# Behind The Shot interviews Jeff Cable, to talk about using the EOS R3 in the real world



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 22, 2021)

> Steve Brazill from Behind The Shot had a chance to interview our favourite Olympic photographer, Jeff Cable. If you remember, Jeff was one of the most active shooters on the web using the Canon EOS R3 at the Tokyo Games.
> The discussion about the Canon EOS R3 begins around the 9:58 mark, which is where I have queued up on the video.
> Jeff gives us some great insight into Canon’s secrecy with pre-release cameras, as well as how the camera performed… A camera he ended up using for 99% of everything he shot at the Olympics. Jeff brought a couple of EOS R5s to shoot with, but the EOS R3 outperformed the
> 
> [url=https://www.canonrumors.com/behind-the-shot-interviews-jeff-cable-to-talk-about-using-the-eos-r3-in-the-real-world/]Continue reading...


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Oct 22, 2021)

What is this "real-world experience" stuff?
This is the internet where we debate over the opinions of YouTubers who never touched the camera.


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 22, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> What is this "real-world experience" stuff?
> This is the internet where we debate over the opinions of YouTubers who never touched the camera.


True... I stepped outside of the box. Jeff gives some great and honest insight into Canon and the R3. This is YouTube for grown-ups.


----------



## prodorshak (Oct 22, 2021)

14 minutes for to choose from 2700 images with downloading, retouching, and sending the files??!! That is insane, only a champ pro can do that. Could an AI system perform remotely close to that currently?


----------



## LSXPhotog (Oct 22, 2021)

prodorshak said:


> 14 minutes for to choose from 2700 images with downloading, retouching, and sending the files??!! That is insane, only a champ pro can do that. Could an AI system perform remotely close to that currently?


It’s not that difficult if you rate your images in camera. ;-)


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Oct 22, 2021)

LSXPhotog said:


> It’s not that difficult if you rate your images in camera. ;-)


Aah-ha - is that what the 'rate' button is meant to be used for?


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 23, 2021)

prodorshak said:


> 14 minutes for to choose from 2700 images with downloading, retouching, and sending the files??!! That is insane, only a champ pro can do that. Could an AI system perform remotely close to that currently?


Photo Mechanic is THE culling and ingesting tool. It is so fast it is ridiculous. You can scan through images nearly as fast as you take them, certainly multiple a second. When you cull high numbers of burst shots you know the compositions and players or moments you are looking for so 80% don't even get a look in for fast delivery. The last 20% can be scanned through for peak action very quickly. EXIF is entered in batches with minimal changes to players names etc. Edits are again basically batch corrections for exposure or lightening shadows and a gentle crop for straightening horizons.

I can turn around 20 images from a 3,000 shot event in a hour (not the 14 minutes Jeff can but thats why he is successful and I am here) using Lightroom. I can also spend two days processing a single 'hero' shot for a discerning client.


----------



## rjbray01 (Oct 23, 2021)

Great great interview - so many tips - learned a lot.


----------



## LSXPhotog (Oct 23, 2021)

StoicalEtcher said:


> Aah-ha - is that what the 'rate' button is meant to be used for?


Yes sir. It’s a total life change that can make your image editing go so much faster. NOTHING reads your images faster than your camera. Rate them in your camera during downtime and between sessions before putting them on your computer and trying to sort through all of them in software that’s trying to figure out how to open each massive file one-by-one. Change your magnification to zoom in 100% on the AF point and it makes short work of your processing.


----------



## koenkooi (Oct 23, 2021)

The angst at EFCS from the host surprised me a bit, I wonder how widespread it is with non-f/1.2 shooters.


----------



## SnowMiku (Oct 23, 2021)

In DPP, I select all of my shots and use quick check, I then press the right arrow key to go through them and then press the X key to mark the bad ones as rejected. This works well for a couple of hundred shots but I couldn't imagine going through 3000.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 23, 2021)

koenkooi said:


> The angst at EFCS from the host surprised me a bit, I wonder how widespread it is with non-f/1.2 shooters.


This is the kind of stuff that drives me insane. Rather than simply test it for himself with a camera he personally owns he relies on the uneducated opinions of people who's photos he likes but who doesn't own the camera or even the brand! I was watching a Vannessa Joy video comparing the R5 and R3 and she was convinced the R3 high iso performance was 'better' because she looked at both images at 200% not the same size!

Stupid influencers....


----------



## entoman (Oct 23, 2021)

Yikes, this thread was started 24 hours ago and only 11 comments so far?

It’s a long video, but I’d urge anyone remotely interested in either the R3 or in sports, action or wildlife photography to take the time to watch and listen.

Amazing photography and fascinating insights from multi-talented Jeff Cable, and great interviewing by Steve Brazill.


----------



## Czardoom (Oct 23, 2021)

entoman said:


> Yikes, this thread was started 24 hours ago and only 11 comments so far?
> 
> It’s a long video, but I’d urge anyone remotely interested in either the R3 or in sports, action or wildlife photography to take the time to watch and listen.
> 
> Amazing photography and fascinating insights from multi-talented Jeff Cable, and great interviewing by Steve Brazill.


Only 11 comments so far because - as was mentioned earlier - this is real-life experience, so all the "debaters" who have never used the camera nor would ever buy the camera have nothing to say or debate. It's "YouTube for grownups" as Camera Rumors Guy said!

Plus his comments are very positive towards the camera. He went to the Olympics figuring he would use it some of the time along with his R5, but ended up using it 99% of the time. When asked to compare the R3 and the actual flagship DSLR, he could come up with only one thing he liked better in the 1DX III - the two CF express cards. He considered the R3 and mirrorless essentially better in every other way. His need for fast turnaround only reinforced the reality that most sports shooters are quite happy with 24 MP. So, up against real-life experience, all the whiners would look pretty foolish with their constant negativity.


----------



## Nemorino (Oct 23, 2021)

Czardoom said:


> Only 11 comments so far because


...the headline is to long.
....no buzzterm is used like "RF aps-c body", "24mp" or R1.


----------



## entoman (Oct 23, 2021)

Czardoom said:


> He went to the Olympics figuring he would use it some of the time along with his R5, but ended up using it 99% of the time. When asked to compare the R3 and the actual flagship DSLR, he could come up with only one thing he liked better in the 1DX III - the two CF express cards. He considered the R3 and mirrorless essentially better in every other way. His need for fast turnaround only reinforced *the reality that most sports shooters are quite happy with 24 MP*.



Different photographers have different needs. Everything Jeff Cable said made perfect sense from the point of view of a successful (and reasonably wealthy) professional photographer.

Professional sports and wildlife photographers will usually have access to ultra-expensive long primes such as 600mm F4 or 800mm F5.6. Combined with their need to process and transmit images rapidly, it makes sense the have a relatively low MP camera.

But for most amateurs, unless they are very wealthy, the reality is that they can’t afford these long primes - they are generally using shorter and more affordable lenses such as 100-400mm zooms, which necessitate the need for heavier cropping. Also amateurs in most cases just don’t have the close access that a press pass provides. So many would argue that more MP and more cropping is often the only solution.


----------



## scyrene (Oct 23, 2021)

entoman said:


> Different photographers have different needs. Everything Jeff Cable said made perfect sense from the point of view of a successful (and reasonably wealthy) professional photographer.
> 
> Professional sports and wildlife photographers will usually have access to ultra-expensive long primes such as 600mm F4 or 800mm F5.6. Combined with their need to process and transmit images rapidly, it makes sense the have a relatively low MP camera.
> 
> But for most amateurs, unless they are very wealthy, the reality is that they can’t afford these long primes - they are generally using shorter and more affordable lenses such as 100-400mm zooms, which necessitate the need for heavier cropping. Also amateurs in most cases just don’t have the close access that a press pass provides. So many would argue that more MP and more cropping is often the only solution.


Sure but... 24MP was considered high MP a few years ago. I used the 5D3 for most of the last decade and rarely felt _that_ constrained. Indeed I went back to it from the 5Ds because the bigger files rarely offered enough extra detail to justify slower processing and filling storage faster. Obviously more of most things means extra leeway, and I understand the crop reach argument as well as anyone, but the idea that 30, 40, 50MP is essential for amateurs is a bit overstated imo.


----------



## dcm (Oct 23, 2021)

He clearly stated why he preferred the R3 for the Olympics and the R5 for the safari that followed (cropping). I was amused that he does a lot of his shooting with an R6 where once again he notes lower resolution is sufficient/preferable for many of his needs.


----------



## entoman (Oct 23, 2021)

scyrene said:


> Sure but... 24MP was considered high MP a few years ago. I used the 5D3 for most of the last decade and rarely felt _that_ constrained. Indeed I went back to it from the 5Ds because the bigger files rarely offered enough extra detail to justify slower processing and filling storage faster. Obviously more of most things means extra leeway, and I understand the crop reach argument as well as anyone, but the idea that 30, 40, 50MP is essential for amateurs is a bit overstated imo.


I quite agree - many people probably don’t need high MP, and simply want the “latest and greatest” piece of kit, in the belief that it will magically improve their photography.

My point was that we all have different needs, and that when choosing kit we should avoid being misled by advertising hype, and instead carefully analyse what we actually *need* and can afford for our own particular subject types and styles of operation.

It’s probably true that most photographers need no more than 15-20MP. But there are many including myself who genuinely need high MP for at least some of our work. I could easily get away with 20MP for 90% of my work, but I need higher resolution for the other 10%.

Another way of looking at it is that it’s better to have too much than too little, both in terms of megapixels and overall specification. We might be getting absolutely satisfactory photographs with a relatively low res machine, but it’s good to have something “in reserve” for those occasions when more is needed.

The only issue I have with high MP cameras, as Jeff Cable also pointed out, is that it would be extremely useful if the user could select different FF resolutions on any particular camera. A camera that could switch between 24, 48 and 96 MP would be rather nice.


----------



## stevelee (Oct 23, 2021)

My camera shoots 26.2MP. I laugh with disdain at cameras that take only a puny 24MP. I would have contempt even if it shot a whole 26.0MP.


----------



## Jorge González (Oct 23, 2021)

I'm a profesional sport photographer (soccer) in Spain, and in the last two Champions League matches I ask to the fat cat about R3, nobody knows, nobody test it, and for the price of a R3 you can buy a R5 and a R6, the R5 for the Canon EF 400mm F2.8 whit the adapter (who buys the same 400 for 12 grands...) and crop, and the R6 whit the Canon RF 70-200 F2.8, that's the end of the history.


----------



## scyrene (Oct 23, 2021)

entoman said:


> I quite agree - many people probably don’t need high MP, and simply want the “latest and greatest” piece of kit, in the belief that it will magically improve their photography.
> 
> My point was that we all have different needs, and that when choosing kit we should avoid being misled by advertising hype, and instead carefully analyse what we actually *need* and can afford for our own particular subject types and styles of operation.
> 
> ...



You deal with the minor point I was gonna raise in response to your penultimate paragraph in the final one - having it in reserve isn't cost free. Having to shoot at higher-than-required resolution all the time for a minority of shots that benefit isn't cost-free. But having the option to shoot at different resolutions would solve that problem. Anyhow it's beside the point of this thread, but most of the resolution-based criticism of the R3 seems to pretrnd the R5 doesn't already exist. They're not equal but it's not as if Canon isn't giving us options.


----------



## dirtyvu (Oct 23, 2021)

stevelee said:


> My camera shoots 26.2MP. I laugh with disdain at cameras that take only a puny 24MP. I would have contempt even if it shot a whole 26.0MP.


The funny thing is how people will spin things. Watching some a74 videos and they never mention how 24 mp isn't enough and when comparing images between a73 and a74, they're hardpressed to tell the difference except when they pixel peep. And in reviews of the a73 they talk about how phenomenal the af was and never misses, but in the a74 videos, they say how hit and miss the af was on the a73... The hilarity came when a couple reviews talked about how the a74 only got like 5fps in uncompressed raw but that was more than enough speed. But these are the same reviewers that said the eos r 5fps was so slow


----------



## snapshot (Oct 24, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> This is the kind of stuff that drives me insane. Rather than simply test it for himself with a camera he personally owns he relies on the uneducated opinions of people who's photos he likes but who doesn't own the camera or even the brand! I was watching a Vannessa Joy video comparing the R5 and R3 and she was convinced the R3 high iso performance was 'better' because she looked at both images at 200% not the same size!
> 
> Stupid influencers....


I thought her video showed 2 interesting things: 1. the white balance differs from r5 (maybe more pleasing???) 2. The r3 rendering of the chandeliers in the venue with the glass ceiling was clearly more sensitive than the r5, even though the sky looked very similar in exposure, maybe there are different gamma curves in the r3 (or is the sensitivity really better?).


----------



## mpmark (Oct 24, 2021)

prodorshak said:


> 14 minutes for to choose from 2700 images with downloading, retouching, and sending the files??!! That is insane, only a champ pro can do that. Could an AI system perform remotely close to that currently?


It’s called practice and knowing your field. There is nothing insane about it. He doesn’t wear a cape does he?


----------



## Talys (Oct 24, 2021)

dirtyvu said:


> The funny thing is how people will spin things. Watching some a74 videos and they never mention how 24 mp isn't enough and when comparing images between a73 and a74, they're hardpressed to tell the difference except when they pixel peep. And in reviews of the a73 they talk about how phenomenal the af was and never misses, but in the a74 videos, they say how hit and miss the af was on the a73... The hilarity came when a couple reviews talked about how the a74 only got like 5fps in uncompressed raw but that was more than enough speed. But these are the same reviewers that said the eos r 5fps was so slow


It's the same tribalism that's tearing at so many modern communities today. No matter what my guys do, I will support them, and no matter the other guys do, I will denigrate and vilify them. The company I identify with will solve all your problems if you'd only have an open mind- and your guys are trying to ruin the world and steal your money if you'd only open your eyes.

Why people can't just enjoy photography and be happy that there are is lots of cool, new technology to explore is beyond me. Especially since, if you can't produce great photos using DSLRs from a decade ago, your photos are still going to be lousy with the latest $5,000 flagship.


----------



## David - Sydney (Oct 24, 2021)

StoicalEtcher said:


> Aah-ha - is that what the 'rate' button is meant to be used for?


Well, I for one would love if the Rate button could be remapped to something remotely useful eg manually switching between EFV and rear screen. I have to use MF-n which is hard to reach with gloves on underwater whereas left thumb would be simple. I can't imagine spending good bottom time to rate shots underwater.


----------



## slclick (Oct 24, 2021)

David - Sydney said:


> Well, I for one would love if it could be remapped to something remotely useful eg manually switching between EFV and rear screen. I have to use MF-n which is hard to reach with gloves on underwater whereas left thumb would be simple. I can't imagine sending time to rate shots underwater.


Should underwater use drive features? I would think using a housing is a matter of making the most of trade offs. It must be far less than 1% of consumer usage. Even something like macro is pretty uncommon in the big scheme of things and I would not expect it to be in the forefront of body design.


----------



## David - Sydney (Oct 25, 2021)

slclick said:


> Should underwater use drive features? I would think using a housing is a matter of making the most of trade offs. It must be far less than 1% of consumer usage. Even something like macro is pretty uncommon in the big scheme of things and I would not expect it to be in the forefront of body design.


Underwater shooting is definitely a niche segment but I don't think that I am the only one who would like the option to remap the Rate button for other use cases. The housing - by definition - covers the face sensor so the R5 thinks that the EVF needs to be on the whole time.
Not sure why it isn't possible as other buttons can be remapped easily. 
It is good that there is a work-around, albeit an ergonomically cumbersome option.

A different story for the joystick which is tricky to operate through a housing from an engineering perspective. The very expensive housings can do it but the (relatively) cheaper ones don't allow it (and DOF preview button etc). The Ikelite basic housing is USD1700 plus handle, vacuum, ports, dome, strobes, TTL, arms, cords, taxes, freight etc. The Nauticam equivalent is USD4700 but it is an engineering beast!


----------



## ToonD (Oct 25, 2021)

Jorge González said:


> I'm a profesional sport photographer (soccer) in Spain, and in the last two Champions League matches I ask to the fat cat about R3, nobody knows, nobody test it, and for the price of a R3 you can buy a R5 and a R6, the R5 for the Canon EF 400mm F2.8 whit the adapter (who buys the same 400 for 12 grands...) and crop, and the R6 whit the Canon RF 70-200 F2.8, that's the end of the history.


And concerning the R5, would you then shoot electronic shutter or mechanical?


----------



## koenkooi (Oct 25, 2021)

ToonD said:


> And concerning the R5, would you then shoot electronic shutter or mechanical?


Or EFCS?


----------



## LSXPhotog (Oct 25, 2021)

ToonD said:


> And concerning the R5, would you then shoot electronic shutter or mechanical?


It’s highly dependent on the sport you’re shooting and what kind of photos you’re capturing. I shoot Motorsports and it works incredibly well for me until it doesn’t. LOL I can use it for freezing action like a car launching and even capturing motion blur slower shutter speed images. However, if I’m shooting panning or shots with quick whips, the distortion of vertical lines can become distracting so I will shoot FCES or Mechanical for those shots.

Ball sports, the R5’s electronic shutter is a NO GO. The read out speed is too slow to keep the shape of the ball.


----------



## ToonD (Oct 25, 2021)

LSXPhotog said:


> It’s highly dependent on the sport you’re shooting and what kind of photos you’re capturing. I shoot Motorsports and it works incredibly well for me until it doesn’t. LOL I can use it for freezing action like a car launching and even capturing motion blur slower shutter speed images. However, if I’m shooting panning or shots with quick whips, the distortion of vertical lines can become distracting so I will shoot FCES or Mechanical for those shots.
> 
> Ball sports, the R5’s electronic shutter is a NO GO. The read out speed is too slow to keep the shape of the ball.


That's the point. I shoot a lot of soccer and I can't upload photos to clients with oval balls. So I have to use my 1DX bodies for that. But then I really miss the eye auto focus etc.


----------



## ToonD (Oct 25, 2021)

koenkooi said:


> Or EFCS?


How does that work with high shutter speeds? I have honestly never used that.


----------



## snapshot (Oct 25, 2021)

ToonD said:


> How does that work with high shutter speeds? I have honestly never used that.


i use efcs for tennis and i have been happy.


----------



## ToonD (Oct 25, 2021)

snapshot said:


> i use efcs for tennis and i have been happy.


Now I have read a little bit over EFCS but I don't get how it's going to prevent rolling shutter like the ball in the attached photo.


----------



## takesome1 (Oct 25, 2021)

Very educational.
Peanut Butter Whisky 
and Reese's Alcohol.


----------



## SHAMwow (Oct 25, 2021)

ToonD said:


> Now I have read a little bit over EFCS but I don't get how it's going to prevent rolling shutter like the ball in the attached photo.
> View attachment 200970


EFCS doesn't have this effect though. Fully electronic does. EFCS is actually involving the mechanical shutter.


----------



## toodamnice (Oct 25, 2021)

SHAMwow said:


> EFCS doesn't have this effect though. Fully electronic does. EFCS is actually involving the mechanical shutter.



Is there a DR penalty for using EFCS? I have been trying to find the answer to that but I guess I have not done a good job searching lol. I like the added speed of EFCS on my R5 but need the DR for shooting stormy skies that have some very bright areas. I see the graph on Photon to Photos, but does R5 (ES) mean electronic shutter or EFCS?


----------



## prodorshak (Oct 25, 2021)

mpmark said:


> It’s called practice and knowing your field. There is nothing insane about it. He doesn’t wear a cape does he?


Maybe I was trying to be nice and appreciative. Worth a try, what do you think?


----------



## prodorshak (Oct 25, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Photo Mechanic is THE culling and ingesting tool. It is so fast it is ridiculous. You can scan through images nearly as fast as you take them, certainly multiple a second. When you cull high numbers of burst shots you know the compositions and players or moments you are looking for so 80% don't even get a look in for fast delivery. The last 20% can be scanned through for peak action very quickly. EXIF is entered in batches with minimal changes to players names etc. Edits are again basically batch corrections for exposure or lightening shadows and a gentle crop for straightening horizons.
> 
> I can turn around 20 images from a 3,000 shot event in a hour (not the 14 minutes Jeff can but thats why he is successful and I am here) using Lightroom. I can also spend two days processing a single 'hero' shot for a discerning client.


Awesome, I think me having zero exp in Photo Mechanic makes me appreciate your (and Jeff's) skills more!


----------



## Bigpapi (Oct 25, 2021)

This is very educational, and I appreciate the insight from a legitimate and credible professional working photographer. If there's anyone interested in this camera, or Canon in general when it comes to photography, I highly recommend it. I didn't think I'd watch more than 5 minutes but I sat through the whole thing because it actually elevated my sports photography. 

It's a shame that all people care about is listening to YouTubers that review cameras and have shit for photography.


----------



## koenkooi (Oct 25, 2021)

toodamnice said:


> Is there a DR penalty for using EFCS? I have been trying to find the answer to that but I guess I have not done a good job searching lol. I like the added speed of EFCS on my R5 but need the DR for shooting stormy skies that have some very bright areas. I see the graph on Photon to Photos, but does R5 (ES) mean electronic shutter or EFCS?


EFCS itself doesn't have a DR penalty, but it does unlock higher FPS modes on the R5 which to come with a DR penalty regardless of shuttermode, you'll go from 14-bit to 13-bit captures when doing more than 8fps.

ES means fully electronic shutter, not EFCS.


----------



## SteveC (Oct 25, 2021)

David - Sydney said:


> Underwater shooting is definitely a niche segment but I don't think that I am the only one who would like the option to remap the Rate button for other use cases.


Believe me, you aren't the only one.

I find the button utterly useless, and would love to be able to use it for something else, but it's not only the most useless button on the entire camera it's the ONE button that cannot be changed to _anything_ else.


----------



## David - Sydney (Oct 26, 2021)

SteveC said:


> Believe me, you aren't the only one.
> 
> I find the button utterly useless, and would love to be able to use it for something else, but it's not only the most useless button on the entire camera it's the ONE button that cannot be changed to _anything_ else.


I did provide Canon feedback via the support channel for the Rate re-map among other potential firmware improvements. Hopefully you have done the same  
Maybe all CR readers could provide a solid/coordinated source of feedback this way.


----------



## LSXPhotog (Oct 26, 2021)

SteveC said:


> Believe me, you aren't the only one.
> 
> I find the button utterly useless, and would love to be able to use it for something else, but it's not only the most useless button on the entire camera it's the ONE button that cannot be changed to _anything_ else.


Please see my above post and maybe give the rate button a shot. It can dramatically change the way you edit and deliver images.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Oct 26, 2021)

toodamnice said:


> Is there a DR penalty for using EFCS? I have been trying to find the answer to that but I guess I have not done a good job searching lol. I like the added speed of EFCS on my R5 but need the DR for shooting stormy skies that have some very bright areas. I see the graph on Photon to Photos, but does R5 (ES) mean electronic shutter or EFCS?


not that I know of. I just know the bokeh at high shutters like 1000 and up look worse.


----------



## john1970 (Oct 26, 2021)

I am curious on why there is a difference in the dynamic range between electronic shutter and physical shutter. Can someone explain why the electronic shutter in the R5 has lower dynamic range below ISO 800? Just curious and want to understand.


----------



## Kit. (Oct 26, 2021)

john1970 said:


> I am curious on why there is a difference in the dynamic range between electronic shutter and physical shutter. Can someone explain why the electronic shutter in the R5 has lower dynamic range below ISO 800? Just curious and want to understand.


The ADCs the photo sensors use are "ramp-compare" type. Which means that in order to evaluate one 13-bit pixel the ADC needs to pass through 2¹³ = 8192 cycles. For a 14-bit pixel, the number of cycles (and thus the time) per pixel doubles.

For the electronic shutter, the rolling shutter effect is determined by the speed of pixel processing (accessing, analog-to-digital conversion, digital throughput). If analog-to-digital conversion is the bottleneck, it is possible to increase its speed by a factor of two or four by dropping one or two bits of its resolution (by doubling or quadrupling the magnitude of the ramp-up step of the ADC).

For the fully mechanical shutter and the EFCS, the rolling shutter effect is determined by the speed of the mechnical shutter, and then the sensor readout could be continued when the sensor is covered by the mechanical shutter. However, you still need to read the whole sensor before you can start a new exposure. So, to increase your frame rate with EFCS, you may also want to decrease the bitness of your ADC.

For the "natural" (limited by the photon physics) dynamic range of a sensor with Bayer pattern and a pixel pitch of R5 at ISO 800 and above, 12 bits of the value representation are enough, and you don't need an ADC with a higher bitness. Lower ISOs mean potentially more photons per pixel cell and more bits to be useful for recording the full DR.


----------



## john1970 (Oct 26, 2021)

Kit. said:


> The ADCs the photo sensors use are "ramp-compare" type. Which means that in order to evaluate one 13-bit pixel the ADC needs to pass through 2¹³ = 8192 cycles. For a 14-bit pixel, the number of cycles (and thus the time) per pixel doubles.
> 
> For the electronic shutter, the rolling shutter effect is determined by the speed of pixel processing (accessing, analog-to-digital conversion, digital throughput). If analog-to-digital conversion is the bottleneck, it is possible to increase its speed by a factor of two or four by dropping one or two bits of its resolution (by doubling or quadrupling the magnitude of the ramp-up step of the ADC).
> 
> ...


Thank you for the detailed explanation. If I understand correctly, having a stacked sensor with a faster readout might improve the dynamic range in electronic mode? Can has stated that the R3 shoots 14-bit files @ 30 fps with the electronic shutter so hoping that dynamic range is very good with the ES.


----------



## SHAMwow (Oct 26, 2021)

toodamnice said:


> Is there a DR penalty for using EFCS? I have been trying to find the answer to that but I guess I have not done a good job searching lol. I like the added speed of EFCS on my R5 but need the DR for shooting stormy skies that have some very bright areas. I see the graph on Photon to Photos, but does R5 (ES) mean electronic shutter or EFCS?


I'm not sure about DR. I don't usually pay attention to that. The only confirmed penalty I've seen is a slight deviation in the bokeh at certain shutter speeds. Something I'd never notice without the videos or research I saw. I personally just shoot my R5 on mechanical. I mainly shoot sports, and I am happy with the 10-12 frames I can get. And I don't shoot slow shutter speeds so the reduced vibration from EFCS also isn't a factor.


----------



## SteveC (Oct 26, 2021)

LSXPhotog said:


> Please see my above post and maybe give the rate button a shot. It can dramatically change the way you edit and deliver images.


I can't possibly usefully "rate" images based on a 2 inch tall image on the back of the camera, especially not in daylight.

I do that process at home.

Button is useless to me. Utterly, completely useless.


----------



## Kit. (Oct 26, 2021)

john1970 said:


> Thank you for the detailed explanation. If I understand correctly, having a stacked sensor with a faster readout might improve the dynamic range in electronic mode?


If you have a stacked sensor, you can put much more electronics onto it. In particular, you can increase the number of ADCs working in parallel, and then your bottleneck will no longer be the ADC.


----------



## LSXPhotog (Oct 27, 2021)

SteveC said:


> I can't possibly usefully "rate" images based on a 2 inch tall image on the back of the camera, especially not in daylight.
> 
> I do that process at home.
> 
> Button is useless to me. Utterly, completely useless.


OK, so change your magnification button to zoom 1:1 on the AF point to check focus in the field. Benefit of an EVF is now you can keep your eye to the viewfinder on a sunny day when required. It's what most of us are doing and it's PROBABLY why there is a button called RATE on nearly all professional cameras and why it's one of the first things I look for on any new camera body I consider...because we're using it in the field to save time when we get them on the computer. If you're not willing to do any of this then best of luck to you in the future. Just trying to save you time and demonstrate another approach to culling images that was taught to me by one of the greatest photographers I know.


----------



## SteveC (Oct 27, 2021)

LSXPhotog said:


> OK, so change your magnification button to zoom 1:1 on the AF point to check focus in the field. Benefit of an EVF is now you can keep your eye to the viewfinder on a sunny day when required. It's what most of us are doing and it's PROBABLY why there is a button called RATE on nearly all professional cameras and why it's one of the first things I look for on any new camera body I consider...because we're using it in the field to save time when we get them on the computer. If you're not willing to do any of this then best of luck to you in the future. Just trying to save you time and demonstrate another approach to culling images that was taught to me by one of the greatest photographers I know.


If I can interrupt photographing things long enough to do all that, then instead of rating the bad pictures, I'll simply delete them.

But I'd rather spend that time AFTER the job when it doesn't cut into my time on site.

But realistically, even if some people find it useful and others find it a waste of time...the REAL issue is why Canon won't let you reassign the button.

If I could do that, I wouldn't give a damn about the rate function. Instead I end up resenting it because it uses up what could otherwise, to me, be a valuable button. The fact that YOU and unspecified pros find it useful doesn't change the fact that the button is unassignable for those who do not.


----------



## Cyborx (Oct 27, 2021)

“Jeff Cable was one of the photographers using the R3 during the olympics” 

This means Jeff Cable is a Canon Ambassador.

That means Jeff Cable is being paid (in money or cams) to tell the world Canon is great!

That means you are watching a commercial.

The R3 is 24 mpix guys.. Nikon is doing 45mpix, Sony is doing 50mpix. What is Canon doing?? It’s almost 2022. 24 mpix, seriously? Sure, incredible AF. But 24 mpix?

I am waiting so long for a Canon mirrorless pro camera, but I’m gonna skip this one.. keeping my fingers crossed for Canon to make an epic R1 with a reasonable pricetag. If not, I’m off to Sony too…


----------



## snapshot (Oct 27, 2021)

Cyborx said:


> “Jeff Cable was one of the photographers using the R3 during the olympics”
> 
> This means Jeff Cable is a Canon Ambassador.
> 
> ...


i gather from this you do not feel like the R3 will improve your results. i can only say the move from 5d4 to r5 has greatly improved my results, and the resolution really isnt the biggest piece of the puzzle. i wonder about the 'sensor splatter' that is what kept me out of the 1d series. i perhaps electronic shutter has reduced the moving parts to the point that there is no issue.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 28, 2021)

Cyborx said:


> The R3 is 24 mpix guys.. Nikon is doing 45mpix, Sony is doing 50mpix. What is Canon doing?? It’s almost 2022. 24 mpix, seriously? Sure, incredible AF. But 24 mpix?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 28, 2021)

snapshot said:


> i wonder about the 'sensor splatter' that is what kept me out of the 1d series. i perhaps electronic shutter has reduced the moving parts to the point that there is no issue.


That was an issue with the 1D X only, although mine never had an issue. Canon issued a service notice (in 2013, I think) and fixed the problem for free.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Oct 28, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Photo Mechanic is THE culling and ingesting tool.


Is it useful for exposure bracketting?


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Oct 28, 2021)

entoman said:


> Different photographers have different needs. Everything Jeff Cable said made perfect sense from the point of view of a successful (and reasonably wealthy) professional photographer.
> 
> Professional sports and wildlife photographers will usually have access to ultra-expensive long primes such as 600mm F4 or 800mm F5.6. Combined with their need to process and transmit images rapidly, it makes sense the have a relatively low MP camera.
> 
> But for most amateurs, unless they are very wealthy, the reality is that they can’t afford these long primes - they are generally using shorter and more affordable lenses such as 100-400mm zooms, which necessitate the need for heavier cropping. Also amateurs in most cases just don’t have the close access that a press pass provides. So many would argue that more MP and more cropping is often the only solution.


This is a very good point.
General advice is that it is better to spend money on lenses than a camera.
At a certain point spending more on a camera is far more affordable.
Although an M6 Mark II would offer more reach than the R5 at a given resolution.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Oct 28, 2021)

entoman said:


> I quite agree - many people probably don’t need high MP, and simply want the “latest and greatest” piece of kit, in the belief that it will magically improve their photography.


Some people are just spec chasers.
I doubt many people think buying the fastest car they can afford will improve their driving.
They just want the fastest car they can afford.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Oct 28, 2021)

Cyborx said:


> “Jeff Cable was one of the photographers using the R3 during the olympics”
> 
> This means Jeff Cable is a Canon Ambassador.


No, it does not.
Team USA photographers use Canon gear.
Canon wanted them to try the R3 out during the Olympics.
They were not really expected to use it for important photos but many of them chose to.


----------



## Cyborx (Oct 29, 2021)

I rest my case…


----------



## Cyborx (Oct 29, 2021)

Love unsponsored product reviews… lol


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 30, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> Is it useful for exposure bracketting?


I what way? I don't exposure bracket unless I am going to be doing blending and that type of stuff isn't high volume. But you can very quickly scan through lots of bracketed images to select the optimal single exposure or choice of two or so exposures you want to then blend.

It's real strengths are the import speed and the speed that you can scroll through thousands of images and rate, keyword and caption images.


----------

