Canon R5 R5 not recognising RF100-500 lens

[Deepgreen]

This morning, my R5 stopped recognising my RF100-500mm lens when attached. I have checked the connection and all is clean and as it should be. There is no error message but the F no. just shows 0.0 om the screen and the lens won't focus. Any thoughts from the collective knowledge here, please? Other lenses work normally.

 

[SO8]

Have you another body you can try , a friend nearby or friendly dealer ... go in, explain and ask to pop lens on a body ?

Check firmware of lens ? Bit odd as other lenses work ok

 

[Deepgreen]

Have you another body you can try , a friend nearby or friendly dealer ... go in, explain and ask to pop lens on a body ?

I don't know anyone with another body but a dealer may help. I shall have to investigate, thanks.

 

[Deepgreen]

Have you another body you can try , a friend nearby or friendly dealer ... go in, explain and ask to pop lens on a body ?

Check firmware of lens ? Bit odd as other lenses work ok

No firmware update for the lens released since October 2021.

 

[Jake Shoots Birds]

Seems simplistic but have you tried removing and swapping batteries? Removing memory cards? Are you powering the camera down before removing and reseating the lens?

None of these things make sense, but they can all trigger something that could trigger something...

 

[Deepgreen]

Seems simplistic but have you tried removing and swapping batteries? Removing memory cards? Are you powering the camera down before removing and reseating the lens?

None of these things make sense, but they can all trigger something that could trigger something...

Tried all those yesterday. Today, the lens is connecting intermittently so I think damp might be the issue. It's drying out rapidly in the sun so all might be OK. We'll see. I was thrown by the lack of error message; just the F0.0 reading and inability to focus, manually or automatically. It did get some dew on it in the night (astro shooting) but no rain, and no moisture on the end glass owing to a large hood. Yet again, the claim that their premium lenses are "weather-sealed" is questionable - no rain, just dew on a clear, still night, but STILL it seems to have penetrated! There is not much more gentle weather than dew...

 

[OpusElenae]

Dew is condensation though, rather than precipitation, so it can affect the inside of your body and lens as the air cools.

 

[Deepgreen]

Dew is condensation though, rather than precipitation, so it can affect the inside of your body and lens as the air cools.

Indeed (although condensation is precipitated), but I would expect something that is described as "weather-sealed" to be able to stay dry inside when dew forms on the outside. It's not an aggressive form of moisture, after all. If I take a lens from a warm room to a frosty outside, I don't expect moisture to accumulate inside the lens (at least not enough to affect its operation), only on the outside of the barrel and glass. So, if rain and dew are not covered by "weather-sealed", I wonder what is...

 

[koenkooi]

Indeed (although condensation is precipitated), but I would expect something that is described as "weather-sealed" to be able to stay dry inside when dew forms on the outside. It's not an aggressive form of moisture, after all. If I take a lens from a warm room to a frosty outside, I don't expect moisture to accumulate inside the lens (at least not enough to affect its operation), only on the outside of the barrel and glass. So, if rain and dew are not covered by "weather-sealed", I wonder what is...

Canon (and all other manufacturers) don't cover any form of water damage on their "weather sealed" lenses. And almost no vendor actually cites an IPxx rating. With those 2 things combined, it's best to treat "weather sealed" as purely marketing, not as something you want to depend on in wet or dusty conditions.

The lensrentals.com blog has a few articles on how overrated the "weather sealing" is and why their rental insurance doesn't cover damage related to that.

 

[Deepgreen]

Canon (and all other manufacturers) don't cover any form of water damage on their "weather sealed" lenses. And almost no vendor actually cites an IPxx rating. With those 2 things combined, it's best to treat "weather sealed" as purely marketing, not as something you want to depend on in wet or dusty conditions.

The lensrentals.com blog has a few articles on how overrated the "weather sealing" is and why their rental insurance doesn't cover damage related to that.

Indeed so. The lens has gone off to Canon now as it was a very intermittent fault and Err60 suggests any number of possible causes. It is still in warranty so I will be pressing hard for it to be covered by that as it absolutely hasn't been out in damaging weather (a small amount of dew and that not even on the lens glass itself). I think the manufacturers should be challenged robustly on their weather-sealing claims. It really seems to be no more than the tight seal between the camera body and the lens body, which is identical for any lens that fits.