for heat management and battery management would be essentially re-used if there are heat sensor(s) in the body and for the 3 types of battery that Canon uses.

HW will have different capabilities so developing an algorithm for AF detection will work on one processor but not all in their fleet. Clearly the code for the RP will be different to the Digic X platform.

KISS

i am a full time firmware coder and when i read this thread about cut & paste related to porting a firmware on a different model, it's seems that the most people don't know mutch about the hard work of firmware engineering. A firmware for a camera like an R5 is not as simple as coding an Arduino board or a Raspi.
Magic-Latern will be never work on hardware based upon their own developed RTOS called DryOS, that they use since 5DM4, 80D. What's different? The debug interface is not available in the production code and none know's the API's and the handling off. No documentation is public available. All of them was available from VXWorks, the RTOS that canon uses before.

But, i agree in that, that canon is went to an apple iphone price course. Expensive, hi-quality and properitary. But Apple support their devices for a long time - also releases new features if the hardware does'nt limit's.