# More features and specifications for the Canon EOS R3 have emerged



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jun 2, 2021)

> Canon has released new specifications for the Canon EOS R3, but has left many others undisclosed. The Canon EOS R3 will shoot RAW video, and by the looks of it, it will not shoot 8K.  In a normal Canon move, they have made the Canon EOS R3 compatible with the LP-E19 battery from the EOS-1D X Mark II and EOS-1D X Mark III. Canon is also adding AF tracking for cars, motorcycles, and other motorsports.
> Check out all of the new features and specifications below.
> From Canon Australia:
> Today we’re releasing new and exciting specs for the  Canon EOS R3, marking a new era for sports, wildlife, and news photographers.
> The EOS R3 will take object-tracking to another level – adding Auto Focus (AF) tracking for motorsports which...



Continue reading...


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jun 2, 2021)

What do we think for the resolution? I'm guessing ~32.5MP, midway between the 1DX3 and R5.


----------



## john1970 (Jun 2, 2021)

After seeing these specifications along with SD and CFExpress cards I am on the fence if I should buy R3 or not. I am still waiting for the official announcements to learn more, but at this stage I would like some insights into the following:

1) What exactly does Canon mean that the DPAF has enhance tracking for people and animals? Is the tracking significantly better than the R5. Is the enhancement quad-pixel AF?

2) Can the electronic shutter be used at speeds other than 30 fps like 10 fps or 20 fps? Many times I have a need for 10 fps and silent shutter and just do not need 30 fps.

3) Lastly, what is the resolution of the sensor? I a still hoping for 30 MP, but my gut is saying it may not be more than 24 MP.


----------



## marathonman (Jun 2, 2021)

No details as to whether you can recover highlights if you are 8 stops over-exposed.... what will the Internet talk about today then?


----------



## RMac (Jun 2, 2021)

twoheadedboy said:


> What do we think for the resolution? I'm guessing ~32.5MP, midway between the 1DX3 and R5.


I'd wager 20MP. The fact that they're not trumpeting the resolution is pretty suggestive that it's not an exciting spec, so staying the same as the R6/1DXiii wouldn't surprise me in the least.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 2, 2021)

I think it is becoming pretty clear that the R3 is to the R1 what the R6 is to the R5. Most of the people in this thread have been hoping the R3 is what the R1 will actually be, yet the R5 basically already does for them.


----------



## padam (Jun 2, 2021)

The R1 has to top -7EV, so it will be able to focus with the lens cap on.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Jun 2, 2021)

I'd call this the R3 series, with cliff hangers and the burning question what will happen in the next episode... Another burning question will finally be the pricing.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Jun 2, 2021)

marathonman said:


> No details as to whether you can recover highlights if you are 8 stops over-exposed.... what will the Internet talk about today then?


Anyone who has to recover 8 stops over-exposed images has a much deeper problem with photography I guess


----------



## Chaitanya (Jun 2, 2021)

twoheadedboy said:


> What do we think for the resolution? I'm guessing ~32.5MP, midway between the 1DX3 and R5.


Maybe even 24 or 28 to keep things in check.


----------



## docsmith (Jun 2, 2021)

While expected, I am pleased to see the battery confirmed. There had been some speculation that the R3 might have two LP-E6NH in it. But, the R3 will be sporting elite weather sealing and a higher volt battery. 

Nice. 

Not bring on the sensor size and get it into the hands of testers!


----------



## SV (Jun 2, 2021)

Seems ok, but I think I'll hold out for 20 Stops of Coordinated Control IS so that I can handhold those night time Milky Way shots...


----------



## Atlasman (Jun 2, 2021)

I believe the R3 has to be a direct competitor to the Sony A1—and at-the-same time, be an improved R5. This means it should have at least 45MP, 4K oversampled from 8K, eliminate all recording limitations. I would buy such a beast!


----------



## FrenchFry (Jun 2, 2021)

I was hoping for higher MP, and this is not promising. Too bad as I would have put in a preorder. But it sounds like the R3 is going to make reach-limited subjects even smaller, which is not what I am looking for in a wildlife body.

Reach will continue to be an issue for me until Canon develops lighter weight high performing telephotos.

What I don’t understand is why Canon is stating this body will compete with the A1 and Z9 if it will have half the MPs. Also, why the big marketibg hype about undercutting the competition when you are selling something that isn’t in line with those products anyway?
Hopefully Canon is just playing games anf does have a sensor of at least 30MP-45MP. Maybe they are scared of advertizing 8k again if it is limited recording time again.Fingers crossed for better news but I am prepared to be disappointed.


----------



## sanj (Jun 2, 2021)

It seems like Canon is struggling with 8K.


----------



## sanj (Jun 2, 2021)

What is 'Speedlight shooting with electronic shutter'?


----------



## rinamiele (Jun 2, 2021)

30MP isn't exciting either but one can hope for _that_ over 20MP! Look, if the initial acquisition/pickup is as good as 1DX3, I'm gonna be happy. Shooting warblers with the R5 was dreadful (and I love my R5) If higher MP then lovely. Shooting 4K 120 needs to be included too, but anything more would be bonus. I'm definitely excited about the accessory shoe (XLR adapter please!) 

I think this is a great stop-gap camera - there sure is a lot to love already. Is it perfect? What camera is? I'm likely getting it anyway... ha ha ha!!! Ohhhh boyyyyyy


----------



## matthudson (Jun 2, 2021)

I have no idea why Canon keeps crippling their high end cameras with a dedicated SD card slot. CFExpress are cheap enough now that the cost justification doesn't hold up for the price of the body. Hopefully the R3 is dual-purpose slots, but knowing Canon they'll hold that for the R1


----------



## sanj (Jun 2, 2021)

As of now, I think R5 will be my camera. This is nice, but nothing really compelling to upgrade. R5 rocks!


----------



## sanj (Jun 2, 2021)

RAW is mentioned twice. Wonder what that means...


----------



## sanj (Jun 2, 2021)

'New' accessory shoe? Does anyone guess what that would be?


----------



## sanj (Jun 2, 2021)

matthudson said:


> I have no idea why Canon keeps crippling their high end cameras with a dedicated SD card slot. CFExpress are cheap enough now that the cost justification doesn't hold up for the price of the body. Hopefully the R3 is dual-purpose slots, but knowing Canon they'll hold that for the R1


R1 will probably not have SD.


----------



## canonmike (Jun 2, 2021)

RMac said:


> I'd wager 20MP. The fact that they're not trumpeting the resolution is pretty suggestive that it's not an exciting spec, so staying the same as the R6/1DXiii wouldn't surprise me in the least.


I'd say your 2nd statement is a pretty logical one, since they haven't trumpeted the MP to the mountaintops, as you stated. I'm afraid the bird and nature photographers might be a little disappointed with such a low MP count, if that is indeed the case.


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jun 2, 2021)

> Canon today announced new features and specifications for the Canon EOS R3. Before we get too excited, Gordon was now able to turn the camera on and test any of the features.
> The above video will give you a great look at the ergonomics of the Canon EOS R3.
> Canon EOS R3 Specifications:
> 
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## polaris8030 (Jun 2, 2021)

_Speedlite shooting with electronic shutter_
If my sync speeds are still 1/200 .. what does an electronic shutter bring me compared to mech. I guess it means that rolling effects are reduced to the point that electronic shutter + flash is ok to use. anything else ?


----------



## Stuart (Jun 2, 2021)

Does Speedlight shooting with electronic shutter mean sync speeds above 250th Sec?

would 30fps be possible with a new speedlight at full power


----------



## DBounce (Jun 2, 2021)

I’m thinking this is likely a pass for me. The R1 is likely the one most of us are waiting for. Canon just decided to throw a curved ball with the R3. The R5S also sounds interesting, if real.


----------



## Chaitanya (Jun 2, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> I think it is becoming pretty clear that the R3 is to the R1 what the R6 is to the R5. Most of the people in this thread have been hoping the R3 is what the R1 will actually be, yet the R5 basically already does for them.


More in the line of what A9 is to A1 in Sony lineup. Not a bad idea to test waters and new tech before coming out with flagship 1 series camera.


----------



## Atlasman (Jun 2, 2021)

RMac said:


> I'd wager 20MP. The fact that they're not trumpeting the resolution is pretty suggestive that it's not an exciting spec, so staying the same as the R6/1DXiii wouldn't surprise me in the least.


The name of the game is to tease—they want us to keep on guessing a critical feature of the camera.


----------



## carlosalberto (Jun 2, 2021)

I think this could be my first mirrorless camera, but if it comes with an SD slot instead of dual CFExpress, I'll keep waiting.


----------



## sdz (Jun 2, 2021)

Canon may hide the resolution because it wants to hype the camera. Everyone will want to speculate about that and their doing so keeps the camera newsworthy and current. That said, the R1 will need to best the R3 and a higher megapixel count is one way to do that. Another way would be to have multiple processors to handle the demands made on the camera by high megapixel, high framerate camera. A third way would include a new quad pixel AF system. Of course, the R3 might introduce the QPAF at a low resolution while the R1 will provide that capability at a higher resolution.

The waiting is the hardest part.


----------



## Toglife_Anthony (Jun 2, 2021)

sanj said:


> It seems like Canon is struggling with 8K.


Or maybe they're just a tad hesitant to market it heavily, as that clearly backfired on them with the R5...


----------



## usern4cr (Jun 2, 2021)

john1970 said:


> After seeing these specifications along with SD and CFExpress cards I am on the fence if I should buy R3 or not. I am still waiting for the official announcements to learn more, but at this stage I would like some insights into the following:
> 
> 1) What exactly does Canon mean that the DPAF has enhance tracking for people and animals? Is the tracking significantly better than the R5. Is the enhancement quad-pixel AF?
> 
> ...


If they force you to use 30fps only with electronic shutter (as the R5 forces you to use their 20fps only with it) then I will be beyond disappointed with that particular feature. I am hoping that they will offer various fps settings for all shutter modes, including fully electronic. Then, in the near future, I hope that they give R5 users a firmware update to allow various fps settings for electronic shutter as well. This is a very sorely-needed (and easy) fix for the R5 that Canon really needs to make as soon as possible.


----------



## Atlasman (Jun 2, 2021)

sdz said:


> Canon may hide the resolution because it wants to hype the camera. Everyone will want to speculate about that and their doing so keeps the camera newsworthy and current. That said, the R1 will need to best the R3 and a higher megapixel count is one way to do that. Another way would be to have multiple processors to handle the demands made on the camera by high megapixel, high framerate camera. A third way would include a new quad pixel AF system. Of course, the R3 might introduce the QPAF at a low resolution while the R1 will provide that capability at a higher resolution.
> 
> The waiting is the hardest part.


The R1 should be the ultimate in resolution!


----------



## AEWest (Jun 2, 2021)

RMac said:


> I'd wager 20MP. The fact that they're not trumpeting the resolution is pretty suggestive that it's not an exciting spec, so staying the same as the R6/1DXiii wouldn't surprise me in the least.


I doubt that low. Probably 30 at least. If 20, the R6 with a grip is starting to look good...


----------



## RayValdez360 (Jun 2, 2021)

RMac said:


> I'd wager 20MP. The fact that they're not trumpeting the resolution is pretty suggestive that it's not an exciting spec, so staying the same as the R6/1DXiii wouldn't surprise me in the least.


DAMN 20MP IN 2021 on a $4000+ camera is a bit lack luster. this really would just be for sports or shooting styles that demand fast fps.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Jun 2, 2021)

sanj said:


> 'New' accessory shoe? Does anyone guess what that would be?


shoe can send data so maybe a mic or possibly a screen can go on top. it means canon is probably making some new toys for that shoe.


----------



## polaris8030 (Jun 2, 2021)

I went back to the interview w/ the Russian rep/head that was posted here on 4/30








Canon EOS R3 – это еще не флагман | PHOTOWEBEXPO


Во время московской выставки «Фотофорум-2021» нам удалось взять интервью у представителя компании Canon. На вопросы ответил Андрей Тищенко, руководитель отдела ...




photowebexpo.ru





_What cameras will the Canon EOS R3 compete with on the market?_​_Of course, the closest competing model will be the Nikon Z9 , which we do not know much about yet, as the camera has just been announced and has not yet been officially unveiled
... And of course, Sony a1because there are cool technologies there
... In other words, our camera will be in the segment of those cameras that are currently announced by competitors as top-end._

"closest competing model" is a subjective opinion. The R3 does compete with the Z9 in terms of it's body class (pro body layout, battery grip) and does compete with the A1 (30 fps electronic shutter)

I think it will come down to the new eye tracking focus and the ability to get the shot no matter the amount of craziness that is going on in the scene. The R5 brain is good, but it still loses it's head against busy backgrounds, sudden movements and changes in the scene.
Maybe then Canon will drop their case (1, 2, 3, 4) AF options - something I have never really learned to use reliably - and just have subject specific AF and generic AF, all supported by eye tracking

Heck .. if I can nail the shot 90% of the time in difficult AF situations -- just imagine that, even I - a pixel peeping bird photographer - would be willing to consider a lower sensor MP


----------



## Daner (Jun 2, 2021)

According to one of the shops that I use here in Stockholm the new hot shoe has connections for communication and voltage supply for accessories.


----------



## sdz (Jun 2, 2021)

Atlasman said:


> The R1 should be the ultimate in resolution!


Typically, the 1 series cameras have not been the highest MP Canon camera even if they have been the most capable Canon cameras. Canon eventually will bring to market the long-promised high MP camera. This will be a niche camera and will best in resolution everyother Canon camera. But it may and likely will not be Canon's best camera even if it is the best Canon camera for the niche it serves.


----------



## Mahk43 (Jun 2, 2021)

The EVF seems very very protruding compared to the 1DXmkIII.
I'm not a pro nor user of such a body, but could be an issue to store it intoa bag no?


----------



## Hector1970 (Jun 2, 2021)

This may well be a 20MP camera but it would put me off buying it if it is. They should put a 50MP sensor in it and be done with it. They can keep 100MP for the R1.


----------



## [email protected] (Jun 2, 2021)

twoheadedboy said:


> What do we think for the resolution? I'm guessing ~32.5MP, midway between the 1DX3 and R5.



24mp would be fine in a pro camera and very good PR from Canon already promoting their upcoming flagship camera.

Wish Nikon could do the same as Canon gradually release some specs, build some hype prior to Camera's release.


----------



## Atlasman (Jun 2, 2021)

sdz said:


> Typically, the 1 series cameras have not been the highest MP Canon camera even if they have been the most capable Canon camera. Canon eventually will bring to market the long-promised high MP camera. This will be a niche camera and will best in resolution everyother Canon camera. But it may and likely will not be Canon's best camera even if it is the best Canon camera for the niche it serves.


You may be right. But an R3 type is the first for Canon in digital—which to me indicates a re-jig of the lineup.


----------



## Alan B (Jun 2, 2021)

https://www.canon.co.uk/press-centr...led-a-high-speed-high-performance-mirrorless/


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 2, 2021)

RMac said:


> I'd wager 20MP. The fact that they're not trumpeting the resolution is pretty suggestive that it's not an exciting spec, so staying the same as the R6/1DXiii wouldn't surprise me in the least.


You'd lose that bet resoundingly.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 2, 2021)

justaCanonuser said:


> Anyone who has to recover 8 stops over-exposed images has a much deeper problem with photography I guess


He was being sarcastic, I think.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 2, 2021)

FrenchFry said:


> I was hoping for higher MP, and this is not promising. Too bad as I would have put in a preorder. But it sounds like the R3 is going to make reach-limited subjects even smaller, which is not what I am looking for in a wildlife body.
> 
> Reach will continue to be an issue for me until Canon develops lighter weight high performing telephotos.
> 
> ...


Nowhere is the megapixels mentioned in the announcement. Don't confuse forum guesses with news.


----------



## mkush (Jun 2, 2021)

These aren’t the final specs… and they don’t want to totally tip their hand. The specs look great but what would really put this camera over the top? High resolution. So my guess is that they’re holding back that spec for impact. At the actual announcement they’ll say, “By the way… is is 50 MP and shoots 8K without overheating.” Then everyone will totally flip for it. If they said 8K now, that would reveal that it’s at least 45 MP, so they can’t say that.


----------



## RMac (Jun 2, 2021)

sanj said:


> 'New' accessory shoe? Does anyone guess what that would be?


Something to compete with this. Having an easy interface on the camera to plug in pro audio equipment (XLR) is a huge benefit for videography.



This could be a really nice video camera if Canon would get rid of the crippling 30 minute record limit. The only real feature it would be missing would be built-in ND filters (which I'll admit is a pretty big feature).


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 2, 2021)

Mahk43 said:


> The EVF seems very very protruding compared to the 1DXmkIII.
> I'm not a pro nor user of such a body, but could be an issue to store it intoa bag no?


No


----------



## RMac (Jun 2, 2021)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Nowhere is the megapixels mentioned in the announcement. Don't confuse forum guesses with news.


Well, we know it has oversampled 4k, so more than 12MP, and they don't mention 8K, so almost certainly less than 50. Yes, anything else is a guess, but given that they're not mentioning it, it seems unlikely to be an exciting spec.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 2, 2021)

RMac said:


> Something to compete with this. Having an easy interface on the camera to plug in pro audio equipment (XLR) is a huge benefit for videography.
> View attachment 198031
> 
> 
> This could be a really nice video camera if Canon would get rid of the crippling 30 minute record limit. The only real feature it would be missing would be built-in ND filters (which I'll admit is a pretty big feature).


Not so sure about that myself. How many scenes are interesting enough that are 30 mins long?


----------



## AEWest (Jun 2, 2021)

RMac said:


> Something to compete with this. Having an easy interface on the camera to plug in pro audio equipment (XLR) is a huge benefit for videography.
> View attachment 198031
> 
> 
> This could be a really nice video camera if Canon would get rid of the crippling 30 minute record limit. The only real feature it would be missing would be built-in ND filters (which I'll admit is a pretty big feature).


Doubt they will put in ND filters in a hybrid camera. They will reserve that feature for C line cameras.


----------



## VegasCameraGuy (Jun 2, 2021)

twoheadedboy said:


> What do we think for the resolution? I'm guessing ~32.5MP, midway between the 1DX3 and R5.


I'm thinking more like 60-80Mp. If it comes in below the R5, then I'm not breaking my piggy bank for lower resolution.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 2, 2021)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Not so sure about that myself. How many scenes are interesting enough that are 30 mins long?


Long form video is very popular. Set the camera for an interview or wildlife scene etc and let it run, then edit out the good bits. Indeed in interviews getting the camera and gear handling out of the equation is very important, nothing breaks the flow of things quite like somebody saying cut I have to reset the camera!


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 2, 2021)

VegasCameraGuy said:


> I'm thinking more like 60-80Mp. If it comes in below the R5, then I'm not breaking my piggy bank for lower resolution.


Then your piggy bank can rest easy for a while...


----------



## VegasCameraGuy (Jun 2, 2021)

sanj said:


> As of now, I think R5 will be my camera. This is nice, but nothing really compelling to upgrade. R5 rocks!


I'll dump my R5 for higher resolution and eye focus otherwise I'll just wait for the R1. I would have thought that Canon had learned their lesson about video with a stills camera and tailor the R3 for stills work. I see absolutely no reason to drop back 5 years in resolution especially with Sony at 60mp.


----------



## Sharlin (Jun 2, 2021)

DBounce said:


> The R1 is likely the one most of us are waiting for



"Most of us" aren't in the market for either the R1 or the R3.


----------



## VegasCameraGuy (Jun 2, 2021)

twoheadedboy said:


> What do we think for the resolution? I'm guessing ~32.5MP, midway between the 1DX3 and R5.


Let's see drop the resolution by 50% and increase the price by 50%, sounds like a good idea to me! Well, Duh!


----------



## RMac (Jun 2, 2021)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Not so sure about that myself. How many scenes are interesting enough that are 30 mins long?


*Most* of the things I've needed to record over the pandemic (which got me into videography) have been longer than 30 minutes.
Interviews
Weddings (like a documentary recording)
Church Services/Sermon recordings
Conference presentations

I realize there are lots of things that don't need long-form recording capability, but there are lots of things that do, and I've found cameras with artificial record time limits are more trouble than they're worth in those situations.

It was enough of an issue that I went and bought a used C300.


----------



## AccipiterQ (Jun 2, 2021)

Nothing that would make me want to swap from the R5 honestly


----------



## goldenhusky (Jun 2, 2021)

The good
Able to use speedlites with electronic shutter
LP-E19 battery
better IBIS
I am sure AF will be better than R5

My biggest disappointment so far
CF-e and SD card - why Canon why? May be it is your goal to disappoint people in one way or other. (for those who argue that SD cards are cheaper than Cf-e please do your research. There is not much price difference between comparable SD-UHS ii and CF-e cards)

My speculations
This is not going to be a high megapixel. This will be most likely a 25MP + or - 5 MP camera
Price is going to be $6k USD
This is not a competitor to Sony a1. So no Canon is not undercutting any competition in fact the opposite is true

I decided to hold off buying R5 expecting R3 is going to be at least a 45MP camera but sounds like most likely I will have to buy a R3


----------



## tron (Jun 2, 2021)

The same digic is mentioned so I would say about 30Mp (just because 30 x 30 = 45 x 20) assuming they were using it to its limits.

If that is the case it could be a nice replacement for 5DIV.


----------



## VegasCameraGuy (Jun 2, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> I think it is becoming pretty clear that the R3 is to the R1 what the R6 is to the R5. Most of the people in this thread have been hoping the R3 is what the R1 will actually be, yet the R5 basically already does for them.


I agree and to me, it doesn't make any sense for the R3 to be lower resolution than the R5 especially if it comes in at $6K. What are we getting for $2K besides a grip and eye focus?


----------



## timmy (Jun 2, 2021)

Ive read on here several times that the R3 was to go toe-to-toe with the Z9 and A1 but in order to do so, I agree that it has to have at least a 45mp sensor. Not saying it won't be amazing, but if that's its purpose, I don't see how they can avoid that. The R1 will undoubtedly and exponentially destroy the A1 but at what price, $8000-$9,000? They need a $6,000 A1/Z9 competitor, unless the R5 is considered that already?


----------



## H. Jones (Jun 2, 2021)

Funny to note from the side-view, the LP-E19 is actually somewhat wider than the camera itself. Especially when you consider that the space after the right-side of the HDMI port is all empty space where the flip-screen fits into the frame. 

Also, with that said, the viewfinder doesn't look like it takes anymore space than the 1DX when you compare it to the LP-E19. The only difference is that there's more space between the eyecup and the back of the camera, since the camera is skinnier, which gives you even more room to not hit your nose on the camera.


----------



## BeenThere (Jun 2, 2021)

sanj said:


> 'New' accessory shoe? Does anyone guess what that would be?


Must be for new accessories. Seriously, maybe something like a Canon branded monitor/recorder?


----------



## VegasCameraGuy (Jun 2, 2021)

matthudson said:


> I have no idea why Canon keeps crippling their high end cameras with a dedicated SD card slot. CFExpress are cheap enough now that the cost justification doesn't hold up for the price of the body. Hopefully the R3 is dual-purpose slots, but knowing Canon they'll hold that for the R1


Why are people crying about a CFx card? A 128Gb Sony Touch is a little over $200 and once you've forked out $3900 for the R5 body another $250 is chicken feed.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 2, 2021)

VegasCameraGuy said:


> I agree and to me, it doesn't make any sense for the R3 to be lower resolution than the R5 especially if it comes in at $6K. What are we getting for $2K besides a grip and eye focus?


The difference between a 1 series and a 5 series! Now for most people that isn't something of value, to me it very much is.


----------



## PhotographerJim (Jun 2, 2021)

I’m wondering if Canon is going the route of the old 1D/1Ds. The R1 will be the studio/highest MP while the R3 will be geared more towards action/speed. Even the announcement of new af for cars/cycles seems to support this, as well as the eye controlled af.


----------



## Mahk43 (Jun 2, 2021)

CanonFanBoy said:


> No


Glad to hear it, I've had the R with a Grip still on it, and if the EVF was that big it would have been a big issue for my (big) bag.


----------



## arbitrage (Jun 2, 2021)

VegasCameraGuy said:


> I agree and to me, it doesn't make any sense for the R3 to be lower resolution than the R5 especially if it comes in at $6K. What are we getting for $2K besides a grip and eye focus?


You are getting a stacked sensor. If you've ever shot an A9/A1 back to back with an R6/R5 you will know why that matters...a lot for fast action photography. And now confirmation that flash can be used with ES sort of guarantees not only a good read speed like the A9 but a top end read speed like the A1. Unless the flash sync is limited to 1/160 or something then it would be A9 level (even though A9 didn't allow flash with ES).

I also don't understand why people are surprised this may be a 20 odd MP camera even with the highest price in the R lineup? The 1DX series has always been way lower MPs than the 5 series and has always sold for way more than those cameras. Nothing to be surprised about there. I predicted 20 odd MP sensor from the very start and I'm sticking with my prediction.


----------



## H. Jones (Jun 2, 2021)

VegasCameraGuy said:


> I agree and to me, it doesn't make any sense for the R3 to be lower resolution than the R5 especially if it comes in at $6K. What are we getting for $2K besides a grip and eye focus?



This is a tough one, if it is lower resolution I could see this ending up around $4500-5000 to compete more with the A9, which makes it a little more understandable. 

But outside of that, for almost all of my uses Canon has really sold me on high-speed 45mp. My R5 is my primary camera, over the 1DX2, mostly for that reason, and if this camera ends up lower than 45 megapixels, I'm likely going to just buy a second R5 and put a battery grip on it. BSI is nice, but my R5's silent shutter doesn't significantly bother me as is, and I've gotten plenty of great action shots and birds in flight with the silent shutter. 

I've been a lifelong fan of the 1-series, and far prefer a solid, built-in grip over a battery grip, but the R5 is just *so* good it's really gonna take a lot to justify spending 1000s more on a lesser spec when I could be spending the same money on new RF glass. I'm kind of coming to terms with that, to be honest. It would be nice to have two of the same camera and not have to worry which one I pick up.

I know the point of this camera is for a similar market to the 1D, which I've always understood doesn't particularly need much resolution. But I've always been in that market, as someone who works with newspapers that downsample everything to just 2 megapixels for print, and I have been *blown* away by how much more I can crop an image and still make the front cover of a print paper thanks to 45 megapixels. That's a value that I can't really dismiss, and I've found it to give me far more use than just adding FPS.


----------



## DBounce (Jun 2, 2021)

Sharlin said:


> "Most of us" aren't in the market for either the R1 or the R3.


I said “waiting for”... not in the market for. But why are you wasting time reading this if you are not interested in either camera?


----------



## arbitrage (Jun 2, 2021)

This camera seems like it was meant to be the R1 but then the A1 threw a wrench in that plan so Canon made it an R3 knowing they needed a high-MP/fast FPS camera to match A1 (and Z9). Although who knows, maybe this was Canon's plan all along.

I was thinking A9 lineup was likely dead after the A1. But now an A9III could easily go up against this R3. Sony would have no problem throwing 35+FPS at a 24-35MP stacked sensor with upgraded eye-af. Sell it for $4500 like the previous A9 lineup and you've undercut the likely price of the R3 ($5.5-6K) by a lot and matched or bested it on the spec sheets. The R3 will have the advantage of the integrated grip which Sony will never do. So if you like integrated grips then the R3 may be worth the premium.

The R1 will be interesting to see. I'd guess the earliest would be Winter Olympics 2022??


----------



## PhotographerJim (Jun 2, 2021)

RMac said:


> *Most* of the things I've needed to record over the pandemic (which got me into videography) have been longer than 30 minutes.
> Interviews
> Weddings (like a documentary recording)
> Church Services/Sermon recordings
> ...


I’ve heard that in some parts of the world, there is a tax on equipment that can record 30 minutes or longer because it’s considered broadcast equipment, I believe that is why the cap.

Either that or they just want people to purchase the more expensive EOS Cinema gear….


----------



## RMac (Jun 2, 2021)

PhotographerJim said:


> I’ve heard that in some parts of the world, there is a tax on equipment that can record 30 minutes or longer because it’s considered broadcast equipment, I believe that is why the cap.
> 
> Either that or they just want people to purchase the more expensive EOS Cinema gear….


This formerly was the case due to EU tax laws. Those tax laws phased out mid-2019, though, so at this point to the best of my knowledge, it's an artificial limit Canon imposes. It's worth pointing out that Sony has essentially eliminated this limitation in their cameras for some time now.


----------



## VegasCameraGuy (Jun 2, 2021)

H. Jones said:


> Funny to note from the side-view, the LP-E19 is actually somewhat wider than the camera itself. Especially when you consider that the space after the right-side of the HDMI port is all empty space where the flip-screen fits into the frame.
> 
> Also, with that said, the viewfinder doesn't look like it takes anymore space than the 1DX when you compare it to the LP-E19. The only difference is that there's more space between the eyecup and the back of the camera, since the camera is skinnier, which gives you even more room to not hit your nose on the camera.
> 
> View attachment 198032


Could you share the link to the video where the above image came from? I can find no other images of the side of the camera? It's now released but the image shows the flap over the RJ45 network plug confirming the LAN light showing on the front.


----------



## AEWest (Jun 2, 2021)

I predict that we will get the resolution number within the next few days. There must be a few pre-production models floating around if Gordon Laing has one. 

Therefore Canon won't be able to keep a lid on the specs for much longer or they will be leaked to CR as a CR3 level rumour.


----------



## TravelerNick (Jun 2, 2021)

goldenhusky said:


> My biggest disappointment so far
> CF-e and SD card - why Canon why?



It's still easier to find a SD card if you're desperate . Likely the only reason I would consider it a useful feature.


----------



## john1970 (Jun 2, 2021)

AEWest said:


> I predict that we will get the resolution number within the next few days. There must be a few pre-production models floating around if Gordon Laing has one.
> 
> Therefore Canon won't be able to keep a lid on the specs for much longer or they will be leaked to CR as a CR3 level rumour.


My understanding is that Gordon Laing was only able to look at a pre-production model of the camera, but was not allowed to touch the camera. I suspect that we will have the full specifications by mid-July and a release date of early September. Frankly, I am still on the fence to purchase or not. I currently own a R5 and might very well wait until a R1 is released. Resolution and AF improvements for wildlife are important to me.


----------



## TMHKR (Jun 2, 2021)

Was eye-controlled AF mentioned, hence the gigantic viewfinder?


----------



## sfericean (Jun 2, 2021)

Anyone notice there is no wireless file transfer port? Makes you wonder if this new hot shoe will have the WFT antenna up on top as one of the Canon branded accessories.


----------



## exige24 (Jun 2, 2021)

RMac said:


> I'd wager 20MP. The fact that they're not trumpeting the resolution is pretty suggestive that it's not an exciting spec, so staying the same as the R6/1DXiii wouldn't surprise me in the least.


Would be a non starter for me. Would much rather have the R5's 50mp/20fps than 20-30mp/ 30 fps. All the added features are just fluff except the BSI sensor, but I don't care for video at all, which more than half of the advantages of having that are applied to. Not enticing me at all to switch from my R5. Better luck next time Canon.

It is kind of a strange decision to include a BSI sensor, which mostly video people crave, and then remove video features like 8k. Canon will not give it all. Lol


----------



## melgross (Jun 2, 2021)

FrenchFry said:


> I was hoping for higher MP, and this is not promising. Too bad as I would have put in a preorder. But it sounds like the R3 is going to make reach-limited subjects even smaller, which is not what I am looking for in a wildlife body.
> 
> Reach will continue to be an issue for me until Canon develops lighter weight high performing telephotos.
> 
> ...


By the rime you can put in a preorder we will know all the specs. We don’t know what the Rez is yet, which is why people are guessing from low to high. It’s possible that this tease will give us a big surprise when they finally tell us everything before the release announcement.

they could be holding the best for last.


----------



## ClickIt_AC (Jun 2, 2021)

tron said:


> The same digic is mentioned so I would say about 30Mp (just because 30 x 30 = 45 x 20) assuming they were using it to its limits.
> 
> If that is the case it could be a nice replacement for 5DIV.


And what if...it is dual digic?


----------



## exige24 (Jun 2, 2021)

AccipiterQ said:


> Nothing that would make me want to swap from the R5 honestly




More than that, even IF I didn't already own an R5 and was deciding between both new, I'm pretty sure I would still pick up the R5. Haha


----------



## exige24 (Jun 2, 2021)

VegasCameraGuy said:


> I agree and to me, it doesn't make any sense for the R3 to be lower resolution than the R5 especially if it comes in at $6K. What are we getting for $2K besides a grip and eye focus?



BSI Sensor, but then they're removing 8k. Hahahahahah


----------



## tron (Jun 2, 2021)

ClickIt_AC said:


> And what if...it is dual digic?


I would really love that! In that case it could also be 45 to 50Mp. A R3 that is a superset of R5 (don't mind the video) would interest me a lot!


----------



## frjmacias (Jun 2, 2021)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Not so sure about that myself. How many scenes are interesting enough that are 30 mins long?


The record limit being removed is not for scenes would be my guess. A lot of professionals do long format recording for interviews, shows, and corporate events. An unlimited record limit would prove invaluable for those professionals. That said, these professionals are probably doing external recording to a monitor like the Ninja V+ anyways.


----------



## exige24 (Jun 2, 2021)

arbitrage said:


> You are getting a stacked sensor. If you've ever shot an A9/A1 back to back with an R6/R5 you will know why that matters...a lot for fast action photography. And now confirmation that flash can be used with ES sort of guarantees not only a good read speed like the A9 but a top end read speed like the A1. Unless the flash sync is limited to 1/160 or something then it would be A9 level (even though A9 didn't allow flash with ES).
> 
> I also don't understand why people are surprised this may be a 20 odd MP camera even with the highest price in the R lineup? The 1DX series has always been way lower MPs than the 5 series and has always sold for way more than those cameras. Nothing to be surprised about there. I predicted 20 odd MP sensor from the very start and I'm sticking with my prediction.



The A1 changed the dynamics, that's why. This will be seen as less than and deservedly so.


----------



## mariosk1gr (Jun 2, 2021)

usern4cr said:


> If they force you to use 30fps only with electronic shutter (as the R5 forces you to use their 20fps only with it) then I will be beyond disappointed with that particular feature. I am hoping that they will offer various fps settings for all shutter modes, including fully electronic. Then, in the near future, I hope that they give R5 users a firmware update to allow various fps settings for electronic shutter as well. This is a very sorely-needed (and easy) fix for the R5 that Canon really needs to make as soon as possible.


We all hope with Canon and we stay with hope most of the time!
I was hoping for a fw update with my 5d4, my c100 mark ii, my R and now we were hoping for R3 to come with at least 40mp+ and it turned out that's not the case! R5 offers 8k and then everyone should expect 8k on R3, tha is not the case either. Where in the heck is c-log2?? We are paying 6k ffs! I would love to buy R3 and use it as a b-cam with my c70 but with these specs I'm not willing to pay 6k!! Nevertheless 20/24/28mp for that price range today in 2021 is already outdated! I have hopes for R5C if it comes with a fan inside and the same specs for stills. So f*cki*g frustrated right now!


----------



## mpmark (Jun 2, 2021)

RMac said:


> I'd wager 20MP. The fact that they're not trumpeting the resolution is pretty suggestive that it's not an exciting spec, so staying the same as the R6/1DXiii wouldn't surprise me in the least.


When have canon ever mentioned mp in a development news? This is just how they operate with releasing info, don’t make more of it.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 2, 2021)

mariosk1gr said:


> We all hope with Canon and we stay with hope most of the time!
> I was hoping for a fw update with my 5d4, my c100 mark ii, my R and now we were hoping for R3 to come with at least 40mp+ and it turned out that's not the case! R5 offers 8k and then everyone should expect 8k on R3, tha is not the case either. Where in the heck is c-log2?? We are paying 6k ffs! I would love to buy R3 and use it as a b-cam with my c70 but with these specs I'm not willing to pay 6k!! Nevertheless 20/24/28mp for that price range today in 2021 is already outdated! I have hopes for R5C if it comes with a fan inside and the same specs for stills. So f*cki*g frustrated right now!


Then it just isn’t the model for you. Every camera is not designed for every user. Personally I am seriously interested in the R3 and the MP count is close to irrelevant for me.

As for waiting for firmware updates, why? Buy a camera for what it does out of the box, nothing else is implied or guaranteed.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 2, 2021)

mpmark said:


> When have canon ever mentioned mp in a development news? This is just how they operate with releasing info, don’t make more of it.


Well if it was a higher MP they would probably have said shoots 6k rather than shoots oversampled 4K.


----------



## Rocksthaman (Jun 2, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Then it just isn’t the model for you. Every camera is not designed for every user. Personally I am seriously interested in the R3 and the MP count is close to irrelevant for me.
> 
> As for waiting for firmware updates, why? Buy a camera for what it does out of the box, nothing else is implied or guaranteed.


Literally knew you would be the first to respond


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 2, 2021)

VegasCameraGuy said:


> I agree and to me, it doesn't make any sense for the R3 to be lower resolution than the R5 especially if it comes in at $6K. What are we getting for $2K besides a grip and eye focus?


1 series build quality, ergonomics and battery. Improved AF and fps. The first Canon FF stacked back illuminated sensor. LAN/Ethernet port. New hot shoe port.

Flip the question around, what does the 1DX III offer that the R3 doesn’t, yet the 1DX III is $6,499.


----------



## SpaceGhost (Jun 2, 2021)

The non-matching dual card slots really sucks especially at this price point. Makes me feel the resolution will be low as well. The R3 was looking to have a lot of potential for my next purchase until this news dump. 

On the flip side, I really like the new body. 

I used to spend more money on my camera gear until Canon started dragged their feet with the switch to mirrorless. The R5 is great but I've always been a 1 series fan. The R3 looked like a great compromise but now I feel I'll just wait.


----------



## reef58 (Jun 2, 2021)

I am not a rumor guesser, but I am not sure why everyone thinks this needs to be 45 or 50 mega pixels. The R5 covers that pretty well. With the new sensor technology if I had to guess I am going for 20-30, but I really have no idea. I am not sure they need another 20mp camera either with the 1dx3 and R6. 24? 30?


----------



## Rocksthaman (Jun 2, 2021)

Battery guys, would you rather have two R5 batteries or the 1dx style. I’ve grown fond of the R5 grip and battery, other than the FPS dropping at under 50%.

4260 vs 2700mah


----------



## Canfan (Jun 2, 2021)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


My only question is would there be an firmware update for the R5 with improved autofocus and subject recognition coming?


----------



## AEWest (Jun 2, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> 1 series build quality, ergonomics and battery. Improved AF and fps. The first Canon FF stacked back illuminated sensor.
> 
> Flip the question around, what does the 1DX III offer that the R3 doesn’t, yet the 1DX III is $6,499.


That is a question I can't answer. The only advantage the 1DX3 has is dual CF express, and the all important OVF for some. If the R3 is $6K, there will have to be a price drop on the 1DX3. Biggest downside to the 1DX3 is of course the EF mount.


----------



## padam (Jun 2, 2021)

arbitrage said:


> This camera seems like it was meant to be the R1 but then the A1 threw a wrench in that plan so Canon made it an R3 knowing they needed a high-MP/fast FPS camera to match A1 (and Z9). Although who knows, maybe this was Canon's plan all along.
> 
> I was thinking A9 lineup was likely dead after the A1. But now an A9III could easily go up against this R3. Sony would have no problem throwing 35+FPS at a 24-35MP stacked sensor with upgraded eye-af. Sell it for $4500 like the previous A9 lineup and you've undercut the likely price of the R3 ($5.5-6K) by a lot and matched or bested it on the spec sheets. The R3 will have the advantage of the integrated grip which Sony will never do. So if you like integrated grips then the R3 may be worth the premium.
> 
> The R1 will be interesting to see. I'd guess the earliest would be Winter Olympics 2022??


Not really, the R1 will use a completely different body to justify an even higher price tag, probably with the memory cards mounted lengthways, like the 1DX and it will be even newer technology, so it needs more time.

The A9 line is not dead but it might not receive an update either.
Why would they do it in the first place, when they want to push the A1 as the definite upgrade from an A9 or A9II?
And they will do minor 'A' facelift on an A1 with a better LCD screen like they did with the A7RIII and A7RIV or a bit more extensive update without changing the sensor like A9II compared to the A9, and then the A1 prices will start to drop, so eventually it will become closer to the current A9II price level.

It really doesn't matter if there is a body that is a few hundred dollars cheaper or offers a feature that is not there on a competitor. Whether that's Canon/Sony/Nikon whatever, you are buying into a system and from now on, all will be providing plenty of options with certain lens options being better on one over the other, different screens, body designs, card slots, etc.. there is just more to it than just playing a game of "Top Trumps".


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 2, 2021)

AEWest said:


> That is a question I can't answer. The only advantage the 1DX3 has is dual CF express, and the all important OVF for some. If the R3 is $6K, there will have to be a price drop on the 1DX3. Biggest downside to the 1DX3 is of course the EF mount.


Same type dual card slots, fixed rear screen. Bigger top screen, secondary rear screen. GPS. OVF. Probably AF point linked spot metering. Battery life. 

They won’t have to drop the price of the 1DX III as I am sure there are very few ‘in stock’ as the numbers produced would have been very carefully regulated and monitored. Unless of course they messed up those numbers, I live in hope...


----------



## AEWest (Jun 2, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Same type dual card slots, fixed rear screen. Bigger top screen, secondary rear screen. GPS. OVF. Probably AF point linked spot metering. Battery life.
> 
> They won’t have to drop the price of the 1DX III as I am sure there are very few ‘in stock’ as the numbers produced would have been very carefully regulated and monitored. Unless of course they messed up those numbers, I live in hope...


I would think that at this stage any EF mount camera regardless of specs will have to be discounted as it clear Canon is rapidly moving away from the EF system.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 2, 2021)

AEWest said:


> I would think that at this stage any EF mount camera regardless of specs will have to be discounted as it clear Canon is rapidly moving away from the EF system.


I don’t recall the 1V being discounted when we moved to digital, I’d expect them to just keep whatever they have left as the stock for the holdouts.

As for the rest of the EF cameras, well there is still a massive price difference between a Rebel kit and an RP and the Rebels made money because they were so cheap. Sure all us enthusiasts know about the EF RF migration but that really won’t impact the Rebel kit buyers who were never going to buy another lens anyway.


----------



## Wildlife Junkie (Jun 2, 2021)

No dual cf express card slot is disappointing for a pro camera. Please Canon not again a 20/21 MP sensor. We are in 2021 and anything below 40 MP would also be disappointing.


----------



## Diltiazem (Jun 2, 2021)

VegasCameraGuy said:


> Could you share the link to the video where the above image came from? I can find no other images of the side of the camera? It's now released but the image shows the flap over the RJ45 network plug confirming the LAN light showing on the front.


----------



## usern4cr (Jun 2, 2021)

AEWest said:


> Doubt they will put in ND filters in a hybrid camera. They will reserve that feature for C line cameras.


If they do come out with a global shutter in a R... body, I'm guessing that they *will* put a ND filter in it to protect the sensor when the lens is removed (as well as having the ND function).


----------



## FrenchFry (Jun 2, 2021)

melgross said:


> By the rime you can put in a preorder we will know all the specs. We don’t know what the Rez is yet, which is why people are guessing from low to high. It’s possible that this tease will give us a big surprise when they finally tell us everything before the release announcement.
> 
> they could be holding the best for last.


I hope you're right!


----------



## tron (Jun 2, 2021)

Rocksthaman said:


> Battery guys, would you rather have two R5 batteries or the 1dx style. I’ve grown fond of the R5 grip and battery, other than the FPS dropping at under 50%.
> 
> 4260 vs 2700mah


You do not compare them correctly. The 2700mAh battery has 50% more voltage. So their Wh of the two R5 batteries are almost the same with R3's and 1DxIII's battery.


----------



## H. Jones (Jun 2, 2021)

usern4cr said:


> If they do come out with a global shutter in a R... body, I'm guessing that they *will* put a ND filter in it to protect the sensor when the lens is removed (as well as having the ND function).


Honestly a good bet, and would even make sense to help boost the value of the R1 if it does end up being in the $7500 range, which nowadays is significantly more expensive than the C200 or C70, both of which have ND filters. The ND filters on the cinema cameras serve the same function, and due to the different sensor tech needed for global shutter, I doubt a global shutter sensor would even function with a mechanical shutter.


----------



## canonmike (Jun 2, 2021)

carlosalberto said:


> I think this could be my first mirrorless camera, but if it comes with an SD slot instead of dual CFExpress, I'll keep waiting.


I'm afraid there's an SD card in the mix, just like the R5, from what I can see.


----------



## usern4cr (Jun 2, 2021)

arbitrage said:


> You are getting a stacked sensor. If you've ever shot an A9/A1 back to back with an R6/R5 you will know why that matters...a lot for fast action photography. And now confirmation that flash can be used with ES sort of guarantees not only a good read speed like the A9 but a top end read speed like the A1. Unless the flash sync is limited to 1/160 or something then it would be A9 level (even though A9 didn't allow flash with ES).
> 
> I also don't understand why people are surprised this may be a 20 odd MP camera even with the highest price in the R lineup? The 1DX series has always been way lower MPs than the 5 series and has always sold for way more than those cameras. Nothing to be surprised about there. I predicted 20 odd MP sensor from the very start and I'm sticking with my prediction.


I'm going to guess that they either have a ~45MP sensor to match the R5, or a ~25MP sensor. 
The ~25MP sensor would allow for 6K video (or downsampling to 4K or 5K) and have a 6K x 4K stills ability.
I'm guessing they will drop the 30 min video limit, and have solved the heat problem for downsampled 4K 120fps.


----------



## goldenhusky (Jun 2, 2021)

TravelerNick said:


> It's still easier to find a SD card if you're desperate . Likely the only reason I would consider it a useful feature.



That is true but it operates at a lower speed or fills up the buffer quickly.


----------



## AlanF (Jun 2, 2021)

usern4cr said:


> I'm going to guess that they either have a ~45MP sensor to match the R5, or a ~25MP sensor.
> The ~25MP sensor would allow for 6K video (or downsampling to 4K or 5K) and have a 6K x 4K stills ability.
> I'm guessing they will drop the 30 min video limit, and have solved the heat problem for downsampled 4K 120fps.


Unfortunately, the 30 minute cap on video is not a technical limit but a taxation one.

"_Ever wonder why digital cameras have a 30 minute recording limit no matter how large of a memory card you have? Many claim it has to do with the 4GB file size limitations of the FAT32 file system used on most memory cards, overheating from recording for so long, etc. As it turns out, this has to do with the World Trade Organization and, as many things do, taxes.

The problem is that any camera that can record for longer than 29 minutes and 59 seconds is officially classified as a video camera by the WTO. This classification means that the cameras would be subject to a 5% duty fee, which would in turn raise prices_."





The 30 Minute Video Capture Limit May Come to an End for Digicams and HD dSLRs


Ever wonder why digital cameras have a 30 minute recording limit no matter how large of a memory card you have? Many claim it has to do with the 4GB file size limitations of the FAT32 file system used on most memory cards, overheating from recording for so long, etc. As it turns out, this has to...




www.steves-digicams.com


----------



## goldenhusky (Jun 2, 2021)

I received an email from B and H saying EOS R3 announced in the header. Jumped here quickly to see the details and there is nothing. Went back to the email only to find "New Details Emerge for Upcoming Canon EOS R3" duh! inside the message


----------



## canonmike (Jun 2, 2021)

Hector1970 said:


> This may well be a 20MP camera but it would put me off buying it if it is. They should put a 50MP sensor in it and be done with it. They can keep 100MP for the R1.


Since Canon hasn't dangled any R3 MP carrots, my guess is much lower MP's than what most people had anticipated for this camera. Looks like the envisioned higher MP body is a ways off, yet. This may very well validate some of the opinions out there that the R3 was actually intended to be the R1 but after Sony's A1 release, Canon decided to rethink its high end offerings and release dates. Still, the R3 looks to be a body that will be well received by sports and action photographers. Bird photographers may just have to wait awhile longer for some other Canon surprise high MP or APSC offering. Is there a soon to be R7 just around the corner?? After all, no one expected this R3 body when Canon made the sudden and surprising announcement. Maybe Private by Design is right and we shouldn't get so hung up on MP. However, since the pixel peepers may now be let down a bit, it may behoove Canon to put it all out there, play their cards and show us their R3 hand. No bluff, no tease, just show us what you've got. Lay their cards on the table for everyone to see. Then, being able to make an informed decision, we'll either buy it or not.


----------



## RMac (Jun 2, 2021)

AlanF said:


> Unfortunately, the 30 minute cap on video is not a technical limit but a taxation one.
> 
> "_Ever wonder why digital cameras have a 30 minute recording limit no matter how large of a memory card you have? Many claim it has to do with the 4GB file size limitations of the FAT32 file system used on most memory cards, overheating from recording for so long, etc. As it turns out, this has to do with the World Trade Organization and, as many things do, taxes.
> 
> ...


Again, I believe that this tax went away mid-2019. Sony no longer hobbles their hybrid cameras with this limitation. At this point my understanding is it's purely Canon crippling their cameras to protect their cinema line (overheating limitations aside).


----------



## canonmike (Jun 2, 2021)

goldenhusky said:


> The good
> Able to use speedlites with electronic shutter
> LP-E19 battery
> better IBIS
> ...


Did you mean, "buy an R5 after all?"


----------



## carlosalberto (Jun 2, 2021)

canonmike said:


> I'm afraid there's an SD card in the mix, just like the R5, from what I can see.


After watching the video, I agree with you. I'll wait for R1


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Jun 2, 2021)

I never understood what people like about SD cards. SD cards are so flimsy. An SD card will break if you put it into your back pocket together with your keys.


----------



## canonmike (Jun 2, 2021)

frjmacias said:


> The record limit being removed is not for scenes would be my guess. A lot of professionals do long format recording for interviews, shows, and corporate events. An unlimited record limit would prove invaluable for those professionals. That said, these professionals are probably doing external recording to a monitor like the Ninja V+ anyways.


Or are employing cinema dedicated cameras.....


----------



## bernie_king (Jun 2, 2021)

Rocksthaman said:


> Battery guys, would you rather have two R5 batteries or the 1dx style. I’ve grown fond of the R5 grip and battery, other than the FPS dropping at under 50%.
> 
> 4260 vs 2700mah


I'd rather have the LP-E19. It's a higher voltage battery. It may be anecdotal but it is one of the reasons the 1 Series cameras could focus big whites faster. Makes a huge difference in target acquisition. My R5 with a grip reminds me of my 7D Mark II when it comes to big whites... It was the reason I sold it. I can't wait for the R3


----------



## canonmike (Jun 2, 2021)

FrenchFry said:


> I hope you're right!


Don't we all??????


----------



## SteveC (Jun 2, 2021)

tron said:


> You do not compare them correctly. The 2700mAh battery has 50% more voltage. So their Wh of the two R5 batteries are almost the same with R3's and 1DxIII's battery.


Which brings up the question of why they insist on rating batteries in mAh instead of Wh or mWh. It would make some sense if the user had control of the voltage and it truly was an issue of current times hours, but they do not. And people are buying batteries because of the energy they expect to get out of them, not the charge (in coulombs!).


----------



## polaris8030 (Jun 2, 2021)

bernie_king said:


> I'd rather have the LP-E19. It's a higher voltage battery. It may be anecdotal but it is one of the reasons the 1 Series cameras could focus big whites faster. Makes a huge difference in target acquisition. My R5 with a grip reminds me of my 7D Mark II when it comes to big whites... It was the reason I sold it. I can't wait for the R3


it's not a higher voltage battery. it is 3 batteries in parallel (LP-E6* batteries are 2 in parallel). Batteries are spec'd at their typical voltage which is 3.6V - 3.8V. The LP-E19 is 3.6V*3 = 10.8V. The higher mAh rating reflects the 3p config as well. Battery impedance increases as batteries discharge, age or when it's cold .. so yes, apples to apples, a 3p battery will perform better under all circumstances than a 2p (assuming Canon uses the same battery cell tech for both)


----------



## padam (Jun 2, 2021)

Skyscraperfan said:


> I never understood what people like about SD cards. SD cards are so flimsy. An SD card will break if you put it into your back pocket together with your keys.


I don't think that's advisable for any memory card...
SD cards are everywhere(even my first digital camera used it), some phones have microSD slots some laptops even have SD card slots I've never broke one and even Mike Drew can't seem to break them.






For CFExpress it is a 100$ just to get a decent reader, it runs hot and I have to pay attention not to forget that at home otherwise all that speed gets lost via USB-C transfer from the camera.

If you are anxious about SD cards as a backup, just buy one with a big capacity and don't take it out of the camera. It's really not a big deal.


----------



## tron (Jun 2, 2021)

polaris8030 said:


> it's not a higher voltage battery. it is 3 batteries in parallel (LP-E6* batteries are 2 in parallel). Batteries are spec'd at their typical voltage which is 3.6V - 3.8V. The LP-E19 is 3.6V*3 = 10.8V. The higher mAh rating reflects the 3p config as well. Battery impedance increases as batteries discharge, age or when it's cold .. so yes, apples to apples, a 3p battery will perform better under all circumstances than a 2p (assuming Canon uses the same battery cell tech for both)


They are not in parallel they are in series that's why it has higher voltage. In parallel they would be 3.6V !!!


----------



## Juangrande (Jun 2, 2021)

RMac said:


> *Most* of the things I've needed to record over the pandemic (which got me into videography) have been longer than 30 minutes.
> Interviews
> Weddings (like a documentary recording)
> Church Services/Sermon recordings
> ...


Imagine that, buying a video camera for shooting video. You might be on to something.


----------



## polaris8030 (Jun 2, 2021)

polaris8030 said:


> it's not a higher voltage battery. it is 3 batteries in parallel (LP-E6* batteries are 2 in parallel). Batteries are spec'd at their typical voltage which is 3.6V - 3.8V. The LP-E19 is 3.6V*3 = 10.8V. The higher mAh rating reflects the 3p config as well. Battery impedance increases as batteries discharge, age or when it's cold .. so yes, apples to apples, a 3p battery will perform better under all circumstances than a 2p (assuming Canon uses the same battery cell tech for both)



i'm sorry I got it wrong .. it is a higher voltage battery, 3 cells in series 


tron said:


> They are not in parallel they are in series that's why it has higher voltage. In parallel they would be 3.6V !!!



Yes .. you are so right !!! they are in series. I wrote it as 3.6 x 3 - but called it as parallel. my bad


----------



## padam (Jun 2, 2021)

RMac said:


> *Most* of the things I've needed to record over the pandemic (which got me into videography) have been longer than 30 minutes.
> Interviews
> Weddings (like a documentary recording)
> Church Services/Sermon recordings
> ...


To be fair, overheating is much more of a problem than the recording limit.
An external recorder solves both pretty well in one go, if the camera screen it set to shut off - although one needs to rely on that micro-HDMI port to work and looking at the R3's port arrangement, I'm not sure if they've changed it...


----------



## SUNDOG04 (Jun 2, 2021)

DBounce said:


> I said “waiting for”... not in the market for. But why are you wasting time reading this if you are not interested in either camera?


Not a waste of time when studying what is and what is not available. As a Canon user I am considering going with a Nikon Z6II as my interest is more landscape and spending an extra $500 on an R6 is a waste for my purposes as I have no interest in video. But, buy the time I am ready to go mirrorless, maybe Canon will have something more appealing to me and I will stick with Canon. Studying the entire market may or my not be a waste of time, but it is my time that would be wasted.


----------



## stochasticmotions (Jun 2, 2021)

bernie_king said:


> I'd rather have the LP-E19. It's a higher voltage battery. It may be anecdotal but it is one of the reasons the 1 Series cameras could focus big whites faster. Makes a huge difference in target acquisition. My R5 with a grip reminds me of my 7D Mark II when it comes to big whites... It was the reason I sold it. I can't wait for the R3


Having a stronger battery is the one thing that I would like to see for the R5 and I remember the 1DIV being able to drive the 500mm a lot longer than the 5Ds. With the speed dropping quickly on the R5 as the battery drains I really have to pull the battery after it is about 50% depleted. I'm pretty sure the R3 will not have that issue.....but I will not be getting it since I really don't like the huge cameras anymore, guess I will have to live with buying a few more batteries since I doubt there will be a better battery coming out again for the R5.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 2, 2021)

sanj said:


> 'New' accessory shoe? Does anyone guess what that would be?


It sounds pretty much like the multi-interface shoe that Sony has.
It will be interesting to see how much Canon can compete with Sony and Panasonic with audio accessories since Sony and Panasonic have large audio divisions.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 2, 2021)

Hector1970 said:


> This may well be a 20MP camera but it would put me off buying it if it is. They should put a 50MP sensor in it and be done with it. They can keep 100MP for the R1.


I think it will be at least 30 MP for two reasons:
1) People moaned that the R6 had lower MP than the EOS R.
2) DCI 6K+ internal RAW


----------



## Tremotino (Jun 2, 2021)

goldenhusky said:


> The good
> Able to use speedlites with electronic shutter
> LP-E19 battery
> better IBIS
> ...


How do you know it is 1x SD and 1x CF card and not either 2x SD or 2x CF cards like you prefer?!


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 2, 2021)

goldenhusky said:


> CF-e and SD card - why Canon why?


My only guesses are:
1) SD cards are more convenient and affordable
2) CF Express Type-B cards generate a lot of heat

I still think it is a bad decision but it did not stop me from buying an R5.
That makes me part of the problem.
Canon managed to put 2 CF Express Type-B slots in the 1DX Mark III so they handled the heat somehow in one of the most weather-resistant cameras ever made.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 2, 2021)

TravelerNick said:


> It's still easier to find a SD card if you're desperate . Likely the only reason I would consider it a useful feature.


It is more that I can readily find a PC with an SD slot if I forget or have a problem with my external CF Express drive


----------



## john1970 (Jun 2, 2021)

Tremotino said:


> How do you know it is 1x SD and 1x CF card and not either 2x SD or 2x CF cards like you prefer?!


 Translate in Google Chrome: https://www.canon.se/cameras/eos-r3/

Built for professionals.​EOS R3 is built to withstand the stresses of professional daily use. The durable magnesium alloy camera body is sealed to the same degree as our legendary EOS-1D Series cameras, so it can withstand dust and water in harsh conditions. With dual card slots, image files can be written to SD or CFexpress media.

The camera is powered by a high-capacity LP-E19 battery - the same as in our EOS-1DX III camera. This means that the EOS R3 fits perfectly into your existing equipment and can be used with the extra batteries you already own.

In fact, if you've ever used an EOS-1 Series camera, many of the controls on the EOS R3 will feel familiar. If you do not have it, we know you will love the instinctive placement of the controls and the ergonomic grip.

The camera has several different controls, where both the arrow buttons and the smart controls feel instinctively placed within reach of the thumb for intuitive use. Three adjustable knobs on the camera and a lens control ring on each lens with RF mount allow you to easily adjust the shutter speed, aperture, ISO and exposure compensation with the camera facing the eye. EOS R3 also has an angled screen that allows you to easily compose creative perspectives.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 2, 2021)

Skyscraperfan said:


> I never understood what people like about SD cards.


They are ubiquitous.
I could not find an internal CF Express Type-B drive when I looked for one.
Most of my laptops have SD or Micro SD slots.


----------



## navastronia (Jun 2, 2021)

I know the R3 isn't supposed to be a high MP camera, but I really do hope it has at least 24 MP. I'd feel let down at only 20.


----------



## Tremotino (Jun 2, 2021)

canonmike said:


> Since Canon hasn't dangled any R3 MP carrots, my guess is much lower MP's than what most people had anticipated for this camera. Looks like the envisioned higher MP body is a ways off, yet. This may very well validate some of the opinions out there that the R3 was actually intended to be the R1 but after Sony's A1 release, Canon decided to rethink its high end offerings and release dates. Still, the R3 looks to be a body that will be well received by sports and action photographers. Bird photographers may just have to wait awhile longer for some other Canon surprise high MP or APSC offering. Is there a soon to be R7 just around the corner?? After all, no one expected this R3 body when Canon made the sudden and surprising announcement. Maybe Private by Design is right and we shouldn't get so hung up on MP. However, since the pixel peepers may now be let down a bit, it may behoove Canon to put it all out there, play their cards and show us their R3 hand. No bluff, no tease, just show us what you've got. Lay their cards on the table for everyone to see. Then, being able to make an informed decision, we'll either buy it or not.


Nobody has anticipated MP count for this camera, since nobody was expecting it at all...


----------



## navastronia (Jun 2, 2021)

Tremotino said:


> Nobody has anticipated MP count for this camera, since nobody was expecting it at all...



We've been speculating about it since we learned of its existence like 2 months ago. Does that not count?


----------



## Tremotino (Jun 2, 2021)

polaris8030 said:


> it's not a higher voltage battery. it is 3 batteries in parallel (LP-E6* batteries are 2 in parallel). Batteries are spec'd at their typical voltage which is 3.6V - 3.8V. The LP-E19 is 3.6V*3 = 10.8V. The higher mAh rating reflects the 3p config as well. Battery impedance increases as batteries discharge, age or when it's cold .. so yes, apples to apples, a 3p battery will perform better under all circumstances than a 2p (assuming Canon uses the same battery cell tech for bocomple





polaris8030 said:


> it's not a higher voltage battery. it is 3 batteries in parallel (LP-E6* batteries are 2 in parallel). Batteries are spec'd at their typical voltage which is 3.6V - 3.8V. The LP-E19 is 3.6V*3 = 10.8V. The higher mAh rating reflects the 3p config as well. Battery impedance increases as batteries discharge, age or when it's cold .. so yes, apples to apples, a 3p battery will perform better under all circumstances than a 2p (assuming Canon uses the same battery cell tech for both)


Complete BS!!!
A 3s LiPo (3p means 3 cells in parallel for LiPo which is not the case here...) "Performes" (if you want to call it that way) EXACTLY the same as a 2S or 6S LiPo if the chemistry is the same. The output voltage may be different put the performance is always the same.


----------



## AlanF (Jun 2, 2021)

Skyscraperfan said:


> I never understood what people like about SD cards. SD cards are so flimsy. An SD card will break if you put it into your back pocket together with your keys.


So, don't put them into your back pocket.


----------



## Atlasman (Jun 2, 2021)

arbitrage said:


> You are getting a stacked sensor. If you've ever shot an A9/A1 back to back with an R6/R5 you will know why that matters...a lot for fast action photography. And now confirmation that flash can be used with ES sort of guarantees not only a good read speed like the A9 but a top end read speed like the A1. Unless the flash sync is limited to 1/160 or something then it would be A9 level (even though A9 didn't allow flash with ES).
> 
> I also don't understand why people are surprised this may be a 20 odd MP camera even with the highest price in the R lineup? The 1DX series has always been way lower MPs than the 5 series and has always sold for way more than those cameras. Nothing to be surprised about there. I predicted 20 odd MP sensor from the very start and I'm sticking with my prediction.


The 1DX concept was from another era—I don’t believe we should be looking at what came before: we should look at current market conditions—top flagships from Nikon and Sony will and have high megapixel imagers. A 20mp—or even 30mp will not fly in the face of the competition. The optics for Canon would not be in their favour. I’ve said it before: it has to beat the R5.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 2, 2021)

Atlasman said:


> The 1DX concept was from another era—I don’t believe we should be looking at what came before: we should look at current market conditions—top flagships from Nikon and Sony will and have high megapixel imagers. A 20mp—or even 30mp will not fly in the face of the competition. The optics for Canon would not be in their favour. I’ve said it before: it has to beat the R5.


But it might fly in the face of users. I have no particular need or desire for high MP in an R3, if I am at an event and shoot 3,500 images per day per body and the output is very rarely big prints, I simply don't need 30 or 40 or more MP.


----------



## usern4cr (Jun 2, 2021)

polaris8030 said:


> it's not a higher voltage battery. it is 3 batteries in parallel (LP-E6* batteries are 2 in parallel). Batteries are spec'd at their typical voltage which is 3.6V - 3.8V. The LP-E19 is 3.6V*3 = 10.8V. The higher mAh rating reflects the 3p config as well. Battery impedance increases as batteries discharge, age or when it's cold .. so yes, apples to apples, a 3p battery will perform better under all circumstances than a 2p (assuming Canon uses the same battery cell tech for both)


Did you mean "in series"? If you get 10.8V from three 3.6V batteries then they have to be "in series" to do that. Then you get the same mah rating as each individual battery, but 3x higher voltage. If you consider the entire package as a "battery" (as one should since it can't be disassembled) then it is indeed a higher voltage "battery". Now if they put the batteries "in parallel" then the final "battery" will still only be 3.6V, but with a 3x higher mah rating. Either way you get the same 3x higher mwh rating.


----------



## usern4cr (Jun 2, 2021)

AlanF said:


> Unfortunately, the 30 minute cap on video is not a technical limit but a taxation one.
> 
> "_Ever wonder why digital cameras have a 30 minute recording limit no matter how large of a memory card you have? Many claim it has to do with the 4GB file size limitations of the FAT32 file system used on most memory cards, overheating from recording for so long, etc. As it turns out, this has to do with the World Trade Organization and, as many things do, taxes.
> 
> ...


I thought the 30min taxation issue was removed a good while ago (so many have said that already). Are you saying that this isn't true? If so, then it would explain why it hasn't been changed.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 2, 2021)

usern4cr said:


> I thought the 30min taxation issue was removed a good while ago (so many have said that already). Are you saying that this isn't true? If so, then it would explain why it hasn't been changed.


I do believe it still exists but 5% is not an awful lot.


----------



## Tangent (Jun 2, 2021)

Just a couple minor questions/speculations:
*1)* Will ECF play with the modes? -- for example ECF in the bird setting would find the bird closest to where your eye is looking, and continue to track it if set to do so? Similarly, ECF for portraits finding the eye closest to where you're looking. Etc. IOW , being smart about what ECF might be looking for, and being settable for that target.
*2)* Canon continue to feature prominently overall IS performance with lens IS + IBIS in their R3 promotional material, so that leads me to believe, or at least hope, that they will continue with IS in many / most lenses. I'm looking at you, RF 85 1.4 L.


----------



## canonmike (Jun 2, 2021)

melgross said:


> By the rime you can put in a preorder we will know all the specs. We don’t know what the Rez is yet, which is why people are guessing from low to high. It’s possible that this tease will give us a big surprise when they finally tell us everything before the release announcement.
> 
> they could be holding the best for last.


I hope to be blown away by a REZ surprise, rather than let down by the lack thereof......


----------



## mariosk1gr (Jun 2, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Then it just isn’t the model for you. Every camera is not designed for every user. Personally I am seriously interested in the R3 and the MP count is close to irrelevant for me.
> 
> As for waiting for firmware updates, why? Buy a camera for what it does out of the box, nothing else is implied or guaranteed.


Easy words...
When Canon says that R3 is between R5 and 1Dx Mark III then the expectations of the specs should be from both worlds and especially in this price range! As for the fimrware updates most of us use our logical and expect for a few things Canon to address but that's not the case always! Canon despite we love this brand and we choose it most of us for many years, is using a marketing strategy to make our life hard with their cameras (see how the implementation of cooling in R5). So in the end you get a tool that has a lot of potential with 1-2 fw updates but you stick with your d*ck in your hand in the end.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 2, 2021)

mariosk1gr said:


> Easy words...
> When Canon says that R3 is between R5 and 1Dx Mark III then the expectations of the specs should be from both worlds and especially in this price range! As for the fimrware updates most of us use our logical and expect for a few things Canon to address but that's not the case always! Canon despite we love this brand and we choose it most of us for many years, is using a marketing strategy to make our life hard with their cameras (see how the implementation of cooling in R5). So in the end you get a tool that has a lot of potential with 1-2 fw updates but you stick with your d*ck in your hand in the end.


It does, it just doesn’t take the bits from the R5 you wanted it to! The price? It doesn’t phase me as I am a regular 1 series buyer, to my mind it is a big step up from my 1DX II for less money.

You’re only stuck with your d!ck in your hand if you are a wanker. If you don’t like what the camera can do don’t be an early adopter and/or don’t buy it at all.


----------



## AlanF (Jun 2, 2021)

usern4cr said:


> I thought the 30min taxation issue was removed a good while ago (so many have said that already). Are you saying that this isn't true? If so, then it would explain why it hasn't been changed. As said, Sony doesn’t have the 30 min limit.


It should have changed in 2018.


----------



## Quirkz (Jun 2, 2021)

canonmike said:


> I'd say your 2nd statement is a pretty logical one, since they haven't trumpeted the MP to the mountaintops, as you stated. I'm afraid the bird and nature photographers might be a little disappointed with such a low MP count, if that is indeed the case.


On the other hand, why do a BSI sensor for only 20MP full frame sensor?

Isn't BSI more valuable when the individual pixels get really small, so the gaps between them take up more of the surface area?


----------



## sandhar (Jun 2, 2021)

can't wait to get hands on a R3 and try it out

any motorsports photog experts in this forum ? the R3 will bring cars and bikes as a new subject and I think it means the ability to maintain AF at high fps when cars are moving towards you or away from you (subject size is getting bigger or smaller). I've had mixed success on the R5 with these subjects (no priority on detection) - was trying to see if I could get a lock on cars and do a panning motion to blur the background. curious to hear about the challenges in this field of photography.


----------



## Quirkz (Jun 2, 2021)

I'm also wondering if by calling this a competitor to the Sony A1/A9 they're pulling a subtle marketing mind game on people. If the R3 is the competition, then *obviously* the 1DX is still in a different league.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 2, 2021)

sandhar said:


> can't wait to get hands on a R3 and try it out
> 
> any motorsports photog experts in this forum ? the R3 will bring cars and bikes as a new subject and I think it means the ability to maintain AF at high fps when cars are moving towards you or away from you (subject size is getting bigger or smaller). I've had mixed success on the R5 with these subjects (no priority on detection) - was trying to see if I could get a lock on cars and do a panning motion to blur the background. curious to hear about the challenges in this field of photography.







__





Your favourite motorsports events


Great shots!




www.canonrumors.com


----------



## sandhar (Jun 2, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> ...



nice photos !! (by you and also by Roo). looks like I need to practice a bit more !


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jun 2, 2021)

twoheadedboy said:


> What do we think for the resolution? I'm guessing ~32.5MP, midway between the 1DX3 and R5.


Wild guess. 24-30mp. Nothing out of this world but it will produce lovely images and great low light performance.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 2, 2021)

sandhar said:


> nice photos !! (by you and also by Roo). looks like I need to practice a bit more !


Don’t we all? But like you I am excited at what the R3 might bring to the table.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 3, 2021)

VegasCameraGuy said:


> Why are people crying about a CFx card? A 128Gb Sony Touch is a little over $200 and once you've forked out $3900 for the R5 body another $250 is chicken feed.


Pros/cons of dual CFe
- no price difference with USH-ii SD cards
- no need for SD card backward compatibility
- dual recording of video
- more sturdy cards
- no need to carry 2 different card types

Video recording may not need high speed recording depending on the res. 5.5k raw on 1DXiii is not 8k raw on R5
Higher heat generation for CFe card slots but 1D form factor should mitigate heat spread


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 3, 2021)

tron said:


> You do not compare them correctly. The 2700mAh battery has 50% more voltage. So their Wh of the two R5 batteries are almost the same with R3's and 1DxIII's battery.


The R5 slows down max speed in H+ when battery is <50%. This I believe is due to voltage drop. Having the 1D battery with higher voltage would mean higher continuous speed over the battery lifespan


----------



## jam05 (Jun 3, 2021)

john1970 said:


> After seeing these specifications along with SD and CFExpress cards I am on the fence if I should buy R3 or not. I am still waiting for the official announcements to learn more, but at this stage I would like some insights into the following:
> 
> 1) What exactly does Canon mean that the DPAF has enhance tracking for people and animals? Is the tracking significantly better than the R5. Is the enhancement quad-pixel AF?
> 
> ...


Of couse it's going to be better than the R5 initially it has a higer ceiling with faster readouts. That's a no brainer. It will have a stacked sensor BSI. That's hardware. Most likely improved processing speed and a faster storage bus. Most like will have an improved heat sink too.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 3, 2021)

Nowhere to be seen is whether there is a mechanical shutter or not. With flash sync with ES (up to say 1/200s) is there a need for mechanical shutter? If the rolling shutter/read speed from the stacked/BSI sensor is fast enough and you can choose ES shutter continuous speed options (5/10/20/30fps) then perhaps no mechanical shutter is needed anymore!


----------



## Danglin52 (Jun 3, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> But it might fly in the face of users. I have no particular need or desire for high MP in an R3, if I am at an event and shoot 3,500 images per day per body and the output is very rarely big prints, I simply don't need 30 or 40 or more MP.


My sweet spot shooting wildlife would be 32-36mp to allow some room to crop. I would still definitely buy at the 24-26mpx but would have to think about another 20mpx camera. I loved my 1dx II, but another 12-16mpx for crop would have been nice. I think I would find myself using the R5 in good conditions and switching to the R3 in difficult situations as a backup if it was 20mpx. I would also be happy with a higher mpx (45). I am not guessing at this point since I was hoping for a new, smaller battery pack to help slim down the R3. I didn't think it was going to happen, but that wasn't a very worthwhile speculation. Notice how I avoided saying I was "wrong". Update: I was planning to get a R6 as a backup, but after shooting the cameras on a trip (R6 rented) I decided I would go with 2 R5’s. I made that decision because I loved the R5 and didn’t see a real low light benefit of the R6 image when you resized the R5 file to the same resolution. I am going to hold off on the second R5 until I see the R3 specs.


----------



## john1970 (Jun 3, 2021)

David - Sydney said:


> Nowhere to be seen is whether there is a mechanical shutter or not. With flash sync with ES (up to say 1/200s) is there a need for mechanical shutter? If the rolling shutter/read speed from the stacked/BSI sensor is fast enough and you can choose ES shutter continuous speed options (5/10/20/30fps) then perhaps no mechanical shutter is needed anymore!


I would be thrilled to see the R3 offer variable ES shutter as you point out!! If that were to exist I would likely never use a mechanical shutter ever again outdoors.


----------



## sandhar (Jun 3, 2021)

David - Sydney said:


> The R5 slows down max speed in H+ when battery is <50%. This I believe is due to voltage drop. Having the 1D battery with higher voltage would mean higher continuous speed over the battery lifespan



I don't know why the mechanical shutter is such a power hog in the R5 - as a consequence I'm not using it much in the field, but I do hope they optimize the power in the R3, in addition to the stacked voltage advantage


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 3, 2021)

sandhar said:


> I don't know why the mechanical shutter is such a power hog in the R5 - as a consequence I'm not using it much in the field, but I do hope they optimize the power in the R3, in addition to the stacked voltage advantage


One other thing to consider with the R5 is that the dynamic range is less under H+ vs slower shutter speeds (including ES). That shouldn't be the case with the R3


----------



## BakaBokeh (Jun 3, 2021)

Accessory shoe is a cool new piece of information. Hope that makes it to the Cinema oriented R5.

While everyone is speculating about the resolution, I haven't forgotten Craig's comment about the "Resolution Trick". So you may have your choice of high speed or high resolution.


----------



## tataylino (Jun 3, 2021)

Canon again teases a camera that I would love and like but could not afford.


----------



## canonmike (Jun 3, 2021)

tataylino said:


> Canon again teases a camera that I would love and like but could not afford.


We've all been there my friend. Just save your pennies......in the meantime, just do what the rest of us do. Use and be happy with what we do have until we are able to upgrade to what we drool over in the interim.


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Jun 3, 2021)

Stuart said:


> Does Speedlight shooting with electronic shutter mean sync speeds above 250th Sec?
> 
> would 30fps be possible with a new speedlight at full power


Well it will depend on how fast the scan speed is of the sensor. Sony's A1 has a 1/240s scan speed ans sync speed is 1/200. It would be highly unlikely for Canon do do faster than 1/250s IMO unless they have found some new secret source that doesn't ruin DR and that would beg the question about the point of a global shutter if the stacked sensor can essentially give you mechanical shutter scan speeds of < 1/300s.


----------



## sandhar (Jun 3, 2021)

David - Sydney said:


> One other thing to consider with the R5 is that the dynamic range is less under H+ vs slower shutter speeds (including ES). That shouldn't be the case with the R3



Hi David, here is what I see at this canon europe link





Canon EOS R5 Specifications and Features - - Canon Europe


Canon EOS R5 specifications and key features in detail.




www.canon-europe.com





JPEG: 2 compression options RAW: RAW, C-RAW 14 bit (14-bit with Mechanical shutter and Electronic 1st Curtain, 13-bit A/D conversion with H+ mode, 12-bit A/D conversion with Electronic shutter, Canon original RAW 3rd edition) HEIF: 10bit HEIF is available in HDR shooting with [HDR PQ] set to [Enable] Complies with Exif 2.31 and Design rule for Camera File system 2.0 Complies with Digital Print Order Format [DPOF] Version 1.1

parsed out, 
H mode, MS or EFCS : 14bit depth
H+ mode, MS or EFCS : 13bit depth -- makes sense, to shoot faster need faster sensor readout, so drop 1 bit of resolution and tradeoff with a slightly lower SNR
ES : 12bit depth -- same as above, need to read faster
As an aside .. I see posters here asking for ES options for 10, 20, 30 fps .. but the readout still has to be done in the same amount of time to prevent rolling shutter effects, so ES will stay at 12bit ... I think.

I can't wrap my head around the power requirements between these modes though. if it was the electronics pathway from sensor to card that was power hungry, ES should have also degraded at lower than 50% batt levels, but it doesn't. I mean I get performance degradation at low batt levels, but 50%


----------



## Pixel (Jun 3, 2021)

The EOS-1R is still two years away so I feel like I'll have to buy the R3 even though I have two R5's.


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Jun 3, 2021)

Well technically 8K produces overrsampled 4K ala R5. Canon could be holding off any mention of 8K to announce it at the last minute to ensure the web doesn't go into meltdown over heat issues. Look if this shot 8K and overheated then Canon needs new video engineers. The R5 could have been dramatically improved with just copper heatsinks rather than cheap thermal pads. 

Also I would presume the R1 if it's global shutter to be the lower res sensor, it would be a huge leap to see >> 20MP with global shutter on FF IMO. Stacked sensor already exists at 50MP. If the R3 is only around 20MP that would be bitterly disappointing and rule Canon out for me for good, or until R5 II with stacked sensor came along and I won't wait that long. Bare minimum res I'd consider for a $6K camera would be 36MP, it needs to be able to do it all, ala R5 and A1.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 3, 2021)

Pixel said:


> The EOS-1R is still two years away so I feel like I'll have to buy the R3 even though I have two R5's.


Why do you think the R1 is two years away?


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 3, 2021)

Mr Majestyk said:


> Well technically 8K produces overrsampled 4K ala R5. Canon could be holding off any mention of 8K to announce it at the last minute to ensure the web doesn't go into meltdown over heat issues. Look if this shot 8K and overheated then Canon needs new video engineers. The R5 could have been dramatically improved with just copper heatsinks rather than cheap thermal pads.
> 
> Also I would presume the R1 if it's global shutter to be the lower res sensor, it would be a huge leap to see >> 20MP with global shutter on FF IMO. Stacked sensor already exists at 50MP. If the R3 is only around 20MP that would be bitterly disappointing and rule Canon out for me for good, or until R5 II with stacked sensor came along and I won't wait that long. Bare minimum res I'd consider for a $6K camera would be 36MP, it needs to be able to do it all, ala R5 and A1.


20mp is also oversampled 4K, it’s 5.5K.

Prepare to move on, there is no way the R3 is going “to do it all”.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 3, 2021)

VegasCameraGuy said:


> Could you share the link to the video where the above image came from? I can find no other images of the side of the camera? It's now released but the image shows the flap over the RJ45 network plug confirming the LAN light showing on the front.







4:15


----------



## goldenhusky (Jun 3, 2021)

Tremotino said:


> How do you know it is 1x SD and 1x CF card and not either 2x SD or 2x CF cards like you prefer?!



The news is already out and it is real. you can watch Gordon Laing' or Jared Polin' yt Video on the R3


----------



## Atlasman (Jun 3, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> But it might fly in the face of users. I have no particular need or desire for high MP in an R3, if I am at an event and shoot 3,500 images per day per body and the output is very rarely big prints, I simply don't need 30 or 40 or more MP.


And the R3 could meet your requirements with a downsampled 24mp image. But your are only a slice of the market. In todays shrinking market, the camera has to appeal to a much broader market. 

How would you feel about a downsampled 24mp image that would deliver Improved low-noise and greater image clarity—would that satisfy you?


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 3, 2021)

Atlasman said:


> And the R3 could meet your requirements with a downsampled 24mp image. But your are only a slice of the market. In todays shrinking market, the camera has to appeal to a much broader market.
> 
> How would you feel about a downsampled 24mp image that would deliver Improved low-noise and greater image clarity—would that satisfy you?


It doesn’t matter what I want, Canon are going to market what they think they can sell. For the record I will buy an R3 if it is 20mp or 45mp, I have uses for both. But it is supposed to fit in the range between the R5 and the 1DX III so I wouldn’t be surprised if the resolution was closer to 20 than 45 because looking at the physicality of it and the few specs we know so far it seems closer to the 1DX III.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 3, 2021)

Mr Majestyk said:


> Well technically 8K produces overrsampled 4K ala R5. Canon could be holding off any mention of 8K to announce it at the last minute to ensure the web doesn't go into meltdown over heat issues. Look if this shot 8K and overheated then Canon needs new video engineers. *The R5 could have been dramatically improved with just copper heatsinks rather than cheap thermal pads.*


Well, we know that isn't true. There was a very interesting video showing a replacement copper heatsink to bring the heat to the back panel and then external cooling for unlimited 8k raw but there were a few issues that Canon could not release such an option:
- The back panel temperature showed that it would give low temperature burns ie couldn't be released
- It would be worse if the touchscreen was turned in (either way) ie the screen would probably be damaged and the internal temperature would have increased further as the heat had no where to go

The A1 has a couple of differences... They aren't using CFe type B card/slots which were shown to be heat generators. They have preferred to downsample etc using the processor rather than record raw which would have meant CFe type B requirements. The bit rate is dramatically smaller than the R5's firehose giving much less heat! They are probably also running their internal temperatures higher than what Canon engineering practices would allow. We are yet to see if this means a lower life expectancy for the body.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 3, 2021)

sandhar said:


> H mode, MS or EFCS : 14bit depth
> H+ mode, MS or EFCS : 13bit depth -- makes sense, to shoot faster need faster sensor readout, so drop 1 bit of resolution and tradeoff with a slightly lower SNR
> ES : 12bit depth -- same as above, need to read faster
> As an aside .. I see posters here asking for ES options for 10, 20, 30 fps .. but the readout still has to be done in the same amount of time to prevent rolling shutter effects, so ES will stay at 12bit ... I think.
> ...


The mechanical shutter speed would be dependent to the voltage output from the battery. I can find voltage curves online for LP-E6 and they all show voltage decreases over the remaining capacity. Ideal curves would be flat from 90-10% but in real life it is more variable and depends on current draw as well. Even with EFCS, the shutter still needs to move fast for the rear curtain.

Note that 12fps from LP-E6 is pretty remarkable. The 7Dii was ~10fps but not sure if it decreased when battery levels were lower and this was with a smaller curtain/sensor size. The 1D series mechanical shutters were of course faster (up to 16fps) but had a higher voltage from the LP-E19 battery

Removing the mechanical shutter would be an amazing "just one more thing" moment for the R3.


----------



## takesome1 (Jun 3, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> It doesn’t matter what I want, Canon are going to market what they think they can sell. For the record I will buy an R3 if it is 20mp or 45mp, I have uses for both. But it is supposed to fit in the range between the R5 and the 1DX III so I wouldn’t be surprised if the resolution was closer to 20 than 45 because looking at the physicality of it and the few specs we know so far it seems closer to the 1DX III.


It seems to me over the years Canon has put the highest mp sensor in the 1D bodies that it can and still get the processing speed it needs for the highest fps.
I believe that the processing speed of the camera will determine how many mp Canon goes with. 
If Canon isn't using the next generation of processors most likely it will be close to the 1DX III, especially if they are planning on 30 fps.
I think you are right that it does seem closer to the 1DX III.


----------



## sandhar (Jun 3, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> It doesn’t matter what I want, Canon are going to market what they think they can sell. For the record I will buy an R3 if it is 20mp or 45mp, I have uses for both. But it is supposed to fit in the range between the R5 and the 1DX III so I wouldn’t be surprised if the resolution was closer to 20 than 45 because looking at the physicality of it and the few specs we know so far it seems closer to the 1DX III.



if the eye tracking feature works fabulously out of the box (and yes I know this is a big if) I would be adding the R3 to my gear. I'm a bit slow when it comes to changing AF points, usually I am just changing where the camera is pointing (AF stays in the center), so eye tracking AF would be quite amazing for me.


----------



## sandhar (Jun 3, 2021)

David - Sydney said:


> The mechanical shutter speed would be dependent to the voltage output from the battery. I can find voltage curves online for LP-E6 and they all show voltage decreases over the remaining capacity. Ideal curves would be flat from 90-10% but in real life it is more variable and depends on current draw as well. Even with EFCS, the shutter still needs to move fast for the rear curtain.
> 
> Note that 12fps from LP-E6 is pretty remarkable. The 7Dii was ~10fps but not sure if it decreased when battery levels were lower and this was with a smaller curtain/sensor size. The 1D series mechanical shutters were of course faster (up to 16fps) but had a higher voltage from the LP-E19 battery
> 
> Removing the mechanical shutter would be an amazing "just one more thing" moment for the R3.



no mechanical shutter on the R3 !? .. i didn't realize that was the case. are you sure ? it's still a rolling shutter, not a global shutter.


----------



## usern4cr (Jun 3, 2021)

sandhar said:


> no mechanical shutter on the R3 !? .. i didn't realize that was the case. are you sure ? it's still a rolling shutter, not a global shutter.


I don't think there's any announcement of "no mechanical shutter" on the R3.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 3, 2021)

sandhar said:


> no mechanical shutter on the R3 !? .. i didn't realize that was the case. are you sure ? it's still a rolling shutter, not a global shutter.


There will always be a read speed from the sensor. A global shutter would effectively mean instantaneous readout speed but I am sure that there will be some practical limitation. Stacked/BSI sensor looks to be a game changer for Canon which could reduce the read speed to be an effective global shutter. I am not saying that this is the case with the R3 or that there is no mechanical shutter.

Canon has specified 2 key pieces of information: 30fps ES with full tracking and raw recording and flash sync with ES. Both of these would be needed to remove the mechanical shutter. As above comments, the stacked sensor would hopefully remove the R5's dynamic range issues when mechanical shutter is not used.

If the ES flash sync at 1/200s plus dynamic range is good then would there be any need for a mechanical shutter? No lifespan issues. Effectively still images = video @ 30fps. Silent shutter. The world changes


----------



## exige24 (Jun 3, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> But it might fly in the face of users. I have no particular need or desire for high MP in an R3, if I am at an event and shoot 3,500 images per day per body and the output is very rarely big prints, I simply don't need 30 or 40 or more MP.


I see two rebuttals with this point of view as far as camera specs/development are concerned. First, a 50 mp image still works for someone who doesn't care past 20. A 20mp image will never work for someone who needs/wants 50mp. It's built for the lowest possible denominator. Not very good. A possible point might also be that it's great to want things, but some things are just not feasible. The A1 is the counter to that point.


----------



## R1-7D (Jun 3, 2021)

I find this quite interesting from Canon:

"With the EOS R3, you will be able to shoot in *high-quality 4K with Canon Log3 [AND] oversampled 4K, and RAW movie internal recording.*"





__





EOS R3 In Development


Canon Inc. has announced the EOS R3 is in development, expanding its commitment to sports, wildlife, and nature photographers.




www.canon.ca





4K HQ is oversampled, so why are they saying 4K HQ and (ie: as well as) oversampled 4K?

The R5 has 4K HQ but the R6 does not; the R6 simply uses oversampled 4K.


----------



## exige24 (Jun 3, 2021)

R1-7D said:


> I find this quite interesting from Canon:
> 
> "With the EOS R3, you will be able to shoot in *high-quality 4K with Canon Log3 [AND] oversampled 4K, and RAW movie internal recording.*"
> 
> ...




That is interesting! 4k HQ in the R5 is down sampled 8k. If that's by definition. that's a pretty big doozy there! That might confirm both 8k and a 45mp sensor!!!


----------



## sandhar (Jun 3, 2021)

David - Sydney said:


> There will always be a read speed from the sensor. A global shutter would effectively mean instantaneous readout speed but I am sure that there will be some practical limitation. Stacked/BSI sensor looks to be a game changer for Canon which could reduce the read speed to be an effective global shutter. I am not saying that this is the case with the R3 or that there is no mechanical shutter.
> 
> Canon has specified 2 key pieces of information: 30fps ES with full tracking and raw recording and flash sync with ES. Both of these would be needed to remove the mechanical shutter. As above comments, the stacked sensor would hopefully remove the R5's dynamic range issues when mechanical shutter is not used.
> 
> If the ES flash sync at 1/200s plus dynamic range is good then would there be any need for a mechanical shutter? No lifespan issues. Effectively still images = video @ 30fps. Silent shutter. The world changes


ok I think you have a point here :: at 30fps the readout is fast enough that a mechanical shutter is only needed for limited cases where movement across frame is fast. also - given that they have added sports cars as a AF subject should hint at fast readout speeds (else we get elliptical tires in ES and such). so the mechanical shutter may be present, but for most cases, the ES does the job w/ high DR.
interesting !


----------



## R1-7D (Jun 3, 2021)

exige24 said:


> That is interesting! 4k HQ in the R5 is down sampled 8k. If that's by definition. that's a pretty big doozy there! That might confirm both 8k and a 45mp sensor!!!



Hope so! Still not holding my breath, tho.


----------



## masterpix (Jun 3, 2021)

RMac said:


> I'd wager 20MP. The fact that they're not trumpeting the resolution is pretty suggestive that it's not an exciting spec, so staying the same as the R6/1DXiii wouldn't surprise me in the least.


the 1Dx's sensors are in the range of 20MP, so it is only assumed that the R1 sensor will be in that range, maybe slight higher, 20-24MP. The R5 is about 45MP. So when they say that the R3 will be "the bridge between the RR5 and the R1 (not not 1Dx replacement), it probably means that the R3 sensor will be about 30-40MP (32.5MP?). Anyway, I would not consider the R6 as a reference for this discussion.


----------



## masterpix (Jun 3, 2021)

sanj said:


> 'New' accessory shoe? Does anyone guess what that would be?


It looks like they will have a new terminal for all the wires, maybe one socket that will have a wire with several "ends" to connect to other devices. Those terminals (on the left side of the camera body) consume a lot of space and once you like to have USB,HDMI,LAN,external shooter,microphone,speaker... you just don't have enough space there anymore.


----------



## Czardoom (Jun 3, 2021)

My speculation....

Canon is not stupid enough to put out a new camera with essentially the same specs as the R5, and then expect people to buy the roughly $2000 more expensive version. The R5 is meant for those wanting that "all-arounder" - the camera that does everything really well, but is not specialized. Their top of the line, integrated grip cameras are specialized cameras meant mainly for news and sports shooters. There is no reason to think that has changed. The input from that target market has clearly for many years now seems to be - keep the MPs low. Speed and convenience are far more important than high MPs which are not needed. Despite what so many gear-heads seem to think, keeping the MPs low is not being "5 years behind, or "inexcusable in 2021" or whatever similar comments are being used. Many pro photographers think 24 MP or similar is perfect or "the sweet spot" when it comes to MPs. Sony A9 II and the Nikon Z 6 II are 24 MPs and are new cameras and apparently not 5 years out of date.

What has changed, however, is that Sony, with their A1, has gone higher MPs with their flagship. Nikon's Z 9, their new flagship, is rumored to be high MPs as well. So, I think Canon has mapped out a strategy to continue to target their news and sports "series 1" users - with the R3. High speed, low MPs. And then with a "flagship" camera that is more in line with Sony and Nikon, with higher MPs, that being the upcoming R1. 

Of course, I have no special insight and can be completely wrong, but I do think people in foruums almost always ignore the taget market for a product. And the target market seems to be sports shooters. So the camera will be geared for that market, not for those looking for a slightly better R5.


----------



## R1-7D (Jun 3, 2021)

exige24 said:


> That is interesting! 4k HQ in the R5 is down sampled 8k. If that's by definition. that's a pretty big doozy there! That might confirm both 8k and a 45mp sensor!!!



OR...could this just be a poorly constructed sentence by Canon's marketing people who are unaware of the implications of what high-quality (aka "HQ") 4K means? In other words, does the above sentence imply that there are two 4K quality modes -- HQ 4K and oversampled 4K -- or does it mean that Canon's 4K is simply high quality because it's oversampled?


----------



## maulanawale (Jun 3, 2021)

SpaceGhost said:


> The non-matching dual card slots really sucks especially at this price point. Makes me feel the resolution will be low as well. The R3 was looking to have a lot of potential for my next purchase until this news dump.
> 
> On the flip side, I really like the new body.
> 
> I used to spend more money on my camera gear until Canon started dragged their feet with the switch to mirrorless. The R5 is great but I've always been a 1 series fan. The R3 looked like a great compromise but now I feel I'll just wait.


Although I agree that non-matching card slots is a bummer, I don't necessarily see it as a confirmation of low-ish resolution. The Sony A7RIV has dual SD card slots, and even with Sony's poor buffer handling, with a fast enough SD it is just about usable with its 61Mpx ( I got rid of it because the buffer is wired to short circuit the camera  ). So if the R3 was 45Mpx a UHS-II card would likely be just fine if the buffer is well implemented. 
Hopefully not long now until we know!


----------



## Emyr Evans (Jun 3, 2021)

ClickIt_AC said:


> And what if...it is dual digic?


Canon have stated ONE Digic X - exact same as R5.


----------



## H. Jones (Jun 3, 2021)

I know we're all just throwing stuff at a wall right now, but I am increasingly hopeful that Canon will actually surprise us and break the mold a bit here.

I mean, the market for 1-series users remains for... the 1-series. The CF Express + SD card slots speak to a more consumer philosophy along the lines of the EOS R5. The eye control and flip screen speak to a more consumer philosophy. The removal of the lower rear LCD and removal of WFT accessory point(no backwards compatibility for those who already dropped $600 on one) speak to more of a consumer philosophy.

If Canon has always continued the 1-series to be exactly what it's always been since the beginning of time, why would they turn the 1-series into a 3-series?As some others have said, if this camera "bridges" the R5 and 1-series, I still bet that it will match or exceed the resolution of the R5. 

I mean, what kinds of consumers buy the 1-series? Historically, you see it being sports and wildlife consumers, who would both appreciate additional reach, since this is the market that also often ends up buying the 7D, which was always formerly considered to be a consumer's 1D. If Canon makes the R3 about 50 megapixels, the 1.6x crop mode will be very close to the 7D Mark II resolution, which would be a huge boost for this camera towards that market. 

If the 1-series R1 turns out to suddenly be high-resolution with tons of untested cutting edge tech, you could lose a lot of the routine "pay whatever it takes" 1-series buyers who know what they can expect and can trust their cameras, while appealing more towards consumers who are worried about resolution, who will ultimately buy the R5 or the R3 because it costs less.

I know AP photographers who are routinely infuriated by their A9s and use their old 1-series cameras. Those are the commercial customers who both have a limitless budget for the 1-series and do not want to be blindsided by tech the way the AP and Sony forced them into.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 3, 2021)

I think the way Canon releases information is brilliant.
Releasing it all at once risks media outlets focusing on one thing or another.
Releasing it a little at a time forces the media to report on everything and keeps it in the news longer.


----------



## padam (Jun 3, 2021)

maulanawale said:


> Although I agree that non-matching card slots is a bummer, I don't necessarily see it as a confirmation of low-ish resolution. The Sony A7RIV has dual SD card slots, and even with Sony's poor buffer handling, with a fast enough SD it is just about usable with its 61Mpx ( I got rid of it because the buffer is wired to short circuit the camera  ). So if the R3 was 45Mpx a UHS-II card would likely be just fine if the buffer is well implemented.
> Hopefully not long now until we know!


The difference is that it does not shoot *30fps*.
So it will be a lower megapixel count camera, that's pretty much a given, we just don't know how much.

People don't consider the upsides though: the better low-light AF, the internal RAW video which is way more useful if it is lower resolution (8K RAW is just unnecessary), also it will probably work up to 60p like on the 1DX III, but I guess they will not disable the AF in that mode.
That would make it the most powerful stills camera for video in Canon's lineup, I guess it may still have issues in that 60p RAW or full sensor 4K 60p mode, but up to 30p it should handle it no problem, which is what one would use for longer recording anyways.

The A1 does not shoot oversampled 4K internally, RAW is line-skipped and only external as well, 4K60p is line-skipped again.

So as a hybrid camera, the R3 may be more powerful than an A1 or a Z9.


----------



## Tremotino (Jun 3, 2021)

Czardoom said:


> My speculation....
> 
> Canon is not stupid enough to put out a new camera with essentially the same specs as the R5, and then expect people to buy the roughly $2000 more expensive version. The R5 is meant for those wanting that "all-arounder" - the camera that does everything really well, but is not specialized. Their top of the line, integrated grip cameras are specialized cameras meant mainly for news and sports shooters. There is no reason to think that has changed. The input from that target market has clearly for many years now seems to be - keep the MPs low. Speed and convenience are far more important than high MPs which are not needed. Despite what so many gear-heads seem to think, keeping the MPs low is not being "5 years behind, or "inexcusable in 2021" or whatever similar comments are being used. Many pro photographers think 24 MP or similar is perfect or "the sweet spot" when it comes to MPs. Sony A9 II and the Nikon Z 6 II are 24 MPs and are new cameras and apparently not 5 years out of date.
> 
> ...


This is also in my opinion the way it will go. The R1 will have the BSI stacked sensor of the C line. And the R3 will be the old R1 aka successor of the 1Dx line. But obviously there is a chance that the 8k sensor of the future C line is already ready for production and the R3 may profit from it... We will see.


----------



## Cyborx (Jun 3, 2021)

WHAT IS CANON DOING?? Why releasing a camera that cannot meet the specs of the R5 that is on the market for a year already? Basically what they have built is an R6 with a battery grip and some fancy knobs. I don’t get it. Really... Canon, you’ve lost me here....


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 3, 2021)

padam said:


> the internal RAW video which is way more useful if it is lower resolution (8K RAW is just unnecessary), also it will probably work up to 60p like on the 1DX III,


I would not bet on that.
R3 is below the 1DX III.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 3, 2021)

Skyscraperfan said:


> I never understood what people like about SD cards. SD cards are so flimsy. An SD card will break if you put it into your back pocket together with your keys.


I guess it's a Darwinian thing.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 3, 2021)

Skyscraperfan said:


> An SD card will break if you put it into your back pocket together with your keys.


Who does that?


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 3, 2021)

Quirkz said:


> On the other hand, why do a BSI sensor for only 20MP full frame sensor?
> 
> Isn't BSI more valuable when the individual pixels get really small, so the gaps between them take up more of the surface area?


A9 II is only 24 MP


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 3, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> Who does that?


Exactly. Well, we know of one guy who does.  Heck, I don't think I've ever put my keys in my back pocket. I wouldn't put any card in any pocket with keys.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 3, 2021)

takesome1 said:


> It seems to me over the years Canon has put the highest mp sensor in the 1D bodies that it can and still get the processing speed it needs for the highest fps.
> I believe that the processing speed of the camera will determine how many mp Canon goes with.
> If Canon isn't using the next generation of processors most likely it will be close to the 1DX III, especially if they are planning on 30 fps.
> I think you are right that it does seem closer to the 1DX III.


Canon already stated that it is a new stacked BSI sensor.
There is no previous generation sensor that they could use unless they went with Sony.
None of those Sony sensors have DPAF so we know they did not do that either.


----------



## padam (Jun 3, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> I would not bet on that.
> R3 is below the 1DX III.


It has a low megapixel stacked BSI sensor with a fast readout, so it should be able to easily outperform the 1DX III or video. The rolling shutter up to 4k30p is very bad on the 1DX III (and of course on the R6), at the minimum it would be fixed and matched in other regards that alone makes it better.
But I think it should also be able to shoot 4k120p in a 1:1 sensor crop mode as well, that would be a big upgrade as well.

Is it as well-built? Probably not, but people are willing to give that up for the tilt-screen, new RF-mount, etc.
Making a slightly cheaper camera that is overall better after 1,5 years by having the next generation sensor is simply moving with the times.

It is still very much an expensive camera despite not having the highest specs for stills shooting, let's not forget about that.

And the writing on the back suggests that it will still overheat in some modes.
I wouldn't be at all surprised about that, since full sensor 60p RAW recording to the CFExpress card will produce plenty of heat, more demanding than the line-skipped 4k60p on the R5 or the A1 (and I guess Z9).


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 3, 2021)

padam said:


> So as a hybrid camera, the R3 may be more powerful than an A1 or a Z9.


I believe it will be but the one thing it will not do is save video to both cards since the cards do not match.
However, I am OK with RAW to a CF Express and a low res proxy to anSD like the R5 does.


----------



## maulanawale (Jun 3, 2021)

padam said:


> The difference is that it does not shoot *30fps*.
> So it will be a lower megapixel count camera, that's pretty much a given, we just don't know how much.
> 
> People don't consider the upsides though: the better low-light AF, the internal RAW video which is way more useful if it is lower resolution (8K RAW is just unnecessary), also it will probably work up to 60p like on the 1DX III, but I guess they will not disable the AF in that mode.
> ...


That's true, but still, should be able to swallow the files if the camera is somewhere in the 30ish MPX zone wouldn't it?

Anyway, I agree with the rest of your observations. There's more to it than MPX if the rest is as good as we're all expecting it to be.


----------



## padam (Jun 3, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> I believe it will be but the one thing it will not do is save video to both cards since the cards do not match.
> However, I am OK with RAW to a CF Express and a low res proxy to anSD like the R5 does.


Yes, I wonder what's going to be the catch here apart from the overheating and 30-min internal recording limit.
Because that's really not far off from the C500 Mark II, which doesn't even have 4k120p.

Maybe it is indeed not _that _low in terms of megapixel count and it does not shoot full sensor oversampled 4k60p like the supposedly higher-end 1DX III and the price isn't that close to the 1DX III, it is really annoying to just keep guessing.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Jun 3, 2021)

Cyborx said:


> WHAT IS CANON DOING?? Why releasing a camera that cannot meet the specs of the R5 that is on the market for a year already? Basically what they have built is an R6 with a battery grip and some fancy knobs. I don’t get it. Really... Canon, you’ve lost me here....



A bunch of 5D DSLR cameras (R5 equivalent) had higher resolution than 1D series. But the 1D was better in everything else. So nothing new here.


----------



## Nemorino (Jun 3, 2021)

I wonder why no one mentioned the improved low light AF:



> AF down to -7.0 EV



Eos R/R5 have -6 EV. 
Because the sensor is used for AF, this could be also a hint of improved low light performance of the sensor.


----------



## Kiton (Jun 3, 2021)

john1970 said:


> After seeing these specifications along with SD and CFExpress cards I am on the fence if I should buy R3 or not. I am still waiting for the official announcements to learn more, but at this stage I would like some insights into the following:
> 
> 1) What exactly does Canon mean that the DPAF has enhance tracking for people and animals? Is the tracking significantly better than the R5. Is the enhancement quad-pixel AF?
> 
> ...



Very good questions John,

I have been frustrated by the forced 20 frames on electronic shutter also. As an example, while shooting in the courthouse, I only need single frame, but want the silent!

With the R5 I have NEVER hit buffer shooting RAW to CFExpress, but when shooting backup jpegs to the SD I have hit buffer many times.
This body should have the option for dual CFexpress cards.
While shooting NHL playoff action, using mechanical shutter, not electronic, I have turned the resolution down for the backup jpegs to the SD card to reduce buffer issues!


----------



## Kiton (Jun 3, 2021)

sanj said:


> What is 'Speedlight shooting with electronic shutter'?


The R5 does not fire a flash (at least not any flash I own) on electronic shutter. The R3 will, presumably with all flashes, not just some stupid assed uber expensive dedicated unit.


----------



## canonmike (Jun 3, 2021)

H. Jones said:


> I know we're all just throwing stuff at a wall right now, but I am increasingly hopeful that Canon will actually surprise us and break the mold a bit here.
> 
> I mean, the market for 1-series users remains for... the 1-series. The CF Express + SD card slots speak to a more consumer philosophy along the lines of the EOS R5. The eye control and flip screen speak to a more consumer philosophy. The removal of the lower rear LCD and removal of WFT accessory point(no backwards compatibility for those who already dropped $600 on one) speak to more of a consumer philosophy.
> 
> ...


Interesting H. Jones and you peaked my interest with your last paragraph. What, exactly are the AP photogs you know infuriated about with their A9's that causes them to pull out their 1Dx's??


----------



## rbielefeld (Jun 3, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> But it might fly in the face of users. I have no particular need or desire for high MP in an R3, if I am at an event and shoot 3,500 images per day per body and the output is very rarely big prints, I simply don't need 30 or 40 or more MP.


I do have a need for higher MP as I am a professional bird and wildlife photographer. There are a lot of us out here. I can only speak for myself, but if the R3 comes in under 30MP I will likely pass on it. The R5 at 45 is really a great res for birds. I love my two R5s, but with a BSI stacked sensor and eye controlled AF I would love to give a 30-50MP R3 a go. So, I really do hope it is at least 30MP.


----------



## GoldWing (Jun 3, 2021)

twoheadedboy said:


> What do we think for the resolution? I'm guessing ~32.5MP, midway between the 1DX3 and R5.


32 too low, must be min 50+


----------



## GoldWing (Jun 3, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> But it might fly in the face of users. I have no particular need or desire for high MP in an R3, if I am at an event and shoot 3,500 images per day per body and the output is very rarely big prints, I simply don't need 30 or 40 or more MP.


I like to adjust the size of the files as I see fit for the client's needs.


----------



## Kiton (Jun 3, 2021)

rbielefeld said:


> I do have a need for higher MP as I am a professional bird and wildlife photographer. There are a lot of us out here. I can only speak for myself, but if the R3 comes in under 30MP I will likely pass on it. The R5 at 45 is really a great res for birds. I love my two R5s, but with a BSI stacked sensor and eye controlled AF I would love to give a 30-50MP R3 a go. So, I really do hope it is at least 30MP.


If the Sony A1 can do 50, the R3 can be at least very close. 40 (or anything over) is fine. I crop the shit out of some NHL frames on the R5, for that alone I do not want to go back to my 20mp 1d X mk 2 bodies.


----------



## sanj (Jun 3, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> It doesn’t matter what I want, Canon are going to market what they think they can sell. For the record I will buy an R3 if it is 20mp or 45mp, I have uses for both. But it is supposed to fit in the range between the R5 and the 1DX III so I wouldn’t be surprised if the resolution was closer to 20 than 45 because looking at the physicality of it and the few specs we know so far it seems closer to the 1DX III.


'Physicality' does not dictate MP. But yeah, I also feel that it will be closer to 20 and not 45. I would prefer 45 with options of shooting lower MP.


----------



## ClickIt_AC (Jun 3, 2021)

Emyr Evans said:


> Canon have stated ONE Digic X - exact same as R5.


OK... but there is only one Digic X in the 1DX iii however it is paired with a Digic 8 for AF so there could still be some headroom there to up the Mpx maybe... especially with gains on the new sensor factored in?


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Jun 3, 2021)

My fear is that Canon continues the route to give more premium cameras a higher resolution sensor than and give low resolution sensor to the cheaper cameras than lack some features. That happened with the R5 and R6. People who prefer to have larger pixels get a lower quality camera that does not even have a top display. I hope that Canon will not repeat that with the R3 and R1, just because they now have the technology to combine a hight burst rate with a high resolution. If the R1 is the successor of the 1D X Mark III, I hope it will also have the same resolution. For people who want a high resolution, there could be an "R1s" or something like that.

The two different card slots remind me of my 1D Mark II, which has a CF and an SD slot. The result was that I only used the CF slot and often had to switch cards. By the time I bought it, a 1GB card was 109 Euros and I had to change those cards very often.

The suggested price of the R3 of $6000 is much too high for a camera that is not a flagship camera, even it is better than flagship cameras of the past.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 3, 2021)

Kiton said:


> Very good questions John,
> 
> I have been frustrated by the forced 20 frames on electronic shutter also. As an example, while shooting in the courthouse, I only need single frame, but want the silent!
> 
> ...


That does bring into question the R3 as a pro sports camera if we can only shoot 30 FPS to one card.
On the other hand, it will be fine if it can shoot 30 FPS RAW to the CF Express while simultaneously recording 30 FPS JPEG to SD.
That is the way I shoot anyway and the RAW photo is just for when the JPEG is not good enough.
I would never want to edit nearly the amount of RAW files generated at 30 FPS.
I would hazard a guess that most people who only shoot RAW only take a reasonable amount of photos.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 3, 2021)

H. Jones said:


> I know we're all just throwing stuff at a wall right now, but I am increasingly hopeful that Canon will actually surprise us and break the mold a bit here.
> 
> I mean, the market for 1-series users remains for... the 1-series. The CF Express + SD card slots speak to a more consumer philosophy along the lines of the EOS R5.


There have been only two Canon bodies with dual, identical card slots – the 1D X and 1D X III.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 3, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> There have been only two Canon bodies with dual, identical card slots – the 1D X and 1D X III.
> 
> View attachment 198046


You left off the R6


----------



## st jack photography (Jun 3, 2021)

Since day one of this announcement, I have been imagining and saying that *the R3 is to the 1D(or R1) as the R6 is to the R5*. Anything they do with the R3 is meant to compete with certain Sony bodies, cost more than the r5 but be better, but also leave room for the r1 to be the top-of-line flagship. This R3 sounds like a curious hybrid of R5 and 1D.

While I use that r3<r1=r6<r5 logic to predict a likely 24-30mp sensor, I also realize that the sensor is a *new BSI stacked sensor.* Because of that and my familiarity with BSI sensors, owning a Sony Rx1Rm2, I would predict that a BSI sensor of 46 to 62mp is possible, while also giving 30fps RAW. One can also conclude that if a rumored R1 is being produced, and given a BSI sensor too, then it may well have a similar mp count and be a scorching 40 to 60fps. I guess that whatever this camera has, the speculated-on R1 will be a bit better than the R3, mainly in shoot speed and burst.

Be advised, this is just speculation, PURE speculation.

I am a street photographer who shoots commercial work from time to time, so this camera would fit me well, I think. The 5DSr I had was great for commercial, but terrible for street work or any shot with ISO over 200, or any shot with movement while shooting slower shutters than 1/500.


----------



## Kiton (Jun 3, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> That does bring into question the R3 as a pro sports camera if we can only shoot 30 FPS to one card.
> On the other hand, it will be fine if it can shoot 30 FPS RAW to the CF Express while simultaneously recording 30 FPS JPEG to SD.
> That is the way I shoot anyway and the RAW photo is just for when the JPEG is not good enough.
> I would never want to edit nearly the amount of RAW files generated at 30 FPS.
> I would hazard a guess that most people who only shoot RAW only take a reasonable amount of photos.



In the early days, the SD card was really import for news shooters, the very first the 3rd party SD card reader for the iphone (forget the name of it), which had its own battery built in to allow transfer, then the first generation wifi card reader, then the Apple SD card reader for the iphone was a game changer coupled with a CF to SD adapter to Cfast and SD in a CF slot in the 1d.

Today the wifi and the apps are so good, the SD card is redundant for us.
Give me 2 CFexpress slots please.


----------



## John Wilde (Jun 3, 2021)

RMac said:


> I'd wager 20MP. The fact that they're not trumpeting the resolution is pretty suggestive that it's not an exciting spec, so staying the same as the R6/1DXiii wouldn't surprise me in the least.


My guess is around 30MP. Sticking with 20MP would result in too much whining.


----------



## John Wilde (Jun 3, 2021)

VegasCameraGuy said:


> Let's see drop the resolution by 50% and increase the price by 50%, sounds like a good idea to me! Well, Duh!


Low resolution is why the 1D X Mark III is so inexpensively priced. Oh, wait. There is more to a sensor than MP. There are things like speed and low-light performance. My R3 guess is around 30MP.


----------



## John Wilde (Jun 3, 2021)

timmy said:


> Ive read on here several times that the R3 was to go toe-to-toe with the Z9 and A1...


I don't think so. That's the job of the R1. The A1 is priced at (body only) $6.500. The R3 will be in a lower price category. Canon writes that the R3 is "positioned squarely between the EOS R5 and EOS-1D X Mark III cameras", and the R3 price will be positioned there too.


----------



## mpmark (Jun 3, 2021)

justaCanonuser said:


> Anyone who has to recover 8 stops over-exposed images has a much deeper problem with photography I guess


You don’t have to be a fool to neccesarly want to recover 8 stops of light. Cameras still today don’t have the same dynamic scene/range of what your eye sees when you are viewing something beautiful with a high dynamic range but wish to capture it as close as possible to the experience.


----------



## mpmark (Jun 3, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Well if it was a higher MP they would probably have said shoots 6k rather than shoots oversampled 4K.



That doesn’t change my point


----------



## john1970 (Jun 3, 2021)

If the R3 is positioned between the R5 and 1Dx Mk3 I wonder if the price will be the median of 3900 and 6500 USD, which is 5200 USD. At 5200 USD I could see a 30 MP BSI camera with integrated grip selling very well for Canon.


----------



## matthudson (Jun 3, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> There have been only two Canon bodies with dual, identical card slots – the 1D X and 1D X III.
> 
> View attachment 198046



CF and SD is less of an issue than CFExpress to SD. My CF cards are 90MB/s and 160MB/s, while SD is sitting between 95 and 300. GFExpress? Even the cheap ones are at 800mb/s, and it's not that much more expensive to go to 1200 or even 1400.

It's a massive gulf in performance that's really going to show


----------



## padam (Jun 3, 2021)

matthudson said:


> CF and SD is less of an issue than CFExpress to SD. My CF cards are 90MB/s and 160MB/s, while SD is sitting between 95 and 300. GFExpress? Even the cheap ones are at 800mb/s, and it's not that much more expensive to go to 1200 or even 1400.
> 
> It's a massive gulf in performance that's really going to show


Probably not a big problem with less megapixels unless you shoot RAW video or maybe 4k120p if the camera has it.
And since dual recording for video is not available, the SD card won't be a bottleneck, since it won't be utilised.

Even 20fps on the R5 already seems unnecessarily high for most use cases and the camera keeps up with it just fine (in cRAW as I don't see why uncompressed in necessary).

We can be pretty sure than Canon has thought this through, as there are no real buffer issues with any of their mirrorless cameras, so it won't happen with the most expensive one either.


----------



## TiMLud (Jun 3, 2021)

Based on everything I'm reading People believe the R3 will be a low resolution camera. Low in the sense of 24 to 30 meg. In order for Canon to compete with Sony and kick their butt in the market place. Canon has to put a camera out that will rival what Sony is making.
I believe the R3 will be 50-60 meg camera and the R1 will top out at something crazy like 75 to 100 meg. Canon has the sensor tech. They have had the tech for some time now. I also believe the camera will ship in July if not sooner.


----------



## DBounce (Jun 3, 2021)

Is this a “rumor”? It’s an official press release from Canon. The only real “leaks” from all of these camera sites seem to all come from the same source... Nokishita.


----------



## matthudson (Jun 3, 2021)

padam said:


> Probably not a big problem with less megapixels unless you shoot RAW video or maybe 4k120p if the camera has it.
> And since dual recording for video is not available, the SD card won't be a big bottleneck.
> 
> Even 20fps on the R5 already seems unnecessarily high for most use cases.


30fps at 18mp (1DXmk1, since I have that on hand to compare) will give you well over 600mb/s, Everyone would lose their shit if they threw out such a low res sensor, but even so that's a hell of a lot of data to try to clear. 

It still raises questions about why the hell SD is even an option on a camera with this (apparent) performance. Why give the camera 30fps if you need to wait 3x longer for the buffer to get back to normal? Why have the SD if you're meant to go to 30fps? 

It all seems to come back to one thing (which, arguably, is the same problem with the R5): Canon want something that looks amazing on paper, but need to cripple it to protect...I guess the R1? Whether it's 8K video on the R5, or 30fps on the R3, they need something impressive to point at that just can't work in the real world because they don't want it to


----------



## takesome1 (Jun 3, 2021)

TiMLud said:


> Based on everything I'm reading People believe the R3 will be a low resolution camera. Low in the sense of 24 to 30 meg. In order for Canon to compete with Sony and kick their butt in the market place. Canon has to put a camera out that will rival what Sony is making.
> I believe the R3 will be 50-60 meg camera and the R1 will top out at something crazy like 75 to 100 meg. Canon has the sensor tech. They have had the tech for some time now. I also believe the camera will ship in July if not sooner.



I understand that you believe the R3 will be 50-60 mp.
I believe there aliens watching us, even now the US military and even former president Obama is admitting there are UFO's that they are unable to explain their movement. Finally some rumors are confirmed.
Maybe we will both see an announcements soon confirming our "beliefs".


----------



## ClickIt_AC (Jun 3, 2021)

st jack photography said:


> Since day one of this announcement, I have been imagining and saying that *the R3 is to the 1D(or R1) as the R6 is to the R5*. Anything they do with the R3 is meant to compete with certain Sony bodies, cost more than the r5 but be better, but also leave room for the r1 to be the top-of-line flagship. This R3 sounds like a curious hybrid of R5 and 1D.
> 
> While I use that r3<r1=r6<r5 logic to predict a likely 20-24mp sensor, I also realize that the sensor is a *new BSI stacked sensor.* Because of that and my familiarity with BSI sensors, owning a Sony Rx1Rm2, I would predict that a BSI sensor of 46 to 56mp is possible, also giving 30fps RAW. One can also conclude that if a rumored R1 is being produced, and given a BSI sensor too, then it may well have a similar mp count and be a scorching 40 to 60fps. I guess that whatever this camera has, the speculated-on R1 will be a bit better, and vice-versa.
> 
> ...


This is somewhere near the point I was trying to make... although not as eloquently


----------



## padam (Jun 3, 2021)

matthudson said:


> 30fps at 18mp (1DXmk1, since I have that on hand to compare) will give you well over 600mb/s, Everyone would lose their shit if they threw out such a low res sensor, but even so that's a hell of a lot of data to try to clear.
> 
> It still raises questions about why the hell SD is even an option on a camera with this (apparent) performance. Why give the camera 30fps if you need to wait 3x longer for the buffer to get back to normal? Why have the SD if you're meant to go to 30fps?
> 
> It all seems to come back to one thing (which, arguably, is the same problem with the R5): Canon want something that looks amazing on paper, but need to cripple it to protect...I guess the R1? Whether it's 8K video on the R5, or 30fps on the R3, they need something impressive to point at that just can't work in the real world because they don't want it to


The Sony A1 with 50 megapixels has a buffer size of 155 compressed RAW images.

Assuming the R3 has a similarly sized buffer for much less megapixels with cRAW (which may be the only raw option for 30fps anyway), it should last a very long time. I don't hear sports photographers clicking endlessly when they don't need to, they know when to fire and when to pause.

There are obviously thermal constrains using two CFExpress cards producing plenty of heat in a smaller body compared to a 1DX.
Since the body is formed by the R5, I don't think it is just a question of take one out and put in another.
It would probably need the bigger 1DX chassis with the cards mounted lengthways.

So yes it is crippled somewhat, but there are reasons for it (to make it _more reliable_ as they claim) and it will be fully usable in the real world.

And yes, this complaint is based on a camera that will be positioned under the 1DX. So why is that surprising in the first place...


----------



## TravelerNick (Jun 3, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> It is more that I can readily find a PC with an SD slot if I forget or have a problem with my external CF Express drive



That to but missing a shot is worse than having to wait with the shot in hand.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 3, 2021)

People already screaming "crippled" and don't even have the sensor resolution. Knock that stupidity off.

Raw to the big card, jpeg to the little card. Cards are very reliable these days. Are people sending raw files from the sidelines to the AP, or SI? I might be wrong, but somehow think the vast majority of those bursts are sent as jpegs.

Yeah, it would be nice if the cards match, but this probably isn't as big a deal as all the hand wringing suggests.


----------



## matthudson (Jun 3, 2021)

padam said:


> The Sony A1 with 50 megapixels has a buffer size of 155 compressed RAW images.
> 
> Assuming the R3 has a similarly sized buffer for much less megapixels with cRAW (which may be the only raw option for 30fps anyway), it should last a very long time. I don't hear sports photographers clicking endlessly when they don't need to, they know when to fire and when to pause.
> 
> ...


I'm glad you mentioned the A1; it has dual Cfexpress slots in a much smaller body. I'd be interested in finding out why Canon are struggling to fit more than one. Guess Sony made some better decisions in the design process

The R3 body is a 1dx sized body; you can't look at that integrated grip and think it isn't. If it's not in that market segment, why all the comparisons in Canon's media releases? Why is it built off the 1DX form factor and batteries? Why does it have the 1DX weathersealing? This clearly isn't meant to be aimed at the 5d4 or 7dii users, otherwise they'd stick with the same base and same batteries (like the R6/r5)

But, for arguments sake, let's go with that buffer size (150). Let's also grab...10mb per raw file? That seems a bit low, but it'll at least put a floor on it.

So with the perfect SD, that's 5s to clear the buffer. With the poor man's CFE, a touch over 2s. It's a pretty big slowdown proportionally speaking, but there's probably a better comparison

With a slow CFE, you could get up to 25mb raw files at 30fps, and never need to worry if the buffer is 5 or 500 images. For SD, you'd better hope those raw files are very small (10mb), or the buffer suddenly becomes a problem. Is Canon good enough to give you raws that small? I dunno


----------



## matthudson (Jun 3, 2021)

CanonFanBoy said:


> People already screaming "crippled" and don't even have the sensor resolution. Knock that stupidity off.


It's a pretty basic step of logic. The camera clearly needs a cfexpress card; if it doesn't, why does it have the slot? They're less common, and apparently cause overheating. If you didn't need that performance, you'd never even consider putting one in

So if it's needed, then there's going to be cases where you have to write data at 800mb/s+. So, that SD card is going to be an absolute boat anchor if the camera does either simultaneous writeback, or swaps halfway through a shoot

Given that this isn't going to be a cheap camera, and that CFE and SD are about the same price, then why wouldn't you give it to CFE slots? It's a thing in the 1dxiii and the Sony A1, so don't tell me it's impossible.


----------



## padam (Jun 3, 2021)

matthudson said:


> I'm glad you mentioned the A1; it has dual Cfexpress slots in a much smaller body. I'd be interested in finding out why Canon are struggling to fit more than one. Guess Sony made some better decisions in the design process
> 
> The R3 body is a 1dx sized body; you can't look at that integrated grip and think it isn't. If it's not in that market segment, why all the comparisons in Canon's media releases? Why is it built off the 1DX form factor and batteries? Why does it have the 1DX weathersealing? This clearly isn't meant to be aimed at the 5d4 or 7dii users, otherwise they'd stick with the same base and same batteries (like the R6/r5)
> 
> ...


The R6 buffer writing to two SD cards with 20fps is 165 images or 8.4 seconds. People already seem to be quite happy with it shooting sports.

This R3 is definitely catered more towards that, so it will have a much beefier buffer (so the buffer size will be enough for well over 10 seconds even at the maximum frame rate), so I am struggling to find a use case where it will be outrun - assuming the user knows what he is doing. In most cases 30fps is simply not necessary and depending on the shutter speed, etc. it may not even be available and of course shooting RAW to both cards is not the one and only feasible way.

The 1DX II had a normal CF card slot, it didn't have the buffer capacity of these modern cameras, and I didn't hear anyone not saying it was amazing.

And don't throw in CFExpress Type A like it does not have its own drawbacks. It is a slower card, and the camera does not shoot any type of RAW video internally.
So each to his own, there is no perfect camera.

Right now people are complaining about something that hasn't even been tested at all.

It was the exact same thing with the overheating which I wouldn't be surprised to still see that in the R3 assuming it shoots full sensor 60p RAW video with autofocus (unlike the 1DX III where they disabled it).
Yes, it is an issue for some people, but most people shooting slow motion will not use it for 10 minutes straight, only for short bursts.

And the fix for fully unlocking these sensors for video is simply a camera with active cooling, which again is something that a lot of people don't need at all.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 3, 2021)

matthudson said:


> It's a pretty basic step of logic. The camera clearly needs a cfexpress card; if it doesn't, why does it have the slot? They're less common, and apparently cause overheating. If you didn't need that performance, you'd never even consider putting one in
> 
> So if it's needed, then there's going to be cases where you have to write data at 800mb/s+. So, that SD card is going to be an absolute boat anchor if the camera does either simultaneous writeback, or swaps halfway through a shoot
> 
> Given that this isn't going to be a cheap camera, and that CFE and SD are about the same price, then why wouldn't you give it to CFE slots? It's a thing in the 1dxiii and the Sony A1, so don't tell me it's impossible.


Never said impossible, just not a big deal. So what is your use that demands 30fps raw to two different cards at the same time? Or are you just frustrated that you might have to take 3 seconds to swap out a full card for an empty? Yeah, world shattering problem requiring multiple pages in the thread to bitch and moan.

Buy the Sony.


----------



## canonmike (Jun 3, 2021)

John Wilde said:


> Low resolution is why the 1D X Mark III is so inexpensively priced. Oh, wait. There is more to a sensor than MP. There are things like speed and low-light performance. My R3 guess is around 30MP.


My guess is, that if your 30MP guess is correct, there will be a lot of happy R3 buyers hitting that pre-order button, doubly so, if it should be priced around $5.5K rather than $6K.


----------



## SteveC (Jun 3, 2021)

Cyborx said:


> WHAT IS CANON DOING?? Why releasing a camera that cannot meet the specs of the R5 that is on the market for a year already? Basically what they have built is an R6 with a battery grip and some fancy knobs. I don’t get it. Really... Canon, you’ve lost me here....


Judging from your posts Canon never had you.


----------



## SteveC (Jun 3, 2021)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Exactly. Well, we know of one guy who does.  Heck, I don't think I've ever put my keys in my back pocket. I wouldn't put any card in any pocket with keys.


This is what God made those little plastic boxes for SD cards, for.


----------



## canonmike (Jun 3, 2021)

john1970 said:


> If the R3 is positioned between the R5 and 1Dx Mk3 I wonder if the price will be the median of 3900 and 6500 USD, which is 5200 USD. At 5200 USD I could see a 30 MP BSI camera with integrated grip selling very well for Canon.


If the R3 were to come in at $5200.00 and have 30MP and you plan on buying it, I would suggest that one be first in line on the pre-order button, otherwise forget about getting one for quite awhile.


----------



## reef58 (Jun 3, 2021)

GoldWing said:


> 32 too low, must be min 50+


50 too low must be 60+


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 3, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> You left off the R6


The 1D X III isn't on the table, either. But it's not my table...





__





Two Card Trick | Canon EOS cameras with dual card slots







www.eos-magazine.com


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 3, 2021)

matthudson said:


> CF and SD is less of an issue than CFExpress to SD. My CF cards are 90MB/s and 160MB/s, while SD is sitting between 95 and 300. GFExpress? Even the cheap ones are at 800mb/s, and it's not that much more expensive to go to 1200 or even 1400.
> 
> It's a massive gulf in performance that's really going to show


Agreed. I like the dual-CF in my 1D X, which I have set to write RAW to both cards for redundancy. With an SD slot on the R3, I fully expect that will affect long bursts (if not acquisition, then clearing the buffer). So I'll write RAW to the CFexpress and jpg to the SD as an emergency backup.


----------



## TravelerNick (Jun 3, 2021)

David - Sydney said:


> The bit rate is dramatically smaller than the R5's firehose giving much less heat!



The lower bit rate likely means more processing. I can't see that creating less heat.


----------



## H. Jones (Jun 3, 2021)

Not that anyone seriously believed that this didn't have a mechanical shutter, but a video from Canon Korea shows the mechanical shutter over the sensor while the camera is turned off, like in the R5.


----------



## Kuau (Jun 3, 2021)

TiMLud said:


> Based on everything I'm reading People believe the R3 will be a low resolution camera. Low in the sense of 24 to 30 meg. In order for Canon to compete with Sony and kick their butt in the market place. Canon has to put a camera out that will rival what Sony is making.
> I believe the R3 will be 50-60 meg camera and the R1 will top out at something crazy like 75 to 100 meg. Canon has the sensor tech. They have had the tech for some time now. I also believe the camera will ship in July if not sooner.


I sure hope you are correct and most everyone else is wrong. I would be happy with the current R5 45mp sensor, yet with faster readout. If the R3 comes out with a 20-30mp I will be disappointed and may just hold off until the R1. For my shooting requirements I need a souped up R5 which the R3 I hope will be.


----------



## Kuau (Jun 3, 2021)

H. Jones said:


> Not that anyone seriously believed that this didn't have a mechanical shutter, but a video from Canon Korea shows the mechanical shutter over the sensor while the camera is turned off, like in the R5.
> 
> View attachment 198047


Thats a good thing,. I ike on my R5 when you shut off the camera the shutter covers the sensor makes for easier lens swapping and less dust on the sensor.. Still don't understand why Canon has held back on releasing the mega pixel count on the R3, It seems clear that there are some pre productions units already out in the field... Tokyo Olympics are in 50 days..


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 3, 2021)

Kuau said:


> I sure hope you are correct and most everyone else is wrong. I would be happy with the current R5 45mp sensor, yet with faster readout. If the R3 comes out with a 20-30mp I will be disappointed and may just hold off until the R1. For my shooting requirements I need a souped up R5 which the R3 I hope will be.


But the 1DX III has a DIGIC X and 20mp at 20fps, the R3 also has DIGIC X, how do you expect that one processor to process more than twice the resolution 150% faster?


----------



## H. Jones (Jun 3, 2021)

Kuau said:


> It seems clear that there are some pre productions units already out in the field... Tokyo Olympics are in 50 days..


Y'know, I'm sure Canon has rules about using preproduction models for image releases, but if we don't know by then I would be interested to see the file resolutions that Getty Images uploads from the Tokyo Olympics.. I'm sure they could require them to downsize images to hide the resolution of the camera, but it would be amusing if a ton of Getty Olympic images with an unattributed camera happened to be a new resolution like 40 MP or 50 MP


----------



## Kuau (Jun 3, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> But the 1DX III has a DIGIC X and 20mp at 20fps, the R3 also has DIGIC X, how do you expect that one processor to process more than twice the resolution 150% faster?


So does the R5 has the DIGIC X processor maybe the R3 will have 2 of them....


----------



## H. Jones (Jun 3, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> But the 1DX III has a DIGIC X and 20mp at 20fps, the R3 also has DIGIC X, how do you expect that one processor to process more than twice the resolution 150% faster?


I don't think you can read into camera specs *too* much to determine what Canon can and can't do with a processor. A single DIGIC X processor in the EOS R5 already pushes 8K raw video at 30 frames a second. That's very close to doing twice the resolution 150% faster in a raw output, it's clear the 1DX mark III isn't pushing that processor to the limits in any way.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 3, 2021)

Kuau said:


> So does the R5 has the DIGIC X processor maybe the R3 will have 2 of them....


If the $6,499 1DX III has one I can't see the sub $6,000 R3 having two. But I'm happy to be shown to be wrong.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 3, 2021)

H. Jones said:


> I don't think you can read into camera specs *too* much to determine what Canon can and can't do with a processor. A single DIGIC X processor in the EOS R5 already pushes 8K raw video at 30 frames a second. That's very close to doing twice the resolution 150% faster in a raw output, it's clear the 1DX mark III isn't pushing that processor to the limits in any way.


I think the R5 8k experience is precisely why the R3 won’t come close to it.

The R5 and 1DX III share a processor, the 1 series can do what it does all day long every day for years, the R5 can overheat in under 30 minutes. I think the R3 is positioned closer to the 1 series in concept and there is no way Canon want to relive the storm in a teacup the ‘overheating’ drama caused and totally overwhelmed the release and stated performance envelope of the camera.


----------



## chasingrealness (Jun 3, 2021)

I really want this to be a camera that has two megapixel potentialities. 30fps at 20mp and 20fps at 45mp.


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Jun 3, 2021)

How are does Digic X processor compare with the processor of an iPhone? Beating an iPhone when it comes to processing power is the least I would expect in a $6000 or so camera.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Jun 3, 2021)

mpmark said:


> You don’t have to be a fool to neccesarly want to recover 8 stops of light. Cameras still today don’t have the same dynamic scene/range of what your eye sees when you are viewing something beautiful with a high dynamic range but wish to capture it as close as possible to the experience.


Sorry, I didn't want to offend you personally, really. But 8 stops is more than huge! I sometimes have to recover 2-3 stops, if the DR is high, but that's already the limit.


----------



## canonmike (Jun 3, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> I think the R5 8k experience is precisely why the R3 won’t come close to it.
> 
> The R5 and 1DX III share a processor, the 1 series can do what it does all day long every day for years, the R5 can overheat in under 30 minutes. I think the R3 is positioned closer to the 1 series in concept and there is no way Canon want to relive the storm in a teacup the ‘overheating’ drama caused and totally overwhelmed the release and stated performance envelope of the camera.


I completely agree with your, "Canon surely doesn't want to relive the overheating drama, once again", privatebydesign. I, also think it would be fair to assume you have a camera tech savvy well above the average Canon rumor Joe, validated by some of your many posts here, amplifying your understanding of tech issues on a level that escape some of us, myself included. It is also refreshing, on rare occasion, when you have been wrong and I notice you immediately man up and just admit that, when pointed out, that an opposing opinion was correct, after all. Nevertheless, I always enjoy your take on the issue at hand but hope that Canon pleasantly surprises you and the rest of us with a higher R3 MP than what you expect, even if you don't care if it has it. One thing we can all agree on, I'm sure, is that the R3 looks to be one heck of a camera and we cannot wait for Canon to bring it on. The anticipation and excitement is contagious as we wait for it.


----------



## Tremotino (Jun 3, 2021)

reef58 said:


> 50 too low must be 60+


60 too low must be 70+


----------



## usern4cr (Jun 3, 2021)

matthudson said:


> It's a pretty basic step of logic. The camera clearly needs a cfexpress card; if it doesn't, why does it have the slot? They're less common, and apparently cause overheating. If you didn't need that performance, you'd never even consider putting one in
> 
> So if it's needed, then there's going to be cases where you have to write data at 800mb/s+. So, that SD card is going to be an absolute boat anchor if the camera does either simultaneous writeback, or swaps halfway through a shoot
> 
> Given that this isn't going to be a cheap camera, and that CFE and SD are about the same price, then why wouldn't you give it to CFE slots? It's a thing in the 1dxiii and the Sony A1, so don't tell me it's impossible.


I would also prefer to see 2 identical CFExpress slots, and I assume Canon would prefer it if it was practical at this time.

The reason I'm guessing they don't is simply "heat dissipation". The CFExpress slot & card runs very hot. They already have heat buildup issues with the R5. Adding a 2nd CFExpress would only make that much worse on the R3. Since the R3 has a much bigger body, battery and price, it would be easy to justify 2 CFExpress cards on size, battery draw & price, so this is the only big reason I see to not having 2 of them. 

A second possible minor reason is that they intend to have 2 CFExpress slots in the R1 (with more design time and/or smaller sensor MPs so that it can better handle the heat issue) and thus give more reason to sell the future R1.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 3, 2021)

@canonmike very kind words and much appreciated. I agree with your hopes and sentiments about the R3 too!


----------



## tron (Jun 3, 2021)

A realistic scenario could be around 30Mp but with H+ speed having the same restrictions bitwise unfortunately (13 at some high rate and 12 bit at 30fps) . But this high rate could be say 16fps with a H 14 bit capability at say 10 or 12fps instead of the 8fps of R5.

Unless they use a double digic X which I somehow doubt because this will be left for the R1 most probably (but we never know...)


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 3, 2021)

padam said:


> So yes it is crippled somewhat, but there are reasons for it (to make it _more reliable_ as they claim) and it will be fully usable in the real world.


This is what bores the hell out of me when people start whining 'WAAAAH! Its crippled' and 'Canon only want to protect their XXX camera'.
They place no thought into why the specs are what they are and every manufacturer bar none puts things in higher grade models that are not in lower grade models. 
I guess what they really mean is 'Why can't I buy a 1Dx3 for the price 90D'. Ho hum.


----------



## H. Jones (Jun 3, 2021)

tron said:


> A realistic scenario could be around 30Mp but with H+ speed having the same restrictions bitwise unfortunately (13 at some high rate and 12 bit at 30fps) . But this high rate could be say 16fps with a H 14 bit capability at say 10 or 12fps instead of the 8fps of R5.
> 
> Unless they use a double digic X which I somehow doubt because this will be left for the R1 most probably (but we never know...)



While I was thinking about the R5's 8k raw at 30 fps, I realized that 8K in a video aspect ratio works out to be about 33 megapixels of data. So I feel pretty confident that the R3 is capable of being around full frame raw 30-36 megapixels depending on how Canon slices it. Maybe Canon will do ~32 just to meet the new standard for resolution of APS-C cameras.

Let's not forget the M6 did 32mp bursts at 30 FPS, albeit not in the most useful way possible.


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 3, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> The R5 and 1DX III share a processor, the 1 series can do what it does all day long every day for years, the R5 can overheat in under 30 minutes.


And Canon do this time after time - every model since the 5Dii (that introduced video) has been met with howls of derision over an unimpressive spec sheet but when it finally gets to market over months people start reporting how it is a massive improvement in the ergonomics and functionality that makes their life more enjoyable and so worthwhile. So suppose you are a wildlife shooter and the R3 were to solve all the glitches that you don't like on the R5 - for example it has an integrated grip that handles battery than an add-on camera grip, batteries that lasts 4 times longer, does not overheat, has virtually unlimited buffer and better AF and is more rugged. How much would that premium be worth? My guess is 1-1.5k for a professional or a '[email protected]' enthusiast. 
So I think the resolution would be anywhere between 30-45MP with little else: at the latter I would seriously be in the market. At the 30MP end would be a toss-up between the R5 and R3 but still worth it to many.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 3, 2021)

usern4cr said:


> I would also prefer to see 2 identical CFExpress slots, and I assume Canon would prefer it if it was practical at this time.
> 
> The reason I'm guessing they don't is simply "heat dissipation". The CFExpress slot & card runs very hot. They already have heat buildup issues with the R5. Adding a 2nd CFExpress would only make that much worse on the R3. Since the R3 has a much bigger body, battery and price, it would be easy to justify 2 CFExpress cards on size, battery draw & price, so this is the only big reason I see to not having 2 of them.
> 
> A second possible minor reason is that they intend to have 2 CFExpress slots in the R1 (with more design time and/or smaller sensor MPs so that it can better handle the heat issue) and thus give more reason to sell the future R1.


Certainly they could do dual CFe, that’s what the 1D X III has. But remember when that camera launched and Canon ram promotions including a free CFe card and a reader? Likely they don’t want to do that again, and are including SD as an easy upgrade path.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 3, 2021)

Mikehit said:


> And Canon do this time after time - every model since the 5Dii (that introduced video) has been met with howls of derision over an unimpressive spec sheet but when it finally gets to market over months people start reporting how it is a massive improvement in the ergonomics and functionality that makes their life more enjoyable and so worthwhile. So suppose you are a wildlife shooter and the R3 were to solve all the glitches that you don't like on the R5 - for example it has an integrated grip that handles battery than an add-on camera grip, batteries that lasts 4 times longer, does not overheat, has virtually unlimited buffer and better AF and is more rugged. How much would that premium be worth? My guess is 1-1.5k for a professional or a '[email protected]' enthusiast.
> So I think the resolution would be anywhere between 30-45MP with little else: at the latter I would seriously be in the market. At the 30MP end would be a toss-up between the R5 and R3 but still worth it to many.


I 100% agree with the first part, time will tell for the second!


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 3, 2021)

Skyscraperfan said:


> How are does Digic X processor compare with the processor of an iPhone? Beating an iPhone when it comes to processing power is the least I would expect in a $6000 or so camera.


Well, the iPhone has a tiny sensor. Not a valid comparison.


----------



## emailfortom (Jun 3, 2021)

TiMLud said:


> Based on everything I'm reading People believe the R3 will be a low resolution camera. Low in the sense of 24 to 30 meg. In order for Canon to compete with Sony and kick their butt in the market place. Canon has to put a camera out that will rival what Sony is making.
> I believe the R3 will be 50-60 meg camera and the R1 will top out at something crazy like 75 to 100 meg. Canon has the sensor tech. They have had the tech for some time now. I also believe the camera will ship in July if not sooner.


If Canon can make the R3 as advertised, include a 45meg sensor that works better than the R5 in low light - I'm sold!


----------



## jam05 (Jun 3, 2021)

john1970 said:


> After seeing these specifications along with SD and CFExpress cards I am on the fence if I should buy R3 or not. I am still waiting for the official announcements to learn more, but at this stage I would like some insights into the following:
> 
> 1) What exactly does Canon mean that the DPAF has enhance tracking for people and animals? Is the tracking significantly better than the R5. Is the enhancement quad-pixel AF?
> 
> ...





RMac said:


> I'd wager 20MP. The fact that they're not trumpeting the resolution is pretty suggestive that it's not an exciting spec, so staying the same as the R6/1DXiii wouldn't surprise me in the least.


Canon never "trumpets" resolution when announcing a camera. Just use common sense. Between the R5 and R1.


----------



## jam05 (Jun 3, 2021)

Canon only has one "high end" flagship camera. The 1DX3. Its far from being crippled.


----------



## jam05 (Jun 3, 2021)

Mahk43 said:


> The EVF seems very very protruding compared to the 1DXmkIII.
> I'm not a pro nor user of such a body, but could be an issue to store it intoa bag no?


No more than any other camera. If the bag is large ennough for the body the eyepiece shouldnt be a problem. Its smaller than the 1Dx3 in every diminsion


----------



## AEWest (Jun 3, 2021)

H. Jones said:


> While I was thinking about the R5's 8k raw at 30 fps, I realized that 8K in a video aspect ratio works out to be about 33 megapixels of data. So I feel pretty confident that the R3 is capable of being around full frame raw 30-36 megapixels depending on how Canon slices it. Maybe Canon will do ~32 just to meet the new standard for resolution of APS-C cameras.
> 
> Let's not forget the M6 did 32mp bursts at 30 FPS, albeit not in the most useful way possible.


Video bit depth is only 10 bit, vs 14 for stills, so the individual image size is larger for the still image even with the same resolution.


----------



## jam05 (Jun 3, 2021)

RMac said:


> *Most* of the things I've needed to record over the pandemic (which got me into videography) have been longer than 30 minutes.
> Interviews
> Weddings (like a documentary recording)
> Church Services/Sermon recordings
> ...


----------



## jam05 (Jun 3, 2021)

Thats only for high resolution 4k 60 etc. You dont need to record in 4k 60 or 8k for an interview, documentary, church service. etc. All can be recorded at 4k 30 or even 4k 24. Many people have been doing just fine.


----------



## jam05 (Jun 3, 2021)

TravelerNick said:


> It's still easier to find a SD card if you're desperate . Likely the only reason I would consider it a useful feature.


Yeah one can not find those CFe cards in every region with ease, especially with fast continuous write speeds. Max write speeds, maybe. But not compatible fast write speeds for video.


----------



## jam05 (Jun 3, 2021)

Wildlife Junkie said:


> No dual cf express card slot is disappointing for a pro camera. Please Canon not again a 20/21 MP sensor. We are in 2021 and anything below 40 MP would also be disappointing.


We are in 2021 and CFexpress B cards at 300mBs continuous is still difficult to find anywhere locally. Maybe those slow ones for everyday computing. Buy the 300mBs continuous write speed isnt found at your local Best Buy


----------



## reef58 (Jun 3, 2021)

Tremotino said:


> 60 too low must be 70+


I misspoke must be 80+ or I am passing. Sorry hit the 5 instead of the 8


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jun 3, 2021)

Sharlin said:


> "Most of us" aren't in the market for either the R1 or the R3.


True. I got the R6 and have not looked back. Amazing low light and getting good big prints out of it. I am sure i will drool over the R3 and R1 but i certainly dont need them


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 3, 2021)

reef58 said:


> I misspoke must be 80+ or I am passing. Sorry hit the 5 instead of the 8


Duh! And the 1 off the front, >180 or it's DOA....


----------



## SteveC (Jun 3, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Duh! And the 1 off the front, >180 or it's DOA....



That's another D word that's going to get banned, now...


----------



## Tremotino (Jun 3, 2021)

Mikehit said:


> I guess what they really mean is 'Why can't I buy a 1Dx3 for the price 90D'. Ho hum.


Yes, that's what I'm thinking when reading some of this strange comments here...

I can't justify buying the R3 as a hobbyist since my DSLR is totally fine and still a great camera. The R3 won't make me a better photographer anyways. But maybe in 5 years I will be able to buy a refurbished R3. And than I will be a happy shooter, no matter the MP count of this camera. And you know what? I will only use one single SD card! Know why? CFexpress is way too expensive and I will never take 30fps on a daily basis. And a modern sd card never failed on me...


----------



## UpstateNYPhotog (Jun 3, 2021)

I see in the pictures of the R3 that the control wheel for the vertical grip that doubles the functions of the wheel near the shutter button, is on the back of the camera. This is the same as the grip for the R5/R6 cameras. I've not had the opportunity to try either of those cameras with a grip as I disliked the form factor for the grips for the 5D IV and 5D III. I think it's the very square shape of them makes them uncomfortable to me. I'm very happy with the shape of the seven different 1 Series bodies I've used, back to the 1n for film. I know people have complained that the vertical toggle is in an odd, low place on the grips for the R5/R6, but I haven't seen anyone talk about the position of that control dial on the back, rather than on the end of the camera as it always was before on both the 5 Series grips and the 1 Series cameras. Thoughts?


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 3, 2021)

TravelerNick said:


> The lower bit rate likely means more processing. I can't see that creating less heat.


I agree that the processor will be working hard and generating heat. The question that neither of us can answer definitively is whether the CFe type B card/slot that is required to accept that firehose of data is a bigger generator of heat.... but it sure does get hot!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 3, 2021)

jam05 said:


> … the 300mBs continuous write speed isnt found at your local Best Buy


Not will the R3 be found there.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 4, 2021)

sandhar said:


> ok I think you have a point here :: at 30fps the readout is fast enough that a mechanical shutter is only needed for limited cases where movement across frame is fast. also - given that they have added sports cars as a AF subject should hint at fast readout speeds (else we get elliptical tires in ES and such). so the mechanical shutter may be present, but for most cases, the ES does the job w/ high DR.
> interesting !


I think that there are 2 points here: capture time for the sensor and read out time for the sensor. The read out time will define how fast the continuous fps will be. The capture time will dictate the fastest shutter speed. Mechanical shutters get to 1/8000s but they get there by a slit travelling over the sensor. It may be much less with a global shutter. Interesting to see how it is implemented


----------



## john1970 (Jun 4, 2021)

UpstateNYPhotog said:


> I see in the pictures of the R3 that the control wheel for the vertical grip that doubles the functions of the wheel near the shutter button, is on the back of the camera. This is the same as the grip for the R5/R6 cameras. I've not had the opportunity to try either of those cameras with a grip as I disliked the form factor for the grips for the 5D IV and 5D III. I think it's the very square shape of them makes them uncomfortable to me. I'm very happy with the shape of the seven different 1 Series bodies I've used, back to the 1n for film. I know people have complained that the vertical toggle is in an odd, low place on the grips for the R5/R6, but I haven't seen anyone talk about the position of that control dial on the back, rather than on the end of the camera as it always was before on both the 5 Series grips and the 1 Series cameras. Thoughts?


As someone that uses the R5 with the vertical grip I also agree with your comment that the vertical focus point selector is in a terrible location. The location on the R3 is significantly better.


----------



## FrenchFry (Jun 4, 2021)

John Wilde said:


> I don't think so. That's the job of the R1. The A1 is priced at (body only) $6.500. The R3 will be in a lower price category. Canon writes that the R3 is "positioned squarely between the EOS R5 and EOS-1D X Mark III cameras", and the R3 price will be positioned there too.



Yes, but as others such as john1970 have already pointed out, Canon has specifically stated that the R3 will be competing with the Z9 and the A1. Given that the Z9 and A1 are high MP and high performance bodies, it would make sense for the R3 to follow suit if it is in fact competing with these models. If not, it's not really competing and a lower price would be expected. 









Canon EOS R3 – это еще не флагман | PHOTOWEBEXPO


Во время московской выставки «Фотофорум-2021» нам удалось взять интервью у представителя компании Canon. На вопросы ответил Андрей Тищенко, руководитель отдела ...




photowebexpo.ru




What cameras will the Canon EOS R3 compete with on the market?​Of course, the closest competing model will be the Nikon Z9 , which we do not know much about yet, as the camera has just been announced and has not yet been officially unveiled. What this model will be in reality, only time and reviews will show. Canon's culture is built on respect for other manufacturers, and we always maintain a competitive marketplace that drives the advancement and emergence of new technologies for photographers. But when the Nikon D6 came out, in my opinion, it turned out to be very close to the Nikon D5. So I expect the Nikon Z9 to be a really strong and innovative camera for Nikon.
And of course, Sony a1because there are cool technologies there: fast shooting, no blackout. However, she just came out, so there is not much real filming and combat experience on her. And for cameras of this level, it will be important to evaluate the operating experience after some time. In other words, our camera will be in the segment of those cameras that are currently announced by competitors as top-end.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 4, 2021)

matthudson said:


> I'm glad you mentioned the A1; it has dual Cfexpress slots in a much smaller body. I'd be interested in finding out why Canon are struggling to fit more than one. Guess Sony made some better decisions in the design process


Yes and no.... Sony's choice of CFe type A cards means that they are
- very expensive (only 2 cameras use them and only Sony makes them at the moment)
- slower than type B (1 pcie lane vs multiple)
but
- efficient dual slot with USH-II SD cards which is very nice and looks to be less of a heat generator
- backward compatible

Sony's choice means that they can't record raw video and use compressed raw stills. Sony have been happy to choose unusual recording media in the past for some reason... sony memory stick anyone?


----------



## UpstateNYPhotog (Jun 4, 2021)

john1970 said:


> As someone that uses the R5 with the vertical grip I also agree with your comment that the vertical focus point selector is in a terrible location. The location on the R3 is significantly better.


But what about the rear position of the vertical hold control wheel instead of on the righthand end of the camera, just behind the vertical shutter button?


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 4, 2021)

H. Jones said:


> Not that anyone seriously believed that this didn't have a mechanical shutter, but a video from Canon Korea shows the mechanical shutter over the sensor while the camera is turned off, like in the R5.
> 
> View attachment 198047


You are right that it has a sensor cover when no lens is attached which I would expect!  
No mechanical shutter is a long shot but the question remains about when the shutter is no longer required with ES flash sync and minimal read out speeds with these new stacked sensors. Removing the mechanical failure point would be a great feature even if Canon are making them better with 500k actuations for the R5


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 4, 2021)

jam05 said:


> We are in 2021 and CFexpress B cards at 300mBs continuous is still difficult to find anywhere locally. Maybe those slow ones for everyday computing. Buy the 300mBs continuous write speed isnt found at your local Best Buy


Very few CFe Type B cards max out at 300mb/s write speed. You can get Sony Tough, Lexar, Sandisk, Prograde Cobalt etc relatively easily on Amazon for instance. Even getting >200mb/s USH-II SD cards is not simple. Basically you are at the pointy end of current technology. 
Try getting CFe Type A cards which are slower and more expensive and complain to Sony


----------



## UpstateNYPhotog (Jun 4, 2021)

H. Jones said:


> Funny to note from the side-view, the LP-E19 is actually somewhat wider than the camera itself. Especially when you consider that the space after the right-side of the HDMI port is all empty space where the flip-screen fits into the frame.
> 
> Also, with that said, the viewfinder doesn't look like it takes anymore space than the 1DX when you compare it to the LP-E19. The only difference is that there's more space between the eyecup and the back of the camera, since the camera is skinnier, which gives you even more room to not hit your nose on the camera.
> 
> View attachment 198032


Good catch on that. I just got my 1Dx II out and turned it sideways. The screen and the rear control cluster below the screen stick out to the right of the battery end cap on the 1Dx II. I wonder if the R3 will be the size and weight of the 1D IV. That was an awesome size, weight, performance package.


----------



## UpstateNYPhotog (Jun 4, 2021)

Rocksthaman said:


> Battery guys, would you rather have two R5 batteries or the 1dx style. I’ve grown fond of the R5 grip and battery, other than the FPS dropping at under 50%.
> 
> 4260 vs 2700mah


How do you feel about the control wheel on the grip being under your thumb rather than near the shutter button on the end of the camera?


----------



## H. Jones (Jun 4, 2021)

UpstateNYPhotog said:


> How do you feel about the control wheel on the grip being under your thumb rather than near the shutter button on the end of the camera?


The control wheel on the vertical grip near your thumb is the mode dial control wheel duplicated onto the vertical grip. There's still a shutter control wheel on the vertical grip at the vertical grip's shutter button.


----------



## UpstateNYPhotog (Jun 4, 2021)

H. Jones said:


> I know we're all just throwing stuff at a wall right now, but I am increasingly hopeful that Canon will actually surprise us and break the mold a bit here.
> 
> I mean, the market for 1-series users remains for... the 1-series. The CF Express + SD card slots speak to a more consumer philosophy along the lines of the EOS R5. The eye control and flip screen speak to a more consumer philosophy. The removal of the lower rear LCD and removal of WFT accessory point(no backwards compatibility for those who already dropped $600 on one) speak to more of a consumer philosophy.
> 
> ...


Yes, when the going gets tough I go for my 1Dx II everytime over my 5D IV's. I'd rather have 20 MP perfectly in focus, and the ability to run the motor fast to get the precise moment every time. That being said, now I'm no long a PJ, and making a living in higher ed, the R3 might be perfect.


----------



## UpstateNYPhotog (Jun 4, 2021)

Kiton said:


> In the early days, the SD card was really import for news shooters, the very first the 3rd party SD card reader for the iphone (forget the name of it), which had its own battery built in to allow transfer, then the first generation wifi card reader, then the Apple SD card reader for the iphone was a game changer coupled with a CF to SD adapter to Cfast and SD in a CF slot in the 1d.
> 
> Today the wifi and the apps are so good, the SD card is redundant for us.
> Give me 2 CFexpress slots please.


Yeah, there was nothing like thinking, don't drop the SD, don't drop the SD as you put it in the iPhone card reader to file something quick from a breaking news scene. I think I still have that SD reader somewhere.


----------



## UpstateNYPhotog (Jun 4, 2021)

H. Jones said:


> The control wheel on the vertical grip near your thumb is the mode dial control wheel duplicated onto the vertical grip. There's still a shutter control wheel on the vertical grip at the vertical grip's shutter button.


Thank you. Now I see the dial on the lower right hand end of the R3 in Gordon Laing's video. I'd been having trouble finding images of that end of the R5/R6 grip.


----------



## reef58 (Jun 4, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Duh! And the 1 off the front, >180 or it's DOA....


Thanks for reminding me I did forget the 1. Ha


----------



## FrenchFry (Jun 4, 2021)

reef58 said:


> Thanks for reminding me I did forget the 1. Ha


Did you mean the 9? Like >980? Otherwise you miss out on the nose hairs from a half mile away.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 4, 2021)

Kiton said:


> Today the wifi and the apps are so good, the SD card is redundant for us.
> Give me 2 CFexpress slots please.


That is an excellent point.
The R3 has built-in WIFI and ethernet for redundancy.
If that can do 30 FPS then all is good.
There would also be no reason not to include live streaming, but Canon has not mentioned that.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 4, 2021)

matthudson said:


> CF and SD is less of an issue than CFExpress to SD. My CF cards are 90MB/s and 160MB/s, while SD is sitting between 95 and 300. GFExpress? Even the cheap ones are at 800mb/s, and it's not that much more expensive to go to 1200 or even 1400.
> 
> It's a massive gulf in performance that's really going to show


The gap between CF Express and SD Express is not that huge either but Canon went with UHS-II.
Even UHS-III would have made more sense.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 4, 2021)

mpmark said:


> You don’t have to be a fool to neccesarly want to recover 8 stops of light. Cameras still today don’t have the same dynamic scene/range of what your eye sees when you are viewing something beautiful with a high dynamic range but wish to capture it as close as possible to the experience.


Latitude is different than dynamic range.
Dynamic range in the range of light an image can capture while latitude is the amount an exposure can be corrected.
There is some intersect but they are not the same.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 4, 2021)

DBounce said:


> Is this a “rumor”? It’s an official press release from Canon. The only real “leaks” from all of these camera sites seem to all come from the same source... Nokishita.


This site may be called Canon Rumors but there is news here as well.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 4, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> I think the R5 8k experience is precisely why the R3 won’t come close to it.
> 
> The R5 and 1DX III share a processor, the 1 series can do what it does all day long every day for years, the R5 can overheat in under 30 minutes. I think the R3 is positioned closer to the 1 series in concept and there is no way Canon want to relive the storm in a teacup the ‘overheating’ drama caused and totally overwhelmed the release and stated performance envelope of the camera.


The R6 overheats at the same exact resolution that never overheats on the 1DX Mark III so I do not think that tells us very much.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 4, 2021)

AEWest said:


> Video bit depth is only 10 bit, vs 14 for stills, so the individual image size is larger for the still image even with the same resolution.


Canon RAW video is 12-bit.
My guess is that the 30 FPS RAW for still photos will be 12-bit as well and the 14-bit RAW will be much slower.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 4, 2021)

David - Sydney said:


> Yes and no.... Sony's choice of CFe type A cards means that they are
> - very expensive (only 2 cameras use them and only Sony makes them at the moment)
> - slower than type B (1 pcie lane vs multiple)
> but
> ...


I still think two SD Express slots would have been better but Sony likes to do their own thing.


----------



## Bahrd (Jun 4, 2021)

sanj said:


> RAW is mentioned twice. Wonder what that means...


For some, R3 won't be "well done"...


----------



## Proscribo (Jun 4, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> The gap between CF Express and SD Express is not that huge either but Canon went with UHS-II.
> Even UHS-III would have made more sense.


Uh, no. There are exactly 0 UHS-III cards available, and the same stands for SD Express.

And by the way, SD Express requires new cards too, unless you're fine with all your existing cards running at UHS-I speeds at maximum. So when CF Express is arguably better, why not go straight for that.


----------



## Joules (Jun 4, 2021)

I think 20 MP is off the table. 30 seems the most realistic just based off the 30 FPS (as was pointed out numerous times, 30 MP 30 FPS is the same throughput as 45 MP 20 FPS already found in the R5 - slightly more if the R3 manages it at 14 bit).

Bit didn't CR guy hint at higher resolution just recently:

"Beyond what Canon has told us, I have been told that this camera will have a “resolution trick”. Does that mean it will have pixel-shift or something else? This will not be a 20mp camera like the EOS-1D X Mark III, so expect a very high-resolution image sensor."

From: https://www.canonrumors.com/lets-talk-about-the-canon-eos-r3-cr2/

I'm really curious about this trick. Pixel shift would not be useful for sports applications, right? Introducing it in a 1-series type body seems odd.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 4, 2021)

Joules said:


> I'm really curious about this trick. Pixel shift would not be useful for sports applications, right? Introducing it in a 1-series type body seems odd.


Two things:
1) Why not introduce pixel shift?
Just because R3 is a sports and wildlife camera does not mean it can only be used that way.
2) Maybe the resolution trick is why Canon will not release the resolution.
There will be all kinds of outrage as to how Canon tricked us with the resolution even though they were upfront about it.


----------



## Atlasman (Jun 4, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> Latitude is different than dynamic range.
> Dynamic range in the range of light an image can capture while latitude is the amount an exposure can be corrected.
> There is some intersect but they are not the same.


Latitude: I haven’t encountered this word since my film days.


----------



## Atlasman (Jun 4, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> Two things:
> 1) Why not introduce pixel shift?
> Just because R3 is a sports and wildlife camera does not mean it can only be used that way.
> 2) Maybe the resolution trick is why Canon will not release the resolution.
> There will be all kinds of outrage as to how Canon tricked us with the resolution even though they were upfront about it.


If I were Canon:

The industry has lost a significant chunk of revenue from their point-and-shoot cameras. Optimization should be tearing through the hallways of every camera maker. Specialization might be a good strategy in the long run, but at the moment, Canon needs to respond to the A1 and the Z9.

The R5 is nearly there—why not take the R5 put it on "steroids?"

Why invest in a low-resolution system when it can be achieved by a hi-resolution camera?


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 4, 2021)

Atlasman said:


> If I were Canon:
> 
> The industry has lost a significant chunk of revenue from their point-and-shoot cameras. Optimization should be tearing through the hallways of every camera maker. Specialization might be a good strategy in the long run, but at the moment, Canon needs to respond to the A1 and the Z9.
> 
> ...


Does it? What are the actual sales numbers of the A1 and Z9 and what is the profit margin of that body type? What is the profit margin on RF lenses? 

It is very easy to armchair quarterback everybody else but Canon have led the pack for a long time and I don’t see any investor dissatisfaction, and that is the measure for how the company is being run.


----------



## Atlasman (Jun 4, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Does it? What are the actual sales numbers of the A1 and Z9 and what is the profit margin of that body type? What is the profit margin on RF lenses?
> 
> It is very easy to armchair quarterback everybody else but Canon have led the pack for a long time and I don’t see any investor dissatisfaction, and that is the measure for how the company is being run.


"Armchair?"

I thought this was a forum for friendly discussions and to share our views? 

Where have I mentioned about investor dissatisfaction?


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 4, 2021)

Atlasman said:


> "Armchair?"
> 
> I thought this was a forum for friendly discussions and to share our views?
> 
> Where have I mentioned about investor dissatisfaction?


It is a friendly discussion, how much friendlier can it be than doing it from our armchairs? Surely it is my place to offer a counterpoint?

Anyway, my point was this, you said “Canon must” to which I said none of us really know the actual economies of the market, in sales or profit margins, and also if there was an underlying opinion that ‘Canon must’ then that would be reflected in dissatisfaction from the investor angle. Canon is, first and foremost, a business that makes cameras, not a camera company.


----------



## AEWest (Jun 4, 2021)

Atlasman said:


> If I were Canon:
> 
> The industry has lost a significant chunk of revenue from their point-and-shoot cameras. Optimization should be tearing through the hallways of every camera maker. Specialization might be a good strategy in the long run, but at the moment, Canon needs to respond to the A1 and the Z9.
> 
> ...


We don't know the revolution of the camera yet, it could be higher than many people think.

Half of me thinks that Canon is playing a trick on us and will include announcement of 8K at the last minute. 

That way they can say that they didn't want to focus on that spec this time around since they were so heavily criticized for it with the R5.


----------



## Atlasman (Jun 4, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > It is a friendly discussion, how much friendlier can it be than doing it from our armchairs? Surely it is my place to offer a counterpoint?
> ...





privatebydesign said:


> It is a friendly discussion, how much friendlier can it be than doing it from our armchairs? Surely it is my place to offer a counterpoint?
> 
> Anyway, my point was this, you said “Canon must” to which I said none of us really know the actual economies of the market, in sales or profit margins, and also if there was an underlying opinion that ‘Canon must’ then that would be reflected in dissatisfaction from the investor angle. Canon is, first and foremost, a business that makes cameras, not a camera company.





privatebydesign said:


> It is a friendly discussion, how much friendlier can it be than doing it from our armchairs? Surely it is my place to offer a counterpoint?
> 
> Anyway, my point was this, you said “Canon must” to which I said none of us really know the actual economies of the market, in sales or profit margins, and also if there was an underlying opinion that ‘Canon must’ then that would be reflected in dissatisfaction from the investor angle. Canon is, first and foremost, a business that makes cameras, not a camera company.


"It is very easy to armchair quarterback everybody" is derogatory not friendly.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 4, 2021)

Atlasman said:


> "It is very easy to armchair quarterback everybody" is derogatory not friendly.


It can be derogatory, but not in this case... in my opinion. He's simply stating fact. We're all just sitting around speculating about "woulds, coulda, shoulda, when we have not much insight into the big picture.


----------



## Atlasman (Jun 4, 2021)

CanonFanBoy said:


> It can be derogatory, but not in this case... in my opinion. He's simply stating fact. We're all just sitting around speculating about "woulds, coulda, shoulda, when we have not much insight into the big picture.


Not in this case? Go back a read his entire message and tell me it was not derogatory. Then in his subsequent message, he decided to soften his position.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 4, 2021)

Atlasman said:


> Not in this case? Go back a read his entire message and tell me it was not derogatory. Then in his subsequent message, he decided to soften his position.


No I didn’t soften my position, my position is exactly what it was and still is.

I am from the UK and in my experience ‘armchair quarterbacking’ is not an insult. We are all talking sh!t about stuff we don’t really have any deep understanding of but we have an emotional commitment to because we buy their product. But comments that include things like _“Canon must”_ are invariably complete nonsense, so many times Canon have proven they don’t have to do what we, armchair quarterbacks, think is obvious they should do. Look back a few years at the DR wars and Canon’s actual timeframe for their sensor development.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 4, 2021)

Atlasman said:


> If I were Canon:
> 
> The industry has lost a significant chunk of revenue from their point-and-shoot cameras. Optimization should be tearing through the hallways of every camera maker. Specialization might be a good strategy in the long run, but at the moment, Canon needs to respond to the A1 and the Z9.
> 
> ...


But you’re not Canon.

You believe Canon ‘needs to respond to the A1 and the Z9’, so if those cameras are so superior as to require Canon to match them, I presume you’re already a Sony and/or Nikon user. If not, why wait?


----------



## John Wilde (Jun 4, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> What is the profit margin on RF lenses?


"Additionally, the synergy effect of having competitive camera bodies and expanding our lineup of *RF lens, which command high margins*, led to an increase in average selling prices."

- Canon financial document


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 4, 2021)

John Wilde said:


> "Additionally, the synergy effect of having competitive camera bodies and expanding our lineup of *RF lens, which command high margins*, led to an increase in average selling prices."
> 
> - Canon financial document


That was exactly my point. If you have one chip (which are in short supply everywhere (apart from Toyota) due to incompetent adopting of the Toyota Production System) and make $600 on a $2,000 lens, that lens sale is more valuable to you as a corporation than using that chip in a $6,000 body that is going to take 4 years of sales to recoup the R&D. Until Canon start losing the sales race, which they show no real signs of doing any time soon, I don't think they are going to feel "they must" do anything other than what they are doing...


----------



## john1970 (Jun 4, 2021)

I have no idea what Canon's resolution tick is, but my conjecture is that it is a pixel shift via IBIS which requires the subject be very still and camera on a tripod or maybe something to do with a quad pixel sensor. My gut instinct is that we will know all of the specifications by mid-July (i.e. before the Olympics).


----------



## chasingrealness (Jun 4, 2021)

I’m going to go out on a limb here and guess that the pixel trick will be a form of pixel binning that will enable high resolution shots during the day and lower-resolution shots but with better low light performance at night. Who’s with me?


----------



## chasingrealness (Jun 4, 2021)

I think we are all being fooled. Adorama says the price of the R3 will be only $0.01, a massive price drop from the $6,000 we were all anticipating!


----------



## canonmike (Jun 4, 2021)

john1970 said:


> I have no idea what Canon's resolution tick is, but my conjecture is that it is a pixel shift via IBIS which requires the subject be very still and camera on a tripod or maybe something to do with a quad pixel sensor. My gut instinct is that we will know all of the specifications by mid-July (i.e. before the Olympics).


Oh, John....I hope we see the official specs before mid July, for fear we may have some fellow Canon rumornites having virtual heart attacks, if they have to wait that long. Come on Canon, everybody's waiting, rather impatiently I might add and practicing their R3 full specs disclosure happy dance routine. Pls throw in a couple of new RF lens announcements, while you're at it, like the rumored RF10-24 F4L, for one.


----------



## AEWest (Jun 4, 2021)

A camera's capability for 8K recording is not 100% dependent on it's resolution. Both the Nikon Z7 II and Sony a7r4 have enough resolution for 8K recording, but neither offer it.

Therefore even if the R3 comes with 50mp sensor, Canon may have decided not to offer 8K as this camera is a specialist sports cam, and oversampled 4K is sufficient for the target market.


----------



## padam (Jun 4, 2021)

Just for comparison, here is the Canon R5 timeline:

Initial development announcement 13th February 2020
Additional details announcement 20th April 2020
Actual announcement 9th July 2020


----------



## padam (Jun 4, 2021)

AEWest said:


> A camera's capability for 8K recording is not 100% dependent on it's resolution. Both the Nikon Z7 II and Sony a7r4 have enough resolution for 8K recording, but neither offer it.
> 
> Therefore even if the R3 comes with 50mp sensor, Canon may have decided not to offer 8K as this camera is a specialist sports cam, and oversampled 4K is sufficient for the target market.


No, because the way Canon enables RAW video in their stills cameras is always with the full width of the sensor in full resolution.
So it would have Cinema 8K internal RAW, if it had that many megapixels.
But if it shoots 60p RAW (or downsampled full sensor 4k60p) video without the 1DX III AF crippling, that is already a higher-end feature (like in the C500 Mark II) and of course it would produce a fair amount of heat, up to 30p it should be more forgiving.

This is a lower megapixel camera. Probably more than 20 MP, but not over 30 MP.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 4, 2021)

Atlasman said:


> If I were Canon:
> 
> The industry has lost a significant chunk of revenue from their point-and-shoot cameras. Optimization should be tearing through the hallways of every camera maker. Specialization might be a good strategy in the long run, but at the moment, Canon needs to respond to the A1 and the Z9.
> 
> ...


There are still rumors of an R5c and an R5S.
We also expect an R1.
I never expected that both R1 and R3 would be high resolution.
Also, a long-range strategy is warranted, and not everyone will buy a more expensive camera.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 4, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Until Canon start losing the sales race, which they show no real signs of doing any time soon, I don't think they are going to feel "they must" do anything other than what they are doing...


I disagree there.
R5 and R6 are selling like hotcakes but so are M50 and the Rebel cameras.
The rumored ZV-E10 and Z30 seem like threats to the dominance of Canon, especially with so many people declaring their M system and DSLRs dead.
While these threats might not materialize, Canon should not be 100% reactive.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 4, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> The rumored ZV-E10 and Z30 seem like threats to the dominance of Canon…
> While these threats might not materialize, Canon should not be 100% reactive.


There have been many purported threats to the dominance of Canon over the past decade-plus. If Canon were only reactive, it’s unlikely they’d have maintained their market leadership.


----------



## John Wilde (Jun 4, 2021)

Atlasman said:


> Optimization should be tearing through the hallways of every camera maker.


Not to worry - Canon is doing fine.

"For the full year, reflecting the situation surrounding sales in the first quarter, we not only raised our projection for camera unit sales by 100 thousand to 2.9 million, but also raised our projection for revenue."

- Canon financial document 

As a practical matter, a lower priced R3 would sell more units than a higher priced R1.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 4, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> I disagree there.
> R5 and R6 are selling like hotcakes but so are M50 and the Rebel cameras.
> The rumored ZV-E10 and Z30 seem like threats to the dominance of Canon, especially with so many people declaring their M system and DSLRs dead.
> While these threats might not materialize, Canon should not be 100% reactive.


That comment does make much logical sense to me, you say everything Canon make, and they are still manufacturing Rebels in Thailand, is selling like hotcakes, yet follow that with things other companies might be making that aren't out yet might be threats.

One does not begat the other, but there is no reason why we should assume the decisions that got Canon into that long running 'dominant position' shouldn't be working behind the scenes to maintain that position.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 4, 2021)

Atlasman said:


> Not in this case? Go back a read his entire message and tell me it was not derogatory. Then in his subsequent message, he decided to soften his position.


I've read his messages for years. I didn't take it as derogatory. He happens to be a very helpful person. If your feelings are so tender, this is probably the wrong place to hang out.


----------



## Atlasman (Jun 4, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > I've read his messages for years. I didn't take it as derogatory. He happens to be a very helpful person. If your feelings are so tender, this is probably the wrong place to hang out.
> ...


We all have our views and I respect that—but not when I’m referred to as an “armchair quarterback.” That’s an attack.


----------



## Chig (Jun 4, 2021)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


A lot of speculation about the resolution of this camera .
It appears to be very much a specialised body for sports photographers so I think it will only be 20-24 mp for 3 reasons :
- smaller files speed up the camera as the processor can work faster
- smaller files mean a faster work flow 
- most professional sports photographers have suitable Big White lenses and they don't need to crop much and usually are working in arenas which are well lit and human subjects are quite large and don't move very fast (less than 30mph). Motorsports move very fast but in a very predictable way that's easy to track and the Pros are in ideal positions to shoot from.

I really like this camera but for hobbiests like my self who shoot birds in flight especially small fast moving and unpredictable species like swallows, kingfishers and flycatchers a crop sensor version of this camera with 30-35mp would be an ideal camera. 

I wonder how many full time professional sports shooters there are compared to amateur bird shooters ?
I suspect we out number them at least 10 to 1 , here in New Zealand I would think there are only a few dozen sports pros in the country but hundreds of amateur bird shooters (similar ratio in the rest of the world I suspect) so I think the market for a really good crop sensor camera is pretty large.

Personally I'd be prepared to pay a similar price to an R6 (in my dreams a bit lower still) for such a camera but whether Canon chooses to make one at such a price who knows ?

I don't think camera companies make much profit on these flagship bodies (which have very small production runs) but probably make good margins on lenses and making the best ones must help sales of more affordable cameras.


----------



## john1970 (Jun 4, 2021)

padam said:


> Just for comparison, here is the Canon R5 timeline:
> 
> Initial development announcement 13th February 2020
> Additional details announcement 20th April 2020
> Actual announcement 9th July 2020


Good to point that out.

For the 1Dx MK 3 the timing was a bit faster:

Initial development announcement: October 24, 2019
Actual Announcement: January 6, 2020

For the R3 the timing is unknown although I suspect Canon might make a formal announcement for the R3 at the end of July when the RF 400 mm and RF 600 mm lenses are released.


----------



## Chig (Jun 4, 2021)

canonmike said:


> I'd say your 2nd statement is a pretty logical one, since they haven't trumpeted the MP to the mountaintops, as you stated. I'm afraid the bird and nature photographers might be a little disappointed with such a low MP count, if that is indeed the case.


Yep an R7 crop sensor version of this with 30-35mp would be my dream camera


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jun 4, 2021)

Emyr Evans said:


> Canon have stated ONE Digic X - exact same as R5.


Not exactly the same as the R5. Canon stated that the digic X is a chip that is tweaked to suit each camera it is put in. It is not the same chip in each camera


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jun 4, 2021)

Cyborx said:


> WHAT IS CANON DOING?? Why releasing a camera that cannot meet the specs of the R5 that is on the market for a year already? Basically what they have built is an R6 with a battery grip and some fancy knobs. I don’t get it. Really... Canon, you’ve lost me here....


Because there is soooo much more to an image than its megapickles


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 4, 2021)

Aussie shooter said:


> Because there is soooo much more to an image than its megapickles


And in this context there is so much more to a camera than megapixels.


----------



## Chig (Jun 4, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> And in this context there is so much more to a camera than megapixels.


I like MegaPickles - yum !


----------



## Chig (Jun 4, 2021)

chasingrealness said:


> I think we are all being fooled. Adorama says the price of the R3 will be only $0.01, a massive price drop from the $6,000 we were all anticipating!


I'll buy two of them then and my wife won't get cross either !


----------



## canonmike (Jun 5, 2021)

Chig said:


> Yep an R7 crop sensor version of this with 30-35mp would be my dream camera


I hope it happens for you Chig. I know a lot of other Canon shooters would like to see that happen as well......


----------



## canonmike (Jun 5, 2021)

Kiton said:


> If the Sony A1 can do 50, the R3 can be at least very close. 40 (or anything over) is fine. I crop the shit out of some NHL frames on the R5, for that alone I do not want to go back to my 20mp 1d X mk 2 bodies.


Boy, would I like to see you get your wish of 40MP or more, Kiton.......


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 5, 2021)

Kiton said:


> If the Sony A1 can do 50, the R3 can be at least very close. 40 (or anything over) is fine. I crop the shit out of some NHL frames on the R5, for that alone I do not want to go back to my 20mp 1d X mk 2 bodies.


39 MP is all that is required for UHD 8K.
Since Canon is only claiming downsampled 4K and RAW I assume it will be significantly less than that.
I do not see the point in going 35 MP instead of 39.
So somewhere between 20 and 30 makes sense and I am guessing it will be closer to 30.


----------



## canonmike (Jun 5, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> 39 MP is all that is required for UHD 8K.
> Since Canon is only claiming downsampled 4K and RAW I assume it will be significantly less than that.
> I do not see the point in going 35 MP instead of 39.
> So somewhere between 20 and 30 makes sense and I am guessing it will be closer to 30.


Perhaps, 40 is unrealistic but it's ok for him to wish and dream. Personally, I'll be very happy with 30MP.....


----------



## rick1 (Jun 5, 2021)

I had planned to ditch the last of my sony gear for canon once the R3 was released(right now I am part sony(a9ii), and part canon - (R5)). If this camera is less than 36mp, there's no point in upgrading, and especially paying $6000 to upgrade to a camera that is less of a camera than the R5. Who really needs 30fps. The R5's speed is plenty. If the R3 doesn't come near the R5's resolution, canon really dropped the ball. I will be extremely disappointed.


----------



## padam (Jun 5, 2021)

rick1 said:


> I had planned to ditch the last of my sony gear for canon once the R3 was released(right now I am part sony(a9ii), and part canon - (R5)). If this camera is less than 36mp, there's no point in upgrading, and especially paying $6000 to upgrade to a camera that is less of a camera than the R5. Who really needs 30fps. The R5's speed is plenty. If the R3 doesn't come near the R5's resolution, canon really dropped the ball. I will be extremely disappointed.


Literally no one cares. Honestly, the megapixel count is the reason to have one camera over another and you are using an A9II with 24 megapixels? There are far, far bigger differences regarding handling, lenses, etc. and the R5 is a perfectly fine option until there is something better with more megapixels.
For every person complaining about low megapixels, there is another who finds the low-light, AF. video benefits useful and simply does not need more.

The overwhelming majority of the press photos right now are still taken on 1DX Mark II bodies. They simply don't replace them as they just keep working forever. But it's not just for stills, that camera with its 4k60p high bitrate recording (despite the codec) with AF was really ahead of its time (it stills blows away an A9II for video, for instance).
This camera looks like a perfectly fine replacement, slightly smaller body, it has all the video annoyances fixed, should be a big step up in stills, too.


----------



## rick1 (Jun 5, 2021)

padam said:


> Literally no one cares. Honestly, the megapixel count is the reason to have one camera over another and you are using an A9II with 24 megapixels? There are far, far bigger differences regarding handling, lenses, etc. and the R5 is a perfectly fine option until there is something better with more megapixels.
> For every person complaining about low megapixels, there is another who finds the low-light, AF. video benefits useful and simply does not need more.
> 
> The overwhelming majority of the press photos right now are still taken on 1DX Mark II bodies. They simply don't replace them as they just keep working forever. But it's not just for stills, that camera with its 4k60p high bitrate recording (despite the codec) with AF was really ahead of its time (it stills blows away an A9II for video, for instance).
> This camera looks like a perfectly fine replacement, slightly smaller body, it has all the video annoyances fixed, should be a big step up in stills, too.


a "perfectly fine replacement" is right. Canon blew my mind with the R5. I guess I just had greater expectations of them with the R3. I expected it to directly compete with the A1. If this comes in at less than 36ish megapixels, it definitely is a "perfectly fine replacement" but far from anything exceptional, and once again sony will maintain their mirrorless crown with the A1. I had thought canon was going to overtake sony.


----------



## dak3 (Jun 5, 2021)

I'll refrain from purchasing any new gear until Canon releases their SPAD sensor in a "1" series body with at least 30 megapixels and a third generation lens mount. By then RF will be discontinued, just like the EF mount. Oh, and I also expect Canon to add 20K video at 4:2:0 internal 8-bit compressed video (in memory of their notorious history with low bit rates). I should be in my 50s by then! Until that time, I'll continue developing photo plates in my darkroom, exposing shots using flash powder, and measuring DOF with a tape measure.


----------



## padam (Jun 5, 2021)

rick1 said:


> a "perfectly fine replacement" is right. Canon blew my mind with the R5. I guess I just had greater expectations of them with the R3. I expected it to directly compete with the A1. If this comes in at less than 36ish megapixels, it definitely is a "perfectly fine replacement" but far from anything exceptional, and once again sony will maintain their mirrorless crown with the A1. I had thought canon was going to overtake sony.


The A1 has several issues regarding video (but even in photo, they've decided to equip it with a crap LCD screen that does not flip, weaker IBIS, etc.).
If the R3 has all the features that I am hoping, it is a much better photo/video camera for less money.

The R1 may have a more advanced sensor with less limitations compared to the A1, it comes later, that's just mean it will be a newer, better camera.
But it may cost 8000$, who knows.
Then comes the A1 II for even more money than the A1. It never ends, basically.
But it is really not the megapixel count in the R3 that will make or fail Canon's plans to overtake Sony (models like the R6 and R5 are far more important).

Maybe some people think Canon is loosing the plot. Except that the opposite is true.


----------



## rick1 (Jun 5, 2021)

padam said:


> The A1 has several issues regarding video (but even in photo, they've decided to equip it with a crap LCD screen that does not flip, weaker IBIS, etc.).
> If the R3 has all the features that I am hoping, it is a much better photo/video camera for less money.
> 
> The R1 may have a more advanced sensor with less limitations compared to the A1, it comes later, that's just mean it will be a newer, better camera.
> ...


If the sony A1 costs $6500 and does 30fps and 50mp, it would be crazy to buy the R3 at $6000 if it has less than 36mp. If canon is going to charge almost as much as the A1 it needs to directly compete with it. Anything less is subpar. The LCD screen difference is an insignificant difference, the IBIS in the R5 is plenty.


----------



## john1970 (Jun 5, 2021)

For me the R5 basically matches the MP count on the A1 so maybe having a R3 with fewer MP (~30) makes some sense as a second camera. More of a competitor when using MP as a metric with A9 series than A1. Personally, if Canon stay with lower MP I want to see this sensor have some serious low noise at high ISO which should be possible given that it is a BSI sensor.


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Jun 5, 2021)

If the camera has oversampled 4K, I hope it also has cropped 4K as an option in case we want a higher reach or even cropped HD which would come handy for a video of a far away animal that only uses a small part of the frame anyway. Oversampling is a waste of pixels in some situations.


----------



## canonmike (Jun 5, 2021)

As we sit here reading commentary and different viewpoints on the upcoming R3 release and finally seem to be breaking out of the Covid pandemic, I want to acknowledge the fact that many of my fellow Canon Rumor members and a few personal friends that use their camera gear professionally, have struggled to make a living over the last year. Weddings, commercial events, concerts, sports and other gigs have been difficult for them to come by and many were forced to find employment outside of their chosen photographic professions until and if things get back to normal for them. As a retired person that no longer needs to seek income using my camera gear, I take my hat off and salute all of you, as you struggled to maintain your chosen photographic livelihood, while you endeavored to maintain your enthusiasm for your chosen profession. This past Memorial Day weekend saw record numbers of people breaking out of the pandemic and traveling once again. New Covid infections are drastically down, according to news reports and many restaurants, theatres and other retail establishments that have been closed because of social distancing rules are reopening. I so hope this means that those of you needing events to photograph to renew your income are finding them, once again. Thank you to all of you for sharing your commentary, your challenges, your passion and your photos and videos on Canon Rumors, You Tube and other social media sites. I wish all of you the best of luck and so look forward to hearing about some of your break out stories and inspiring commentary, wherever you choose to share it.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 5, 2021)

padam said:


> This camera looks like a perfectly fine replacement, slightly smaller body, it has all the video annoyances fixed, should be a big step up in stills, too.


There is no way the camera would be able to reliably shoot 30 FPS still photos if it overheats shooting video at 30 FPS.
Downsample 4K 60 FPS might be a problem but Canon could probably get away with not downsampling to limit the data rate and I am sure there will also be a crop mode.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 5, 2021)

Skyscraperfan said:


> Oversampling is a waste of pixels in some situations.


The amount of pixels is the same.
4K is 4K.
It is the amount of data that varies.
People seem to be confused by this but the 4K is only the size of the canvas.
The amount of data varies based on the scene being captured, the mode of capture, and the level and methods of compression.


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Jun 5, 2021)

Of course there can be different methods of compression, but would there be a difference between oversampled 4K and cropped 4K, if you use the same compression? Of course oversampled 4K uses the full sensor and therefore should look cleaner.


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 5, 2021)

rick1 said:


> If the sony A1 costs $6500 and does 30fps and 50mp, it would be crazy to buy the R3 at $6000 if it has less than 36mp. *If canon is going to charge almost as much as the A1 it needs to directly compete with it. * Anything less is subpar. The LCD screen difference is an insignificant difference, the IBIS in the R5 is plenty.



Again, you are assuming that MP is the only thing that matters. People have been talking for nigh on 10 years that how Sony has the technological advantage on Canon with MP and dynamic range and still Sony has barely more market share than when they ditched DSLR and went to mirrorless. 
People still talk as though Cano's aim is to steal customers from Sony - it isn't. It is to maintain their position as global leader in camera sales: whether it is DSLR, MILCs or compacts. All they need to do is stay within touching distance in the technology stakes to maintain that position: yes, they took their time to enter the FF MILC market but (unlike Sony) they had to be sure they did it right first time. Since then the pace of Canon development has been highly impressive as witnessed by bring the first 8K video and the first FF bird-eye AF. Sony has historically advanced by throwing new technology with less efficient ergonomics - Canon know how highly professionals value ergonomics so technology could almost take a back seat. Sony is improving its ergonomics (and after sales care), Canon is improving its technology. The two companies are moving ever closer but that does not mean Canon need to match everything Sony does.


----------



## Toglife_Anthony (Jun 5, 2021)

Mikehit said:


> Again, you are assuming that MP is the only thing that matters. People have been talking for nigh on 10 years that how Sony has the technological advantage on Canon with MP and dynamic range and still Sony has barely more market share than when they ditched DSLR and went to mirrorless.
> People still talk as though Cano's aim is to steal customers from Sony - it isn't. It is to maintain their position as global leader in camera sales: whether it is DSLR, MILCs or compacts. All they need to do is stay within touching distance in the technology stakes to maintain that position: yes, they took their time to enter the FF MILC market but (unlike Sony) they had to be sure they did it right first time. Since then the pace of Canon development has been highly impressive as witnessed by bring the first 8K video and the first FF bird-eye AF. Sony has historically advanced by throwing new technology with less efficient ergonomics - Canon know how highly professionals value ergonomics so technology could almost take a back seat. Sony is improving its ergonomics (and after sales care), Canon is improving its technology. The two companies are moving ever closer but that does not mean Canon need to match everything Sony does.



But a majority of Canon's market dominance is in the entry level and APS-C sectors. In some markets Canon trails behind Sony in FF sales and in other markets they hold just a slight lead. With the advancement of cell phone cameras and the market shift in consumers not seeing a need or benefit in entry level cameras, Canon's overall market lead will continue to decline if they focus less on FF (especially mirrorless) and more on entry level to "maintain their position." Much of Canon's market dominance has come from brand loyalty and notoriety; both of those will continue to dwindle if the competition continues to put out products that are PERCEIVED to be better and at a lower price point. There will always be a portion of the market that will buy the 1DX's and R1's of the world no matter the specs or features, but that portion won't help Canon maintain their position. Prior to Sony and other brands putting pressure on Canon, they would have released the R6 with a single card slot and less features, because that's historically the type of moves they would make. We saw with the R5 and R6 that Canon is realizing they can't just give the market what they deem is enough and expect to maintain their market share. Megapixels aren't everything but there's enough serious competition now that Canon has to think a bit differently than they have in years past, and I personally think they're already doing so.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 5, 2021)

Toglife_Anthony said:


> But a majority of Canon's market dominance is in the entry level and APS-C sectors. In some markets Canon trails behind Sony in FF sales and in other markets they hold just a slight lead. With the advancement of cell phone cameras and the market shift in consumers not seeing a need or benefit in entry level cameras, Canon's overall market lead will continue to decline if they focus less on FF (especially mirrorless) and more on entry level to "maintain their position." Much of Canon's market dominance has come from brand loyalty and notoriety; both of those will continue to dwindle if the competition continues to put out products that are PERCEIVED to be better and at a lower price point. There will always be a portion of the market that will buy the 1DX's and R1's of the world no matter the specs or features, but that portion won't help Canon maintain their position. Prior to Sony and other brands putting pressure on Canon, they would have released the R6 with a single card slot and less features, because that's historically the type of moves they would make. We saw with the R5 and R6 that Canon is realizing they can't just give the market what they deem is enough and expect to maintain their market share. Megapixels aren't everything but there's enough serious competition now that Canon has to think a bit differently than they have in years past, and I personally think they're already doing so.


Entry level and brand loyalty are mutually exclusive yet you say Canon only maintains its position because of both of them!


----------



## Toglife_Anthony (Jun 5, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Entry level and brand loyalty are mutually exclusive yet you say Canon only maintains its position because of both of them!


First off, where in my post did I use the word "only"?! Second off, the two are not mutually exclusive. Canon can sell a billion entry-level cameras that help them lead in market share and none of those folks could buy another Canon camera (which would be brand loyalty). A combination of people choosing Canon for their first camera and continuing to choose Canon cameras for their subsequent purchases has helped Canon maintain their position. Not sure where your disconnect is. Lastly, my post was my opinion, couldn't care less if you disagree. ;-)


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 5, 2021)

SwissFrank said:


> I just cannot see how this could possibly be a 20MP sensor. Does anyone have any actual reason why it wouldn't simply use the R5 sensor? What could another sensor do better than the R5 by being lower MP? Honest question, not rhetorical or loaded.


Er, it's Canon's first FF stacked back illuminated sensor....

Very different technology from the R5.


----------



## John Wilde (Jun 5, 2021)

SwissFrank said:


> What could another sensor do better than the R5 by being lower MP?


Faster read-out speed. Probably better low-light performance and dynamic range.


----------



## AEWest (Jun 6, 2021)

John Wilde said:


> Faster read-out speed. Probably better low-light performance and dynamic range.


Also greatly reduced rolling shutter.


----------



## Jethro (Jun 6, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Er, it's Canon's first FF stacked back illuminated sensor....
> 
> Very different technology from the R5.


And for mere (non-pro) mortals, this new technology is the real interest, because it will quickly find its way into the lower priced / enthusiast range of FF mirrorless bodies.


----------



## scottkinfw (Jun 6, 2021)

sanj said:


> What is 'Speedlight shooting with electronic shutter'?


Unless I'm setting up my R5 wrong, the flash does not fire when in electronic shutter mode, only mechanical.


----------



## WOODS (Jun 6, 2021)

Any ideas as to the 4 holes on the vertical grip?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 6, 2021)

WOODS said:


> Any ideas as to the 4 holes on the vertical grip?


1-series cameras have those four holes, it’s a mic on the back to record a voice memo associated with an image.


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Jun 6, 2021)

I wonder why Canon can't just give us two or three sensor options? Maybe 20, 30 and 60 megapixels. Then everybody would be pleased. Would threy really have to change a lot of the internals ofd a camera, if the megapixel count changes? If the camera can process 60 megapixel images, it should also be able to handle 20 megapixel images. At the moment I am working on hundredsof old photos I took with an 8.2 megapixel APS-H camera and I love how crisp they look on a pixel level. With a high megapixel count diffraction sets in much sooner. Of course you can always downsample those photos, but then you would still have to handle those large RAW files.


----------



## sanj (Jun 6, 2021)

SwissFrank said:


> OK, but do you need faster readout than the R5? What far?
> 
> And my understanding is that the R5 is already in the top 8 or so sensors for DR (and most of the sensors beating it are quite exotic). Granted more DR is always good but doesn't cutting pixel count by half only give you one more stop of DR? How does it really differ to do that with fewer/bigger pixels compared to downsampling a higher pixel-count, which I think in theory could also give you that one more stop of DR?
> 
> Low-light, same questions: given high-ISO performance and IS, we can already hand-hold zooms in candlelight. Is another stop of low-light performance going to win more sales than a low MP drives away?


Things must improve every new camera even if slight. Each step forward!


----------



## sanj (Jun 6, 2021)

scottkinfw said:


> Unless I'm setting up my R5 wrong, the flash does not fire when in electronic shutter mode, only mechanical.


Yes, thanks.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 6, 2021)

Skyscraperfan said:


> I wonder why Canon can't just give us two or three sensor options? Maybe 20, 30 and 60 megapixels. Then everybody would be pleased. Would threy really have to change a lot of the internals ofd a camera, if the megapixel count changes? If the camera can process 60 megapixel images, it should also be able to handle 20 megapixel images. At the moment I am working on hundredsof old photos I took with an 8.2 megapixel APS-H camera and I love how crisp they look on a pixel level. *With a high megapixel count diffraction sets in much sooner. *Of course you can always downsample those photos, but then you would still have to handle those large RAW files.


No it doesn’t. Diffraction is a function of aperture and magnification only, not mp numbers. If you look at a high mp image at a higher magnification (which it seems most people do) then it appears that diffraction is more apparent, but that is simply because you are looking at it bigger.


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Jun 6, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> No it doesn’t. Diffraction is a function of aperture and magnification only, not mp numbers. If you look at a high mp image at a higher magnification (which it seems most people do) then it appears that diffraction is more apparent, but that is simply because you are looking at it bigger.


I would not call it a "higher magnification", if I look at both images at 100%. Images have to look well on a pixel level. Otherwise the resolution does not mean anything and I could just upsample a 20 megapixel photo to get 60 megapixels. A 60 magapixel image should also be 60 megapixel sharp. That effects a lot of parameters. Noise for example. And also the maximum allowed camera shake. Depth of field will also be lower on a pixel level, if you increase the resolution. So in low light you need a lower ISO and a higher f stop at the same time, which will result in a much longer exposure. And at the same time you need less camera shake. That means you need a good IS just to compensate for the higher resolution. But at the same time that higher f stop will lead to more diffraction which is even more visible on a pixel level because of the higher resolution. So no matter what you try, your image will look worse on a pixel level in most situations. If diffraction on a pixel level is already visible at f/5.6, that is a big downside for me, as I shoot mostly in f/8 and f/11 to reach a high depth of field. I do not like bokeh at all.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 6, 2021)

Skyscraperfan said:


> *I would not call it a "higher magnification", if I look at both images at 100%*. Images have to look well on a pixel level. Otherwise the resolution does not mean anything and I could just upsample a 20 megapixel photo to get 60 megapixels. A 60 magapixel image should also be 60 megapixel sharp. That effects a lot of parameters. Noise for example. And also the maximum allowed camera shake. Depth of field will also be lower on a pixel level, if you increase the resolution. So in low light you need a lower ISO and a higher f stop at the same time, which will result in a much longer exposure. And at the same time you need less camera shake. That means you need a good IS just to compensate for the higher resolution. But at the same time that higher f stop will lead to more diffraction which is even more visible on a pixel level because of the higher resolution. So no matter what you try, your image will look worse on a pixel level in most situations. If diffraction on a pixel level is already visible at f/5.6, that is a big downside for me, as I shoot mostly in f/8 and f/11 to reach a high depth of field. I do not like bokeh at all.


Well you might not, but you'd be 100% wrong. What else can I say in reply to a completely incorrect statement?

Images do not have to look good at a pixel level unless you are displaying them at a pixel level, a very few people do, the vast majority do not.

As for the rest of your comment, it is just ridiculous nonsense repeated parrot fashion from reviewers and people who don't know better and who aren't interested in actual images just page clicks and 'likes'.


----------



## Sporgon (Jun 6, 2021)

Skyscraperfan said:


> If diffraction on a pixel level is already visible at f/5.6, that is a big downside for me, as I shoot mostly in f/8 and f/11 to reach a high depth of field. I


The theoretical 'diffraction limit' is nothing for a practical photographer to be concerned about. 

I believe that f/5.6 is theoretical aperture at which my 50mp 5DS begins to suffer from diffraction. Well I can tell that that even when you are resolution limited, in other words trying to record very fine small detail that is far way from the camera (unlike portraits for instance) the 5DS isn't suffering at f/8 and not anything to be concerned about at f/11. However at f/16 the 50mp camera loses it's advantage over a lower resolution sensor unless you are going to print the 50mp at it's maximum (or even larger) output size. If your output is going to be more 20 mp native size then it's no better than a 20 mp camera at f/16. 

In 35mm format f/16 is a pretty extreme aperture, but I'm guessing that a 100 mp FF chip is going to exhibit around the same softening at f/11 as the 50mp one does at f/16. Now at f/11 you getting into more practical apertures, and for anyone who is into landscape photography I think this will be a disappointment for them. IMO 100mp is too much for a 35mm format sensor. 

Another point to remember is that smaller pixels will never be as well defined as larger ones, but if you reduce the larger mp sensor down to the same size as the smaller one the difference between the two diminishes rapidly. Similar with noise; people say the 5DS doesn't have good high ISO performance. I got quite interested in a Sony A7SII for my low light work - until I found that up to my usual high ISO working level - ISO 6400, when I reduced the 5DS fils down to 12 mp they weren't much worse that the A7SII ! (Which is a 12 mp camera).


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Jun 6, 2021)

I hardly ever print a photo. If a photo looks noisy or blur on a pixel level, the resolution obviously is too high. Canon always had problems with noise. If you try to recover shadows even from a 1D X at ISO 100, it still looks noisy. So anything that increases noise on a pixel level even more, is bad news. So I would even pay more money for a lower resolution. The main advantage of a full frame sensor for me are the large pixels. If you increase the resolution at the same time, the advantage of the larger pixels is gone. I hate it if Canon makes a smaller resolution camera cheaper than the higher resolution camera. I do not want a cheap camera. Please make the 20 megapixel version the most expensive! $4000 for 60 megapixels and $5000 for 20 megapixels would be fair.


----------



## yeahright (Jun 6, 2021)

Skyscraperfan said:


> I hardly ever print a photo. If a photo looks noisy or blur on a pixel level, the resolution obviously is too high. Canon always had problems with noise. If you try to recover shadows even from a 1D X at ISO 100, it still looks noisy. So anything that increases noise on a pixel level even more, is bad news. So I would even pay more money for a lower resolution. The main advantage of a full frame sensor for me are the large pixels. If you increase the resolution at the same time, the advantage of the larger pixels is gone. I hate it if Canon makes a smaller resolution camera cheaper than the higher resolution camera. I do not want a cheap camera. Please make the 20 megapixel version the most expensive! $4000 for 60 megapixels and $5000 for 20 megapixels would be fair.


then why don't you just downsample your high-MP images for better noise performance, more headroom w.r.t. DLA and better looks on pixel-level if that's what you're after?


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Jun 6, 2021)

rick1 said:


> I had planned to ditch the last of my sony gear for canon once the R3 was released(right now I am part sony(a9ii), and part canon - (R5)). If this camera is less than 36mp, there's no point in upgrading, and especially paying $6000 to upgrade to a camera that is less of a camera than the R5. Who really needs 30fps. The R5's speed is plenty. If the R3 doesn't come near the R5's resolution, canon really dropped the ball. I will be extremely disappointed.


But Canon aren't saying that the R3 is an improved replacement for the R5 - surely this is more about certain models being used designed or specified for specific use types? 

I can't believe their initial comments alongside the initial releases which say "Our new high-performance, high-speed mirrorless camera marks a new era for sports, wildlife and news photographers" (direct quote from Canon Europe (UK)) is an accident - to me it seems clear they are aiming the model at certain groups of users. 

Isn't it possible, or allowable, that the R3 could be appropriate for some purposes while the R5, even though less expensive, is more appropriate for other uses?

I think we sometimes get too hung up that the Canon price and numbering system must somehow mean that each camera further up the ladder must be better than the one before in every use or metric.

If the R5 is 'better' for your purposes than the (speculated specification) R3 - I'd say that was good news and you should be happy that you get what you need and get to save $2k as well.


----------



## AEWest (Jun 7, 2021)

StoicalEtcher said:


> But Canon aren't saying that the R3 is an improved replacement for the R5 - surely this is more about certain models being used designed or specified for specific use types?
> 
> I can't believe their initial comments alongside the initial releases which say "Our new high-performance, high-speed mirrorless camera marks a new era for sports, wildlife and news photographers" (direct quote from Canon Europe (UK)) is an accident - to me it seems clear they are aiming the model at certain groups of users.
> 
> ...


Many are judging the R3 by MP count alone. Yet the 1DX3 only has 20mp for $6500, and the 5D4 has 30 mp for $3,500 and they didn't flinch at the price difference. 

The R3 will definitely be a step up from the R5 in terms of AF, frame rate, build, connectivity, sensor, grip etc, justifying a higher price even if it has a lower MP count.


----------



## rick1 (Jun 7, 2021)

StoicalEtcher said:


> But Canon aren't saying that the R3 is an improved replacement for the R5 - surely this is more about certain models being used designed or specified for specific use types?
> 
> I can't believe their initial comments alongside the initial releases which say "Our new high-performance, high-speed mirrorless camera marks a new era for sports, wildlife and news photographers" (direct quote from Canon Europe (UK)) is an accident - to me it seems clear they are aiming the model at certain groups of users.
> 
> ...


Canon has never been the one to "target" specific users. Sony does that. I HATE that. Canon makes cameras that appeal to all users. For example, the 1Dx cameras appealed to wedding photographers AND sports photographers, etc. I've always loved that about canon. With cameras like the R5 available, there is no way a sub-36ish mp camera will appeal to wedding photographers, unless it has some insane low light abilities or something. If they do target this specific genre of photographer, they will be breaking from what they've always done. It will be extremely disappointing and they will have lost a permeant canon mirrorless convert.


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Jun 7, 2021)

rick1 said:


> Canon has never been the one to "target" specific users. Sony does that. I HATE that. Canon makes cameras that appeal to all users. For example, the 1Dx cameras appealed to wedding photographers AND sports photographers, etc. I've always loved that about canon. With cameras like the R5 available, there is no way a sub-36ish mp camera will appeal to wedding photographers, unless it has some insane low light abilities or something. If they do target this specific genre of photographer, they will be breaking from what they've always done. It will be extremely disappointing and they will have lost a permeant canon mirrorless convert.


Sorry, that doesn’t make any sense to me. Every company has a target user in mind when they develop a product. Otherwise they would just make 1 product in total right? Segmentation within a product lineup is of course something that Canon employs. But please correct me if I have mis understood what you are getting at?


----------



## Joules (Jun 7, 2021)

Skyscraperfan said:


> Canon always had problems with noise. If you try to recover shadows even from a 1D X at ISO 100, it still looks noisy. So anything that increases noise on a pixel level even more, is bad news.


There are no issues with noise in modern Canon sensors though. 90D, M6 II, 1DX III, R6 and R5 all use sensors where you can recover shadows to your hearts content.


Skyscraperfan said:


> The main advantage of a full frame sensor for me are the large pixels. If you increase the resolution at the same time, the advantage of the larger pixels is gone.


You are not giving up anything in terms of low light performance due to a higher resolution. The R5 isn't lacking compared to the 1DX III / R6 or Sony:





__





Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review


Expert news, reviews and videos of the latest digital cameras, lenses, accessories, and phones. Get answers to your questions in our photography forums.




www.dpreview.com





And this is especially true with the R3, which will feature backside illumination.


Skyscraperfan said:


> I do not want a cheap camera.


If you have an issue spending too little on camera gear, you can always buy your gear twice and donate the additional one.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Jun 7, 2021)

SwissFrank said:


> Basically, any architecture/real estate photographer needs this feature to expose a room and also capture the view out the window, so it's not actually that esoteric.


I know exactly what you mean, but I have seen a lot of beautiful artistic images working even with the shortcomings of film in such settings. Sometimes it is much more rewarding if you are restricted in your technical options, in particular in photography. Caution: this reply is written by the artist amongst my multiple personalities, not the geek (who was told to shut up)


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 7, 2021)

SwissFrank said:


> Basically, any architecture/real estate photographer needs this feature to expose a room and also capture the view out the window, so it's not actually that esoteric.


I think 'needs' is incorrect. Architecture/real estate photographers capture such images today, and that feature doesn't yet exist.


----------



## emailfortom (Jun 7, 2021)

WOODS said:


> Any ideas as to the 4 holes on the vertical grip?
> 
> View attachment 198117


Slow release "Air Freshener"? I have the same four openings on my 1Dx mkll . Assume they are for microphone, but honestly don't know.


----------



## yeahright (Jun 7, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> I think 'needs' is incorrect. Architecture/real estate photographers capture such images today, and that feature doesn't yet exist.


I think 'needs' equates to 'could use ... in certain situations' in this context.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 7, 2021)

SwissFrank said:


> Fair enough, it might not be quite a need, but it should be able to speed up work quite a bit compared to the alternatives.


I think that depends on the implementation. Actually taking the multiple exposures really doesn't take long, with current cameras' ability to set up exposure bracketing, it's really just a press-and-hold of the shutter button. If you're envisioning an in-camera combination of the resulting multiple exposures, then that would save time to the extent that the camera does a good job at that combination...somehow, I doubt in-camera will come anywhere close to proper exposure blending or luminosity masking (certainly, current 'in-camera' HDR features are not that great), but maybe it will be 'good enough'. If it's not good enough, then honestly the feature will not make a meaningful difference for things like architecture/real estate.

Where it might make a meaningful difference is with moving subjects, e.g. a bird against a bright sky, where you may want cloud detail and detail on the underside of the bird, an ultrafast pair of exposures with a few stops difference could make shots possible that aren't, with current technology.


----------



## Sporgon (Jun 7, 2021)

Toglife_Anthony said:


> Canon can sell a billion entry-level cameras that help them lead in market share and none of those folks could buy another Canon camera (which would be brand loyalty).


Why, if someone has a Canon camera and they buy another one, is this necessarily 'brand loyalty' ? I use Canon as my working cameras and I wanted a (jacket) pocketable APS-c compact. I have no brand loyalty at all, and I looked at the Ricoh GRIII and Fujica X100V, but the best one for me was the Canon G1XIII. Brand loyalty had nothing to do with it, it's a case of Canon coming up with the best camera.


----------



## Sporgon (Jun 7, 2021)

rick1 said:


> With cameras like the R5 available, there is no way a sub-36ish mp camera will appeal to wedding photographers, unless it has some insane low light abilities or something.


Why wouldn't a wedding photographer, who may shoot six to eight hundred images in a session, be interested in a camera that is lower than 36 mp ?


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 7, 2021)

Sporgon said:


> Why wouldn't a wedding photographer, who may shoot six to eight hundred images in a session, be interested in a camera that is lower than 36 mp ?


Indeed. I have shot a decent numbers of weddings and never with a >20mp camera and never once have I been asked for more.

What having more mp does is allow for other inadequacies, particularly focal length, but certainly is not a necessity.


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Jun 7, 2021)

rick1 said:


> Canon has never been the one to "target" specific users. Sony does that. I HATE that. Canon makes cameras that appeal to all users. For example, the 1Dx cameras appealed to wedding photographers AND sports photographers, etc. I've always loved that about canon. *With cameras like the R5 available, there is no way a sub-36ish mp camera will appeal to wedding photographers, unless it has some insane low light abilities or something. If they do target this specific genre of photographer, they will be breaking from what they've always done.* It will be extremely disappointing and they will have lost a permeant canon mirrorless convert.


I've highlighted part of your response - because that is effectively what I am suggesting: I don't think Canon would be saying the R3 is the camera for wedding photographers, given the way they are setting it up in their press releases. 

Now, that doesn't mean it wouldn't perhaps be a great camera for all sorts of uses - not just sport/wildlife/news PJs - and even perhaps for those wedding 'togs that prefer lower mp over higher too. But if the R5 does what some need, then Canon doesn't have to say the R3 is a replacement for it, rather a different tool for those with different needs/desires.

Cheers.


----------



## Toglife_Anthony (Jun 7, 2021)

Sporgon said:


> Why, if someone has a Canon camera and they buy another one, is this necessarily 'brand loyalty' ? I use Canon as my working cameras and I wanted a (jacket) pocketable APS-c compact. I have no brand loyalty at all, and I looked at the Ricoh GRIII and Fujica X100V, but the best one for me was the Canon G1XIII. Brand loyalty had nothing to do with it, it's a case of Canon coming up with the best camera.


You dug too deep. Obviously some people buy cameras on a case-by-case basis and will go with whatever brand. My comment was in general, and generally once people buy into a brand, they'll stick with that brand. This goes beyond cameras.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 8, 2021)

Mahk43 said:


> The EVF seems very very protruding compared to the 1DXmkIII.
> I'm not a pro nor user of such a body, but could be an issue to store it intoa bag no?



How many pros using this type of body have you ever seen storing such a camera in a bag? If traveling via air they use hard cases. Otherwise, the ones I know tend to carry them on their person or throw them, unbagged, on the passenger seat or in the trunks of their cars.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 8, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Long form video is very popular. Set the camera for an interview or wildlife scene etc and let it run, then edit out the good bits. Indeed in interviews getting the camera and gear handling out of the equation is very important, nothing breaks the flow of things quite like somebody saying cut I have to reset the camera!



On the other hand, when shooting such long form video, where focus is set and remains unchanged, far less capable cameras can do just as well of a job.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 8, 2021)

RMac said:


> *Most* of the things I've needed to record over the pandemic (which got me into videography) have been longer than 30 minutes.
> Interviews
> Weddings (like a documentary recording)
> Church Services/Sermon recordings
> ...



And C300 bodies, or even older and less capable dedicated video cameras, work well in those situations where high performance AF and other advanced features are not required.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 8, 2021)

sfericean said:


> Anyone notice there is no wireless file transfer port? Makes you wonder if this new hot shoe will have the WFT antenna up on top as one of the Canon branded accessories.
> 
> View attachment 198034



Or the WFT module will attach to the new hot shoe with integrated data an power connections?


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 8, 2021)

tron said:


> I would really love that! In that case it could also be 45 to 50Mp. A R3 that is a superset of R5 (don't mind the video) would interest me a lot!



DiG!C X isn't a single chip like previous iterations, it's an architecture. So increased data throughput wouldn't be described as "Dual DiG!C X".


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 8, 2021)

frjmacias said:


> The record limit being removed is not for scenes would be my guess. A lot of professionals do long format recording for interviews, shows, and corporate events. An unlimited record limit would prove invaluable for those professionals. That said, these professionals are probably doing external recording to a monitor like the Ninja V+ anyways.



Or they're using their older, cheaper, and less capable cameras for the stationary shots and using the higher end cameras with greater capabilities for the shots that actually need that capability.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 8, 2021)

usern4cr said:


> If they do come out with a global shutter in a R... body, I'm guessing that they *will* put a ND filter in it to protect the sensor when the lens is removed (as well as having the ND function).



It has a mechanical shutter. When closed, a mechanical shutter completely covers the sensor.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 8, 2021)

H. Jones said:


> Honestly a good bet, and would even make sense to help boost the value of the R1 if it does end up being in the $7500 range, which nowadays is significantly more expensive than the C200 or C70, both of which have ND filters. The ND filters on the cinema cameras serve the same function, and due to the different sensor tech needed for global shutter, I doubt a global shutter sensor would even function with a mechanical shutter.



Why would a global sensor not function with a mechanical shutter? When mechanical shutters are used, readout isn't started until after the mechanical shutter is closed.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 8, 2021)

canonmike said:


> Since Canon hasn't dangled any R3 MP carrots, my guess is much lower MP's than what most people had anticipated for this camera. Looks like the envisioned higher MP body is a ways off, yet. This may very well validate some of the opinions out there that the R3 was actually intended to be the R1 but after Sony's A1 release, Canon decided to rethink its high end offerings and release dates. Still, the R3 looks to be a body that will be well received by sports and action photographers. Bird photographers may just have to wait awhile longer for some other Canon surprise high MP or APSC offering. Is there a soon to be R7 just around the corner?? After all, no one expected this R3 body when Canon made the sudden and surprising announcement. Maybe Private by Design is right and we shouldn't get so hung up on MP. However, since the pixel peepers may now be let down a bit, it may behoove Canon to put it all out there, play their cards and show us their R3 hand. No bluff, no tease, just show us what you've got. Lay their cards on the table for everyone to see. Then, being able to make an informed decision, we'll either buy it or not.



They'll certainly announce the full specs before you're able to buy it.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 8, 2021)

navastronia said:


> I know the R3 isn't supposed to be a high MP camera, but I really do hope it has at least 24 MP. I'd feel let down at only 20.



There's no real practical difference between 20 and 24 MP. It's only a 3.4% difference in linear resolution.

EDIT: I must have been half asleep when I did the math. It's actually 9.5%, but that's still fairly inconsequential. Instead of a display size of, say, 36x24, you can enlarge to 39x26 and get the same number of pixels per inch.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 8, 2021)

sandhar said:


> I don't know why the mechanical shutter is such a power hog in the R5 - as a consequence I'm not using it much in the field, but I do hope they optimize the power in the R3, in addition to the stacked voltage advantage



It's not just the shutter. It's also the energy needed to refocus the lens between each frame.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 8, 2021)

sandhar said:


> Hi David, here is what I see at this canon europe link
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Again, the primary power issue is the energy needed to refocus the lens between each shot.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 8, 2021)

Pixel said:


> The EOS-1R is still two years away so I feel like I'll have to buy the R3 even though I have two R5's.



It'll be the EOS R1. They dropped the dash between EOS and the number when they went from film to digital models. They reversed the numbers/letter in the model names between the EF and RF mount, just like they reversed the letter/number order between the FD and EF mount.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 8, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Why do you think the R1 is two years away?



For me, it seems the existence of the R3 points to a later introduction date for the R1 than was previously expected.


----------



## GoldWing (Jun 8, 2021)

GoldWing said:


> 32 too low, must be min 50+


60+


----------



## rick1 (Jun 8, 2021)

Chris.Chapterten said:


> Sorry, that doesn’t make any sense to me. Every company has a target user in mind when they develop a product. Otherwise they would just make 1 product in total right? Segmentation within a product lineup is of course something that Canon employs. But please correct me if I have mis understood what you are getting at?


For example, sony released an updated A9ii with new features that ONLY targeted sports photographers. Canon has never done that. Whenever they release a new mainstream camera they add features that a wide variety of people will benefit from. Their 1Dx cameras were only 30% less megapixels than their 5DmIV which made them beneficial to other photographers besides sports photographers. With the current technology, and with the R5 being 45mp, to keep the same pace, the R3 would need to be 32mp at least.


----------



## rick1 (Jun 8, 2021)

Sporgon said:


> Why wouldn't a wedding photographer, who may shoot six to eight hundred images in a session, be interested in a camera that is lower than 36 mp ?


In the past of course they would. With the R5 being 45mp I wouldn't be able to go back to a 20mp camera. The cropping ability is amazing


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 8, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> You left off the R6




The R6, though, has two card slots that both use cards that are lower tier than what was the top choice at the time it was released.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 8, 2021)

mpmark said:


> You don’t have to be a fool to neccesarly want to recover 8 stops of light. Cameras still today don’t have the same dynamic scene/range of what your eye sees when you are viewing something beautiful with a high dynamic range but wish to capture it as close as possible to the experience.



With film it was expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights, because film was more forgiving of overexposed highlights than for underexposed shadows. But even film couldn't recover details from highlights that were eight stops overexposed.

With digital it is expose for the highlights and develop for the shadows. This is because there's a hard line at a fully saturated sensel. There's no technology that can recover how many photons above full well capacity fell on a sensel.

Anyone who shoots eight stops too bright with a digital camera, or even a film camera, has no idea what they are doing unless a thermonuclear warhead detonates nearby after exposure has been set but just before the image is exposed. In which case there are other considerations far more important to worry about than a photo which will never be seen by anyone.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 8, 2021)

TravelerNick said:


> That to but missing a shot is worse than having to wait with the shot in hand.



In the world of news and sports journalism, the end result is exactly the same. Someone else gets their shot on the wires first and five minutes later no one else in the world cares how much better of a shot you had.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 8, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> Agreed. I like the dual-CF in my 1D X, which I have set to write RAW to both cards for redundancy. With an SD slot on the R3, I fully expect that will affect long bursts (if not acquisition, then clearing the buffer). So I'll write RAW to the CFexpress and jpg to the SD as an emergency backup.



But even that scenario (Raw to the fast card, JPEG to the slow card) can dramatically reduce the number of frames one can shoot before the buffer fills, if the performance hit for doing it that way with the 7D Mark II, 5D Mark III, and 5D Mark IV are any indication. When both slots are used simultaneously, the bus speeds of the faster slot is reduced to the slower slot's maximum data rate. Of course, Canon may have figured out how to move data from the buffer to each card slot at different bus speeds, but that seems to be fairly farfetched.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 8, 2021)

Kuau said:


> Thats a good thing,. I ike on my R5 when you shut off the camera the shutter covers the sensor makes for easier lens swapping and less dust on the sensor.. Still don't understand why Canon has held back on releasing the mega pixel count on the R3, It seems clear that there are some pre productions units already out in the field... Tokyo Olympics are in 50 days..



To the best of my knowledge, Canon has never officially confirmed a digital camera's resolution prior to the official introduction announcement. Why would they start now?


----------



## AlanF (Jun 8, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> There's no real practical difference between 20 and 24 MP. It's only a 3.4% difference in linear resolution.


I think 24 MP has 9.5% higher linear resolution.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 8, 2021)

Kuau said:


> Thats a good thing,. I ike on my R5 when you shut off the camera the shutter covers the sensor makes for easier lens swapping and less dust on the sensor.. Still don't understand why Canon has held back on releasing the mega pixel count on the R3, It seems clear that there are some pre productions units already out in the field... Tokyo Olympics are in 50 days..



The Tokyo Olympics are toast. Not going to happen in any recognizable way. No foreign non-competitors allowed into the country.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 8, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> But the 1DX III has a DIGIC X and 20mp at 20fps, the R3 also has DIGIC X, how do you expect that one processor to process more than twice the resolution 150% faster?



DiG!C X is not a specific processor chip like previous DiG!C chips were. It's a design architecture. That leaves room for increased processing capacity in the same way that newer Intel Core i7 chips or AMD Ryzen chips can be faster than previous i7 or Ryzen chips are.

Expecting a newer version to be able to process twice as much data in 2/3 the same time is probably a bit optimistic, though.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 8, 2021)

justaCanonuser said:


> Sorry, I didn't want to offend you personally, really. But 8 stops is more than huge! I sometimes have to recover 2-3 stops, if the DR is high, but that's already the limit.



You're not really recovering anything. You're just extending the white point all the way to 16,383 instead of cutting it off at around 4,095 like the camera's JPEG engine that generates the preview image is doing it.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 8, 2021)

jam05 said:


> Canon only has one "high end" flagship camera. The 1DX3. Its far from being crippled.



The Canon EOS C500 Mark II would like to have a word with you...


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 8, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> But even that scenario (Raw to the fast card, JPEG to the slow card) can dramatically reduce the number of frames one can shoot before the buffer fills, if the performance hit for doing it that way with the 7D Mark II, 5D Mark III, and 5D Mark IV are any indication. When both slots are used simultaneously, the bus speeds of the faster slot is reduced to the slower slot's maximum data rate. Of course, Canon may have figured out how to move data from the buffer to each card slot at different bus speeds, but that seems to be fairly farfetched.


If both are 30 FPS then it is still fine.
Even better would be if WIFI is also 30 FPS.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 8, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> The Canon EOS C500 Mark II would like to have a word with you...


C700 is the flagship cinema camera


----------



## Mahk43 (Jun 8, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> How many pros using this type of body have you ever seen storing such a camera in a bag? If traveling via air they use hard cases. Otherwise, the ones I know tend to carry them on their person or throw them, unbagged, on the passenger seat or in the trunks of their cars.


My comment was not to make any controversy. I know pros photographers (everybody into extreme sports) that carry their bodies only into backpack. Inserts foam thickness is usually between 1 and 2cm. The R3 evf seems to exceed that, and may generate issues to pack body and lenses side by side. Same issue for those who carry on themselves or on the passanger seat, the EVF exceed a lot the body and may cause premature wear of the soft part.
My point of view, and I hope I'm wrong.
Finally, I hope people will use eye control AF a lot, because if not, they will carry this big EVF for nothing.


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Jun 8, 2021)

yeahright said:


> then why don't you just downsample your high-MP images for better noise performance, more headroom w.r.t. DLA and better looks on pixel-level if that's what you're after?


That still does not make the RAW files any smaller. Huge files cause a lot of issues. Also if you know that you have more megapixels available, you might try to adjust your photography to those many megaxpixels. For example you might carry a tripod a steadier photo in case you want to crop that photo later. Sometimes having more options restricts your freedom instead of growing it. With 60 megapixels you will always find yourself trying to achieve a very sharp 60 mepapixel photo. Only having to care about "20 megapixel sharpness" releases a lot of pressure. 

The optimum for me would be a camera with the same sensor as the R6, a much larger and heavier body and CF Express cards instead of HD cards. The camera should also have a top display like the R5 and a second display on the back like the 1D X III. And all that for around $5000 with the EF adapter and a second battery included. That would make me happy.


----------



## takesome1 (Jun 8, 2021)

Skyscraperfan said:


> Also if you know that you have more megapixels available, you might try to adjust your photography to those many megaxpixels. For example you might carry a tripod a steadier photo in case you want to crop that photo later. Sometimes having more options restricts your freedom instead of growing it. With 60 megapixels you will always find yourself trying to achieve a very sharp 60 mepapixel photo. Only having to care about "20 megapixel sharpness" releases a lot of pressure.



With this mindset the megapixel's do not matter, nor does the "sharpness" of your pictures. Imagine how much less stress it would be to use your cell phone as your primary camera.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 8, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> I think 'needs' is incorrect. Architecture/real estate photographers capture such images today, and that feature doesn't yet exist.


I think you are 100% correct, and to the specific case use suggesting more DR will 'fix the problem' illustrates a complete misunderstanding by the first poster (who has me blocked so won't see this anyway) of how the eye processes high dynamic range scenes and how increasing camera DR won't actually get the image he thinks.

Essentially the interior has a DR and the exterior has a DR, in HDR the exterior will almost always be several stops over exposed in relation to the interior, this means the shadows outside will be higher than the upper midtones inside. Using curves to 'correct' this so it more accurately represents the scene in a 'natural' way, that is how the brain processes the information from the eye, will always look odd, or HDR. The better way, even with cameras capable of HDR capture, is to take two exposures (though often many more) where you want them to be and blend them in post. This is the only way I have found to make the interior and exterior images look natural and where you have complete control over the respective brightnesses of the interior and exterior.

And to be sure there is no one right way, sometimes blown out exteriors for the mood or because of the view are the right way anyway, whereas sometimes showing the exterior view to full effect is the entire point of the building.


----------



## RichardSM (Jun 8, 2021)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


Would be nice if Canon would provide how many Mp it can shoot, All in all, it looks to be a wonderful camera certainly looking forward to its being available this year.


----------



## Pixel (Jun 8, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Why do you think the R1 is two years away?


Precedent. Canon flagships are always on a four year cycle.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 8, 2021)

Pixel said:


> Precedent. Canon flagships are always on a four year cycle.



If by ‘always’ you mean just the 1DX-1DX II-1DX III then you have a point, if by always you actually mean always then the 1 series cycle has varied from 2 years, 1D III-1D IV, to 6 years, 1N-1V


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Jun 8, 2021)

takesome1 said:


> With this mindset the megapixel's do not matter, nor does the "sharpness" of your pictures. Imagine how much less stress it would be to use your cell phone as your primary camera.


Cell phones can't take sharp photos at all. They are only sharp enough for Instagram. 16 megapixels is the best resolultion for photos. Enough megapixels for even bigger posters and for stock agencies, but still sharp on a pixel level. 20 megapixel or even 24 are still okay to give you some room for cropping to different formats. From there on evey additional megapixel is a downside. The photos of a 150 megapixel camera from Phase One do not really look well on a pixel level. And that camera costs $40,000. Imagine Phase One offered a 20 megapixel version. Those pixels would be huge and the image would look super clean. I would not buy it anyway, as I do not have $40,000 to spare, but a low megapixel medium format camera would be cool.


----------



## neurorx (Jun 8, 2021)

I wonder then the R1 will land and how much it will cost given the information we have learned with the R3. I would really hope to get something regarding the difference in low light and DR vs the R5 and R6.


----------



## AEWest (Jun 8, 2021)

Pixel said:


> Precedent. Canon flagships are always on a four year cycle.


That precedent could change due to the change in mount this time around. Canon is really pushing the RF mount and the 1DX3 helps sell exactly 0 RF lenses. Therefore there is an incentive for them to shorten the upgrade cycle this time.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 8, 2021)

AEWest said:


> That precedent could change due to the change in mount this time around. Canon is really pushing the RF mount and the 1DX3 helps sell exactly 0 RF lenses. Therefore there is an incentive for them to shorten the upgrade cycle this time.


Exactly, and if we go back to that last precedent, FD-EOS, the New F-1 to EOS-1 was eight years, though nobody expects that kind of delay.


----------



## Sporgon (Jun 8, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> And to be sure there is no one right way, sometimes blown out exteriors for the mood or because of the view are the right way anyway, whereas sometimes showing the exterior view to full effect is the entire point of the building.
> 
> View attachment 198159
> 
> View attachment 198160


Nice natural balance 
Just to be pedantic; the brain sees, not the eye which is why we are able to see things in the way you describe, and why some people really do see ghosts - even though they are not really there !


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 9, 2021)

David - Sydney said:


> I think that there are 2 points here: capture time for the sensor and read out time for the sensor. The read out time will define how fast the continuous fps will be. The capture time will dictate the fastest shutter speed. Mechanical shutters get to 1/8000s but they get there by a slit travelling over the sensor. It may be much less with a global shutter. Interesting to see how it is implemented



By "less" I think you mean longer. 1/1000 or 1/4000 is more than 1/8000, not less.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 9, 2021)

UpstateNYPhotog said:


> But what about the rear position of the vertical hold control wheel instead of on the righthand end of the camera, just behind the vertical shutter button?


 You're confusing two different dials. The R3 also has the "main dial" directly behind the shutter button on the top of the grip in addition to the the new third wheel on the top of the back of the grip.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 9, 2021)

UpstateNYPhotog said:


> Thank you. Now I see the dial on the lower right hand end of the R3 in Gordon Laing's video. I'd been having trouble finding images of that end of the R5/R6 grip.



It's all pretty easy to see in the WFT-R10 User Manual, which has the same control layout as the BG-R10.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 9, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> I disagree there.
> R5 and R6 are selling like hotcakes but so are M50 and the Rebel cameras.
> The rumored ZV-E10 and Z30 seem like threats to the dominance of Canon, especially with so many people declaring their M system and DSLRs dead.
> While these threats might not materialize, Canon should not be 100% reactive.


 How many times has Canon been D*O*O*M*E*D because they didn't offer a camera with identical specs and price to that of a competitor. According to the internet, they were dead and buried long ago. Yet here we are.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 9, 2021)

Atlasman said:


> We all have our views and I respect that—but not when I’m referred to as an “armchair quarterback.” That’s an attack.



I think he referred to everyone here, including himself, as armchair QBs. Maybe stop being so narcissistic?


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 9, 2021)

Chig said:


> A lot of speculation about the resolution of this camera .
> It appears to be very much a specialised body for sports photographers so I think it will only be 20-24 mp for 3 reasons :
> - smaller files speed up the camera as the processor can work faster
> - smaller files mean a faster work flow
> ...



Here in the U.S., I'd think that amateur sports photographers outnumber amateur birders by at least 10:1, probably more like 20:1. There are handfuls of them on the sidelines at every high school football game, which is by far the biggest amateur sport in the U.S. (college sports are not "amateur", no matter what the NCAA claims). Baseball/softball and soccer have their share, too.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 9, 2021)

AlanF said:


> I think 24 MP has 9.5% higher linear resolution.




24 MP is 20% more pixels in two dimension than 20 MP. The square root of 20 is 4.47...

But, yeah, the square root of 1.20 is 1.09544...

So you are correct.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 9, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> If both are 30 FPS then it is still fine.
> Even better would be if WIFI is also 30 FPS.


 30fps _until the buffer is full. _Then you're at ever how many frames clear the buffer per second. If the buffer is sending data to both the CFexpress bus and the SD card bus at the SD card speed, it will take significantly longer to clear the buffer of the same amount of data than when the CFexpress bus is operating at its higher speed.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 9, 2021)

Aussie shooter said:


> Not exactly the same as the R5. Canon stated that the digic X is a chip that is tweaked to suit each camera it is put in. It is not the same chip in each camera



DiG!C X is not a chip, it is an architecture.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 9, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> 39 MP is all that is required for UHD 8K.
> Since Canon is only claiming downsampled 4K and RAW I assume it will be significantly less than that.
> I do not see the point in going 35 MP instead of 39.
> So somewhere between 20 and 30 makes sense and I am guessing it will be closer to 30.



UHD 8K is 16:9. Extend that width to a 3:2 sensor and you have 44-45 MP.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 9, 2021)

rick1 said:


> If the sony A1 costs $6500 and does 30fps and 50mp, it would be crazy to buy the R3 at $6000 if it has less than 36mp. If canon is going to charge almost as much as the A1 it needs to directly compete with it. Anything less is subpar. The LCD screen difference is an insignificant difference, the IBIS in the R5 is plenty.



If your highest priority is MP, then the R3 probably is not for you, just like the 1D X Mark III is not for you. Wait for the R1 or go with the Sony α1. 

See how easy that is? Not every camera Canon releases needs to meet your specific needs.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 9, 2021)

SwissFrank said:


> I get the joke, but actually Canon has a patent for a new kind of sensor I'm half-expecting to show up on one of the bodies above the R5, that in effect can give you one-shot HDR. It can basically take two exposures, and switch between them at microsecond speeds, so it can give one exposure 1/1000 the light of the other, and have relatively smooth motion blur and so on while also having a super-under-exposed version of the same scene also with smooth motion blur to recover highlights from.
> 
> Basically, any architecture/real estate photographer needs this feature to expose a room and also capture the view out the window, so it's not actually that esoteric.



1/1000 as much light is only 3.333 stops, though. Eight stops is 25,600X as much light.


----------



## usern4cr (Jun 9, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> 1/1000 as much light is only 3.333 stops, though. Eight stops is 25,600X as much light.


??? A single stop of light is 1/2 as much light (or 2x in the other direction).
So 1/1000 as much light is 10 stops (2^10).
25,600X as much light is LogBase2(25,600) = 14.6 stops.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 9, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> 24 MP is 20% more pixels in two dimension than 20 MP. The square root of 20 is 4.47...
> 
> But, yeah, the square root of 1.20 is 1.09544...
> 
> So you are correct.



But I stand by my opinion that 9.5% more linear resolution has very little practical difference.

The difference between, say, 20 MP and 30 MP is 22.5% linearly. That's significant.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 9, 2021)

usern4cr said:


> ??? A single stop of light is 1/2 as much light (or 2x in the other direction).
> So 1/1000 as much light is 10 stops (2^10).
> 25,600X as much light is LogBase2(25,600) = 14.6 stops.



Yeah, so I used 1/100 as my base instead of 1. Sorry.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 9, 2021)

Skyscraperfan said:


> I wonder why Canon can't just give us two or three sensor options? Maybe 20, 30 and 60 megapixels. Then everybody would be pleased. Would threy really have to change a lot of the internals ofd a camera, if the megapixel count changes? If the camera can process 60 megapixel images, it should also be able to handle 20 megapixel images. At the moment I am working on hundredsof old photos I took with an 8.2 megapixel APS-H camera and I love how crisp they look on a pixel level. With a high megapixel count diffraction sets in much sooner. Of course you can always downsample those photos, but then you would still have to handle those large RAW files.



The biggest reason those 8.2 MP images look so good at the pixel level is that when you view them at 100% on your monitor you're enlarging them a LOT less than when you view 30 MP or 45MP images on the same monitor.

If you're using a monitor with, say, a pixel pitch of 96 ppi then 100% magnification of 8.2 MP (3504x2336) is the equivalent of a piece of a 36x24 inch enlargement. If you view a 45 MP (8192x5464) image at 100% magnification on the same monitor, it's the equivalent of 85x57 display size!


----------



## usern4cr (Jun 9, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> Yeah, so I used 1/100 as my base instead of 1. Sorry.


No problem.

I don't mean to get into the MP arguments above, but will say that I've come to love the 45MP of the R5. I'd be really happy if my next camera had the same value. I don't need more MP but would probably be OK with more, but I would have a much harder time accepting appreciably less (for my particular purposes). Now that the Olympics seem to be "ON" (for better or worse), we'll probably soon see what the R3 MP will be.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 9, 2021)

yeahright said:


> then why don't you just downsample your high-MP images for better noise performance, more headroom w.r.t. DLA and better looks on pixel-level if that's what you're after?


 Because he doesn't understand that 100% magnification is not the same enlargement ratio for a high MP image as it is for a low MP image. When you enlarge a smaller image pixel to the size of a screen pixel, you're magnifying more than when you enlarge a larger image pixel to the same sized screen pixel. 

Some folks apparently can't wrap their mind around the fact that they're looking at a 36x24 inch enlargement when viewing 8.2MP images on a 24" FHD monitor with a pixel pitch of 96 ppi, and they're looking at an 85x57 enlargement when they're viewing a 45MP image at 100% on the same monitor.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 9, 2021)

rick1 said:


> Canon has never been the one to "target" specific users. Sony does that. I HATE that. Canon makes cameras that appeal to all users. For example, the 1Dx cameras appealed to wedding photographers AND sports photographers, etc. I've always loved that about canon. With cameras like the R5 available, there is no way a sub-36ish mp camera will appeal to wedding photographers, unless it has some insane low light abilities or something. If they do target this specific genre of photographer, they will be breaking from what they've always done. It will be extremely disappointing and they will have lost a permeant canon mirrorless convert.



Canon has ALWAYS offered specific products for specific use cases. 

With regard to high resolution for some use cases and faster handling and file sizes easier to transmit quickly over long distances for other use cases, Canon has differentiated their product line since the MP race really started to heat up in the late 2000s. 

In the first decade or so of serious digital imaging on the consumer scale (which includes the "pro" models like the 1D and 1Ds) the 1Ds Series offered higher resolution and a FF sensor while the 1D series offered faster handling and lower resolution with an APS-H size sensor. When the 5-series began to mature, in 2012 Canon introduced both the 18 MP 1D X for high speed handling and the 24MP 5D Mark III for higher resolution. They extended this even further in 2016 when the 1D X Mark II was released at 20 MP and the 5D Mark IV had 30 MP. Then in 2020 the R5 came in at 45MP and the 1D X Mark III came in at 20 MP. 

What rock have you been living under since 2008?


----------



## rick1 (Jun 9, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> Canon has ALWAYS offered specific products for specific use cases.
> 
> With regard to high resolution for some use cases and faster handling and file sizes easier to transmit quickly over long distances for other use cases, Canon has differentiated their product line since the MP race really started to heat up in the late 2000s.
> 
> ...


The canon 1 series have always been at least 68% of the megapixels of the 5 series line appealing to both sports photographers AND 5 series users. THIS is what I meant. If you bring a camera to market with mp so far below the 5 series line, it is breaking with what they have always done. What rock have you been under is the question?


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 9, 2021)

rick1 said:


> For example, sony released an updated A9ii with new features that ONLY targeted sports photographers. Canon has never done that. Whenever they release a new mainstream camera they add features that a wide variety of people will benefit from. Their 1Dx cameras were only 30% less megapixels than their 5DmIV which made them beneficial to other photographers besides sports photographers. With the current technology, and with the R5 being 45mp, to keep the same pace, the R3 would need to be 32mp at least.



The 5D Mark IV has 50% more pixels than the 1D X Mark II. 

The 5Ds and 5Ds R had 2.5X as many pixels as the 1D X Mark II.

I don't know how many pixels a 1Dx has, because I've never seen one anywhere.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 9, 2021)

rick1 said:


> The canon 1 series have always been at least 68% of the megapixels of the 5 series line appealing to both sports photographers AND 5 series users. THIS is what I meant. If you bring a camera to market with mp so far below the 5 series line, it is breaking with what they have always done. What rock have you been under is the question?



In 2020 Canon released the 45 MP R5 which they specifically market as the replacement for the 5D Mark IV. It's a 5-Series camera.
In 2020 Canon released the 20 MP 1D X Mark III, which is a 1-Series camera.

The 1D X Mark III has *44%* as many pixels as the R5.

For that matter, the 2016 20 MP 1D X Mark II only has *40%* as many pixels as the 2015 50 MP 5Ds and 5Ds R...


----------



## rick1 (Jun 9, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> In 2020 Canon released the 45 MP R5 which they specifically market as the replacement for the 5D Mark IV. It's a 5-Series camera.
> In 2020 Canon released the 20 MP 1D X Mark III, which is a 1-Series camera.
> 
> The 1D X Mark III has *44%* as many pixels as the R5.
> ...


Compare apples with apples, compare the 1dxiii with the 5div, or the 1dxii with the 5diii. Compare a similar generation of cameras


----------



## rick1 (Jun 9, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> The 5D Mark IV has 50% more pixels than the 1D X Mark II.
> 
> The 5Ds and 5Ds R had 2.5X as many pixels as the 1D X Mark II.
> 
> I don't know how many pixels a 1Dx has, because I've never seen one anywhere.


the 5div is 30mp, and the 1dxmkii is 20mp. So it is 66% of the megapixels of the 5d, exactly what I was saying. Not sure what you are talking about.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 9, 2021)

rick1 said:


> the 5div is 30mp, and the 1dxmkii is 20mp. So it is 66% of the megapixels of the 5d, exactly what I was saying. Not sure what you are talking about.


Really not sure what you and skyscraper are babbling about. Good lord.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 9, 2021)

rick1 said:


> Compare apples with apples, compare the 1dxiii with the 5div, or the 1dxii with the 5diii. Compare a similar generation of cameras


The 5D S and 5D S R were released in mid-2015 and are still in the catalog.

The 1D X Mark II was released in early 2016 and replaced in 2020.

They are the same generation of camera.

*First you say Canon has not historically marketed different cameras to different types of users.

Now you're saying we can't compare the 5Ds series to the 1D X series model that sold at the same time (1D X Mark II) because they were aimed at different users than the 5D Mark IV which also are the same generation?*


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 9, 2021)

rick1 said:


> Compare apples with apples, compare the 1dxiii with the 5div, or the 1dxii with the 5diii. Compare a similar generation of cameras



The 1D X was introduced in 2012, the same year as the 5D Mark III. They're the same generation of camera.

The 5Ds and 5Ds R were introduced in 2015.
The 1D X Mark II and 5D Mark IV were introduced in 2016, but the 5D Mark IV was not a replacement for the 5Ds and 5Ds R. Both are still in Canon's current catalog. The 1D X Mark II, 5D Mark IV, and 5Ds/5Ds R are the same generation of camera.

The R5 and the 1D X Mark III were both introduced in 2020. They're the same generation offered at the same time.

*"compare the 1dxiii with the 5div" - the 1D X Mark III was introduced in 2020, four years after the 5D Mark IV in 2016.

"or the 1dxii with the 5diii" - The 1D X Mark II was introduced in 2016, four years after the 5D Mark III in 2012.*

As you can clearly see, the trend had been to increase the difference between the 5-Series and the 1-Series with every product cycle.

In 2012 the current 5-Series had 1.33X as many pixels as the 1-Series.
in 2016 the three current 5-Series models had 1.5X and 2.5X, respectively, as many pixels as the 1-Series.
In 2020 the current 5-Series model has 2.25X as many pixels as the current 1-Series camera, with rumors swirling of an impending high resolution R5s by the end of 2021.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Canon_EOS_digital_cameras


----------



## rick1 (Jun 9, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> The 5D S and 5D S R were released in mid-2015 and are still in the catalog.
> 
> The 1D X Mark II was released in early 2016 and replaced in 2020.
> 
> ...


I mispoke, compare the 1dxii to 5dmiv. It has the exact ratio of pixels as I was referring to. The 1dx has 66% of the mp as the 5d


----------



## rick1 (Jun 9, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> The 1D X was introduced in 2012, the same year as the 5D Mark III. They're the same generation of camera.
> 
> The 5Ds and 5Ds R were introduced in 2015.
> The 1D X Mark II and 5D Mark IV were introduced in 2016, but the 5D Mark IV was not a replacement for the 5Ds and 5Ds R. Both are still in Canon's current catalog. The 1D X Mark II, 5D Mark IV, and 5Ds/5Ds R are the same generation of camera.
> ...


You can't compare the R5 to the 1Dx, they are a completely different generation of camera. The R3 and R1 will be the same generation as the R5


----------



## yeahright (Jun 9, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> Because he doesn't understand that 100% magnification is not the same enlargement ratio for a high MP image as it is for a low MP image. When you enlarge a smaller image pixel to the size of a screen pixel, you're magnifying more than when you enlarge a larger image pixel to the same sized screen pixel.
> 
> Some folks apparently can't wrap their mind around the fact that they're looking at a 36x24 inch enlargement when viewing 8.2MP images on a 24" FHD monitor with a pixel pitch of 96 ppi, and they're looking at an 85x57 enlargement when they're viewing a 45MP image at 100% on the same monitor.


as per https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/t...e-canon-eos-r3-have-emerged.40492/post-895269 I believe that @Skyscraperfan does understand the difference but places higher emphasis on psychological aspects than on technological ones.


----------



## Chig (Jun 9, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> Here in the U.S., I'd think that amateur sports photographers outnumber amateur birders by at least 10:1, probably more like 20:1. There are handfuls of them on the sidelines at every high school football game, which is by far the biggest amateur sport in the U.S. (college sports are not "amateur", no matter what the NCAA claims). Baseball/softball and soccer have their share, too.


Interesting but these are amateurs too so the pro sports shooters are very out numbered.
These amateur sports shooters would probably buy a good crop sensor camera too as it gives more reach without having to buy crazy expensive big white lenses


----------



## justaCanonuser (Jun 9, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> You're not really recovering anything. You're just extending the white point all the way to 16,383 instead of cutting it off at around 4,095 like the camera's JPEG engine that generates the preview image is doing it.


You're right, I didn't mean that scientifically. I just meant the visual perception of the post-processed image. But that's already an accident for me, I still shoot sometimes positive (slide) film, which forces me back to the old rules of careful metering anyway.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 9, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> UHD 8K is 16:9. Extend that width to a 3:2 sensor and you have 44-45 MP.


I think you mean DCI 4K which is why R5 is 45 MP.
DCI is slightly larger than UHD.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 9, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> In 2020 Canon released the 45 MP R5 which they specifically market as the replacement for the 5D Mark IV. It's a 5-Series camera.
> In 2020 Canon released the 20 MP 1D X Mark III, which is a 1-Series camera.
> 
> The 1D X Mark III has *44%* as many pixels as the R5.
> ...


I do not think that is a fair comparison since the 1 DX Mark III was released before the R5.
However, that should have bearing on the R1, not the R3.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 9, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> 30fps _until the buffer is full. _Then you're at ever how many frames clear the buffer per second. If the buffer is sending data to both the CFexpress bus and the SD card bus at the SD card speed, it will take significantly longer to clear the buffer of the same amount of data than when the CFexpress bus is operating at its higher speed.


Who says the buffer will get full?
This is not Sony we are talking about.
I get that this s not the R1 but Canon is going hard at 30 FPS.
If there is any kind of limit reached then even I will call BS on them.
The usual cabal of YouTube critics is just waiting for Canon to screw up.


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Jun 9, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> I do not think that is a fair comparison since the 1 DX Mark III was released before the R5.
> However, that should have bearing on the R1, not the R3.


Hmmm if they are released within the same year they are generally considered to be of the same generation. Further proof is that a camera released at the same time as the R5, the R6 also uses the 1DX iii sensor. In my opinion it is very reasonable to compare them…


----------



## rick1 (Jun 9, 2021)

Chris.Chapterten said:


> Hmmm if they are released within the same year they are generally considered to be of the same generation. Further proof is that a camera released at the same time as the R5, the R6 also uses the 1DX iii sensor. In my opinion it is very reasonable to compare


the 1DX iii is basically just an enhanced version of the 1Dx2, the R5 is not just an enhanced version of the 5D, it is a completely different generation of camera. Hence the new naming convention for this generation of cameras.


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Jun 9, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> Because he doesn't understand that 100% magnification is not the same enlargement ratio for a high MP image as it is for a low MP image. When you enlarge a smaller image pixel to the size of a screen pixel, you're magnifying more than when you enlarge a larger image pixel to the same sized screen pixel.
> 
> Some folks apparently can't wrap their mind around the fact that they're looking at a 36x24 inch enlargement when viewing 8.2MP images on a 24" FHD monitor with a pixel pitch of 96 ppi, and they're looking at an 85x57 enlargement when they're viewing a 45MP image at 100% on the same monitor.


I understand what you mean. Of course a 45MP image is larger that an 8.2MP image at 100%, but a pixel still is a pixel. It only is larger because you have more of those pixels. Just look at the 108 megapixel photos that many smartphone cameras can now produce. Then you understand the problems I have with many pixels. The main advantage of a full frame camera for me are the larger pixels on the sensor. With a high resolution you bascically throw away that big advantage. 

8K video has the same problems. 4K already is enough for quite a large screen. 8K just needs more drive space in most situations.


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Jun 10, 2021)

rick1 said:


> the 1DX iii is basically just an enhanced version of the 1Dx2, the R5 is not just an enhanced version of the 5D, it is a completely different generation of camera. Hence the new naming convention for this generation of cameras.


I get where you’re coming from. But of course the difference between 5D and R5 is more dramatic because it is the first 5 series mirrorless - they had to flex their muscles given the relative performance of other mirrorless cameras.

I do however disagree that the 1DX iii is just an enhanced 1DX ii - it has a completely new chip (digit x) and the sensor is also a new ground up design (just mega pixel count is the same). For me the 1DX iii has probably has just as many, if not more upgrades then when comparing 5D ii vs. 5D iii or 6D vs 6D ii.

My point: historically speaking It is actually not very common for a new generation of camera to be so dramatically different like the R5 is to 5D. So yes I would consider 1DX iii a completely new generation over a 1DX ii. Of course that is also how canon has marketed the newer camera.

Further reading on 1DX ii vs 1DX iii https://www.canon-europe.com/pro/stories/eos-1d-x-mark-iii-vs-mark-ii/


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 11, 2021)

rick1 said:


> You can't compare the R5 to the 1Dx, they are a completely different generation of camera. The R3 and R1 will be the same generation as the R5



The R5 is the current 5-Series camera and was released in 2020.
The 1D X Mark III is the current 1-Series and was released in 2020.

They are both current products that were released within four months of one another.

It's perfectly legitimate to compare them to each other. They're both the most current of the 1-Series and 5-Series cameras. 

Besides that, the 5Ds R is still a 50 MP camera and has been in the catalog since 2015. It is also a 5-Series camera that was introduced in the same generation with the 5D Mark IV. If you're willing to compare the 1D X Mark III released in 2020 to the 5D Mark IV released in 2016, the same year as the 1D Mark II (the PREVIOUS generation of the 1-Series), then you must be willing to compare the 1D X Mark III to the 5Ds R as well as the 5D Mark IV.

The 1D X Mark III only has 40% as many pixels as the 5Ds R. Both are DSLRs.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 11, 2021)

rick1 said:


> I mispoke, compare the 1dxii to 5dmiv. It has the exact ratio of pixels as I was referring to. The 1dx has 66% of the mp as the 5d



You mispoke (sic)?

You also conveniently ignore the 5Ds and 5Ds R that are 5-series cameras of the same generation as the 1D X Mark II and 5D Mark IV.

I don't know what a 1dx is. I've never seen one, and there's no model ever listed by Canon anywhere named the 1dx. Do you mean the 18 MP 1D X (2012)? Or perhaps the 20 MP 1D X Mark II (2016)? Or maybe the 20 MP 1D X Mark III (2020)?

The 1D X Mark II has 20 MP and was offered from 2016 until 2020.
The 5D S and 5Ds R have 50MP and were offered from 2015 until 2021.
The 5D S and 5Ds R were current 5-Series cameras the ENTIRE time the 1D X Mark II was in the catalog.
They're the same generation of camera.
The 5Ds and 5Ds R are 5-series cameras of the same generation as the 1D X Mark II.

*Therefore, the 1D X Mark II DOES NOT have 66% of the megapixels of the highest resolution 5- series cameras of the same generation.
The 1D X Mark II has 40% of the megapixels that the highest resolution 5-Series camera of the same generation had.*


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 11, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> Who says the buffer will get full?
> This is not Sony we are talking about.
> I get that this s not the R1 but Canon is going hard at 30 FPS.
> If there is any kind of limit reached then even I will call BS on them.
> The usual cabal of YouTube critics is just waiting for Canon to screw up.



If the bus speed of the CFExpress card is reduced to the maximum speed of the SD card bus, you can bet your behind that the buffer will get full when trying to shoot at full resolution at 30 fps, even if the camera is only 20 MP.

Have you ever used a 7D Mark II or a 5D Mark IV? When the SD card is being written to, the CF card bus also slows down to the maximum speed of the SD card bus.

With the 5D Mark IV the fastest CF cards write at about 112 MB/s.
With the 5D Mark IV the fastest SD cards write at about 79 MB/s.
When both cards are being written to, the CF card bus also slows down to 79 MB/s.
I've personally tested this with my own 5D Mark IV.

With the 7D Mark II the fastest CF cards write at about 103 MB/s.
With the 7D Mark II the fastest SD cards write at about 74 MB/s.
When both cards are being written to, the CF cards bus also slows down to 74 MB/s.
I've personally tested this with my own 7D Mark II.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 11, 2021)

rick1 said:


> the 1DX iii is basically just an enhanced version of the 1Dx2, the R5 is not just an enhanced version of the 5D, it is a completely different generation of camera. Hence the new naming convention for this generation of cameras.



The 1D X Mark III has many features that the 1D X Mark II lacks. When used in Live View mode it has many of the features of the R5, R6, and R.

Further, the PDAF sensor used when shooting via the OVF of the 1D X Mark III is unlike any dedicated PDAF sensor array that has come before in a Canon DSLR. Rather than having line sensors like all other Canon DSLR OVF based PDAF sensors have (or had), the 1D X Mark III has an AF sensor that is a miniature imaging sensor with a 3:2 aspect ratio. It's doing AF via the OVF that is equivalent to Live View that does AF like a mirrorless.

Have you ever even held a 5D Mark III, 5D Mark IV, 1D X Mark II, or 1D X Mark III? Much less an R5, R6, or even EOS R?


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 11, 2021)

Skyscraperfan said:


> I understand what you mean. Of course a 45MP image is larger that an 8.2MP image at 100%, but a pixel still is a pixel. It only is larger because you have more of those pixels. Just look at the 108 megapixel photos that many smartphone cameras can now produce. Then you understand the problems I have with many pixels. The main advantage of a full frame camera for me are the larger pixels on the sensor. With a high resolution you bascically throw away that big advantage.
> 
> 8K video has the same problems. 4K already is enough for quite a large screen. 8K just needs more drive space in most situations.



No, a pixel is not still a pixel. The 45 MP sensor on the R5 collects the same total amount of light as the 20 MP sensors on the 1D X Mark III and R6. When displayed at the same enlargement ratio, they exhibit very similar signal to noise characteristics. The time when higher density sensors performed worse at the same enlargement ratios went away about a decade ago when gapless sensors were introduced.


----------



## rick1 (Jun 11, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> The 1D X Mark III has many features that the 1D X Mark II lacks. When used in Live View mode it has many of the features of the R5, R6, and R.
> 
> Further, the PDAF sensor used when shooting via the OVF of the 1D X Mark III is unlike any dedicated PDAF sensor array that has come before in a Canon DSLR. Rather than having line sensors like all other Canon DSLR OVF based PDAF sensors have (or had), the 1D X Mark III has an AF sensor that is a miniature imaging sensor with a 3:2 aspect ratio. It's doing AF via the OVF that is equivalent to Live View that does AF like a mirrorless.
> 
> Have you ever even held a 5D Mark III, 5D Mark IV, 1D X Mark II, or 1D X Mark III? Much less an R5, R6, or even EOS R?


Yes I own/owned a 1DXiii, 5Div, 5D3, 7D, R5. Are you really trying to compare a mirrorless camera to an old dlsr and trying to say they are the same generation of camera?


----------



## rick1 (Jun 11, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> You mispoke (sic)?
> 
> You also conveniently ignore the 5Ds and 5Ds R that are 5-series cameras of the same generation as the 1D X Mark II and 5D Mark IV.
> 
> ...


are you seriously trying to throw a specialty astrology camera into the mix? LOL


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 11, 2021)

rick1 said:


> Yes I own/owned a 1DXiii, 5Div, 5D3, 7D, R5. Are you really trying to compare a mirrorless camera to an old dlsr and trying to say they are the same generation of camera?


Generation is a measure of age, ergo if they are the same age they are the same generation. What is not in the 1DX III in Live View that is in the R5? There are specification differences but the technology is largely the same.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 11, 2021)

Chig said:


> Interesting but these are amateurs too so the pro sports shooters are very out numbered.
> These amateur sports shooters would probably buy a good crop sensor camera too as it gives more reach without having to buy crazy expensive big white lenses


Well, there are often pros (as in full-time photographers who pay their bills with it, mostly PJs) at many of the larger high school events as well. There are also pros at pretty much all of the college events that don't have a lot of amateurs, unless you count photography/journalism students currently attending the schools involved.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 11, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> I think you mean DCI 4K which is why R5 is 45 MP.
> DCI is slightly larger than UHD.



Yeah, you're right about this.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 11, 2021)

rick1 said:


> are you seriously trying to throw a specialty astrology camera into the mix? LOL



Astrology? Are you serious? You're a Sony troll, aren't you? Admit it.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 11, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> If the bus speed of the CFExpress card is reduced to the maximum speed of the SD card bus, you can bet your behind that the buffer will get full when trying to shoot at full resolution at 30 fps, even if the camera is only 20 MP.


There are 300 MBS V90 SD cards.
10 MB jpegs seem plausible.
(There are higher speed V90s nut they are not officially supported)


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 11, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> There are 300 MBS V90 SD cards.
> 10 MB jpegs seem plausible.
> (There are higher speed V90s nut they are not officially supported)



Only if the camera has a UHS-II capable bus do the faster cards make any difference. The 5D Mark IV and 7D Mark II run at UHS-I speeds, not UHS-II. Some UHS-II cards will default to 100 MB/s when used on a UHS-I bus, but many will default to 50 MB/s, which is slower than many UHS-I cards.

Current CFExpress cards have a maximum theoretical performance of 2000 MB/s. Plenty of current cards are rated at 1500 MB/s write speed, and pedestrian cards can write at 1200 MB/s.

2000 MB/s is SEVEN times faster than V90 SD cards.

Even if the R3 has an UHS-II connection, which I full expect it to, it's still running at a fraction of the speed of the CFExpress slot's capability when only using the CFExpress slot.

If you don't think the camera will slow down if you cut the CFExpress bus speed from even 1200 MB/s to 300 MB/s...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 11, 2021)

rick1 said:


> are you seriously trying to throw a specialty astrology camera into the mix? LOL


Do you often take pictures of Mercury in retrograde or Jupiter in the house of Sagittarius? 

Please tell me where I can get one of those Canon astrology cameras, it would be a great complement to my Casio numerology calculator.


----------



## AEWest (Jun 12, 2021)

I do expect that the R3 will be introduced soon. Jakki Moores just showed it off on Twitter for the G7 meeting. And it has a lens attached suggesting this is a full working model. With Gordon Laing's video, we had no idea if it worked or not.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 12, 2021)

AEWest said:


> I do expect that the R3 will be introduced soon. Jakki Moores just showed it off on Twitter for the G7 meeting. And it has a lens attached suggesting this is a full working model. With Gordon Laing's video, we had no idea if it worked or not.


Good catch.
From Jakki’s Twitter. https://twitter.com/JakkiMoores


----------



## AEWest (Jun 12, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Good catch.
> From Jakki’s Twitter. https://twitter.com/JakkiMoores
> 
> 
> View attachment 198262


What's interesting is that she works for Canon so this tweet must have been authorized by the company.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 12, 2021)

AEWest said:


> What's interesting is that she works for Canon so this tweet must have been authorized by the company.


I’m pretty certain anybody who has one in their hands at the moment, and I’m sure there are a good number worldwide, are very sensitive to the possibility of leaks and unauthorized images and what that would do to their relationship with Canon.


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Jun 13, 2021)

AEWest said:


> What's interesting is that she works for Canon so this tweet must have been authorized by the company.


And not to mention sticking it in the sand too!  

You'd be hoping it was securely propped up - I wouldn't fancy handing it back to Canon at the end of the week with sand inside


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 13, 2021)

Hoping for 30+ megapixels. In my own mind, I'm thinking it will be. Heck, by the time I have any money again, the R5 Mark II will probably be out. Whatever they are, one or the other will be my next, and last, body purchase (R3 or R5). I love the R for portraits, but must admit that it is severely lacking in the tracking AF dept., at least with the two EF mount lenses I have.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 13, 2021)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Hoping for 30+ megapixels. In my own mind, I'm thinking it will be. Heck, by the time I have any money again, the R5 Mark II will probably be out. Whatever they are, one or the other will be my next, and last, body purchase (R3 or R5). I love the R for portraits, but must admit that it is severely lacking in the tracking AF dept., at least with the two EF mount lenses I have.


I think it will be 30 MP.
That does make me wonder what an R7 would be.
If it is 30 MP then I guess an RF mount 90D replacement would have to be higher.
Maybe a UHD 8-bit 4:2:0 8K APS-C camera could still be priced below an R7 with 4K 10-bit 4:2:2 video and 20+ FPS stills.


----------



## rick1 (Jun 14, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> Astrology? Are you serious? You're a Sony troll, aren't you? Admit it.


I was under the impression that the 5ds cameras or whatever were specifically made for astrology, that they didn't have some filter on them that made them better for taking pictures of the stars. Is this incorrect? I don't know a single person that owns a 5ds. I was under the impression that it was a gimped 5d for most general purposes and that it was specifically for astrology. Do you know anyone that even owns one?


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 14, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> I think it will be 30 MP.
> That does make me wonder what an R7 would be.
> If it is 30 MP then I guess an RF mount 90D replacement would have to be higher.
> Maybe a UHD 8-bit 4:2:0 8K APS-C camera could still be priced below an R7 with 4K 10-bit 4:2:2 video and 20+ FPS stills.



I'd be surprised if the R7 isn't more of a 90D type camera than a 7D Mark II type camera, particularly in terms of build quality, durability, and weather resistance. I think competition with other makers has forced Canon to reconsider their past practice of "dumbing down" AF systems for lower tier cameras. With no separate AF focus array, it's no longer a question of hardware cost.

I'm cautiously optimistic we will see an R7 in the future, though I don't think it is by any stretch absolutely guaranteed. I'd be totally surprised if we see an R7 and an R_x_0 series (R10, R20, R30, etc.). More likely we'd see an M10, M20, etc. or continuation of the M6 Mark _x_ line than an R_x_0 series, but even more likely we won't see either one. I think it is even more likely that we'll never see an M_x_00 series. Canon seems to be thinking the Rebel market has died at the hand of the smartphone, though restoring an ISO compliant hot shoe to the cheapest entry level EOS DSLRs might indicate they think a functional hot shoe can attract buyers that would otherwise go with more expensive smartphones (as opposed to a cheaper smartphone and a Rebel that can control cheap, generic flashes).


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 14, 2021)

rick1 said:


> I was under the impression that the 5ds cameras or whatever were specifically made for astrology, that they didn't have some filter on them that made them better for taking pictures of the stars. Is this incorrect? I don't know a single person that owns a 5ds. I was under the impression that it was a gimped 5d for most general purposes and that it was specifically for astrology. Do you know anyone that even owns one?



The only cameras Canon has introduced for *astronomy *are the 20Da and the 60Da, both APS-C cameras with different infrared filters compared to general purpose cameras that make them unsuitable for shooting in daylight or most artificial lighting conditions.

The 5Ds and 5Ds R are high megapixel versions of the 5-Series cameras intended for more general shooting, not dedicated *astronomy cameras*. They were introduced in 2015 when the then current 5D Mark III was 22 MP. In 2016 the 30 MP 5D Mark IV was introduced. The 5Ds and 5Ds R are 50 MP cameras that have many of the features of the 5D Mark IV. Due to the larger file sizes involved, they're not quite as fast handling (5 fps) as the 5D Mark III (6 fps) or 5D Mark IV (7 fps), but they're perfectly capable of taking high quality photos of the same subject matter as any other 5-Series camera and doing so in greater detail when the lenses used are up to the challenge.

I know of no camera manufacturer that has created a camera to do astrology. That's more the purview of makers of things like Tarot cards and Ouija boards, and maybe calendar printers.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 14, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Good catch.
> From Jakki’s Twitter. https://twitter.com/JakkiMoores
> 
> 
> View attachment 198262



Yikes! No way would I set that down in sand. Even if it is a pre-production model that will be scrapped in a few months.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 14, 2021)

rick1 said:


> I was under the impression that the 5ds cameras or whatever were specifically made for astrology, that they didn't have some filter on them that made them better for taking pictures of the stars. Is this incorrect? I don't know a single person that owns a 5ds. I was under the impression that it was a gimped 5d for most general purposes and that it was specifically for astrology. Do you know anyone that even owns one?


There is a difference between astrology and astronomy.
Astrology is to Sony Rumors as astronomy is to Canon Rumors.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 14, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> I'd be surprised if the R7 isn't more of a 90D type camera than a 7D Mark II type camera, particularly in terms of build quality, durability, and weather resistance. I think competition with other makers has forced Canon to reconsider their past practice of "dumbing down" AF systems for lower tier cameras. With no separate AF focus array, it's no longer a question of hardware cost.


An RF mount 90D would be an R10.
There would be no point in calling it R7.
It might make sense to combine the two if Canon can keep the price in line but having two models is more in line with tradition.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 14, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> An RF mount 90D would be an R10.
> There would be no point in calling it R7.
> It might make sense to combine the two if Canon can keep the price in line but having two models is more in line with tradition.


Not really. There was no 7D until the the first 7D was the true replacement for the 50D and the 60D was less than the 50D in many respects. The reason they'll call it the R7 is because all of their R series will have single digit model numbers/letters.

Overall there were more models in the recent past than the contracting market will allow in the future. When sales of camera bodies were at about the same levels in the 1990s as sales levels are at today, there were fewer total models in the EOS line than there where during the explosion of digital camera sales between around 2003 and 2010 or so when the smartphone started eating away at the lower end of the market. That lower end had the most models, the fastest replacement cycles, and the vast majority of sales units. That market is gone.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Jun 14, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> Not really. There was no 7D until the the first 7D was the true replacement for the 50D and the 60D was less than the 50D in many respects. The reason they'll call it the R7 is because all of their R series will have single digit model numbers/letters.
> 
> Overall there were more models in the recent past than the contracting market will allow in the future. When sales of camera bodies were at about the same levels in the 1990s as sales levels are at today, there were fewer total models in the EOS line than there where during the explosion of digital camera sales between around 2003 and 2010 or so when the smartphone started eating away at the lower end of the market. That lower end had the most models, the fastest replacement cycles, and the vast majority of sales units. That market is gone.


You do make very good points.
However, it would also make sense for all of the APS-C models to be double digits.
Although, 7D deserved its name because it was more capable and comparable in cost to the 6D.
I would guess most people here expect the R7 specs to be higher than the R6.
With all of that aside, there seem to be a number of 7D owners that simply want a mirrorless equivalent.
Naming that camera R7 simply makes sense, but we can only debate on what the specs will be.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 14, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> You do make very good points.
> However, it would also make sense for all of the APS-C models to be double digits.
> Although, 7D deserved its name because it was more capable and comparable in cost to the 6D.
> I would guess most people here expect the R7 specs to be higher than the R6.
> ...



If R1 is the King of the Hill and R3 is next, then R5, etc. the R7 would be slightly *_below_* the R6. The RF replacement might be the R9?


----------



## scyrene (Jun 14, 2021)

Toglife_Anthony said:


> Canon's overall market lead will continue to decline if they focus less on FF (especially mirrorless) and more on entry level to "maintain their position." Much of Canon's market dominance has come from brand loyalty and notoriety; both of those will continue to dwindle if the competition continues to put out products that are PERCEIVED to be better and at a lower price point.


You say 'continue to decline', 'continue to dwindle' but they haven't declined, they've maintained their position if not slightly strengthened it relative to their competitors. Also are they focusing more on entry level? Nothing much new has been released for APS-C in a couple of years, it's all been about (FF) RF.


----------



## scyrene (Jun 14, 2021)

Skyscraperfan said:


> Cell phones can't take sharp photos at all. They are only sharp enough for Instagram. 16 megapixels is the best resolultion for photos. Enough megapixels for even bigger posters and for stock agencies, but still sharp on a pixel level. 20 megapixel or even 24 are still okay to give you some room for cropping to different formats. From there on evey additional megapixel is a downside. The photos of a 150 megapixel camera from Phase One do not really look well on a pixel level. And that camera costs $40,000. Imagine Phase One offered a 20 megapixel version. Those pixels would be huge and the image would look super clean. I would not buy it anyway, as I do not have $40,000 to spare, but a low megapixel medium format camera would be cool.


You keep going on about 'pixel level'. Is that how you view all photographs? Zoom in until they're displayed 1:1?

"Only sharp enough for Instagram" - well if that's where someone is posting and sharing their images, that's how sharp it needs to be.


----------



## scyrene (Jun 14, 2021)

rick1 said:


> Yes I own/owned a 1DXiii, 5Div, 5D3, 7D, R5. Are you really trying to compare a mirrorless camera to an old dlsr and trying to say they are the same generation of camera?



I've lost track of what point you thought you were making, what are you trying to say? It sounds like you keep moving the goalposts when presented with data that contradicts your previous statements.



rick1 said:


> are you seriously trying to throw a specialty astrology camera into the mix? LOL



Now I think you're just trolling.


----------



## scyrene (Jun 14, 2021)

Michael Clark said:


> The only cameras Canon has introduced for *astronomy *are the 20Da and the 60Da, both APS-C cameras with different infrared filters compared to general purpose cameras that make them unsuitable for shooting in daylight or most artificial lighting conditions.



Don't forget the Ra!


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Jun 14, 2021)

scyrene said:


> You keep going on about 'pixel level'. Is that how you view all photographs? Zoom in until they're displayed 1:1?
> 
> "Only sharp enough for Instagram" - well if that's where someone is posting and sharing their images, that's how sharp it needs to be.


Actually 98% of my photos will never get printed at all and I think this is true for most photographers. So 1:1 on a monitor is the way I look at them. Of course I also zoom out to see the whole picture, but they should look good at 1:1. My displays still have HD resolution or even less. So defects on a pixel level are visible. I opted against a 4K or even higher resolution display, because I want to see pixel level defects at 1:1.


----------



## scyrene (Jun 14, 2021)

Skyscraperfan said:


> Actually 98% of my photos will never get printed at all and I think this is true for most photographers. So 1:1 on a monitor is the way I look at them. Of course I also zoom out to see the whole picture, but they should look good at 1:1. My displays still have HD resolution or even less. So defects on a pixel level are visible. I opted against a 4K or even higher resolution display, because I want to see pixel level defects at 1:1.



I don't print* any more, and I check images at maximum magnification for some purposes - culling and fine editing. But I hope you can appreciate that when the vast majority of people view an image, they - view _an image_? They look at the _whole_ image, they don't zoom in to a small section of it to check the effects of diffraction, motion blur, unsharp mask, etc. I do sometimes on other people's pics, out of curiosity, but most images that look good as a whole have defects viewed too close. It doesn't matter, because that's not what image capture is for, except maybe in a few very technical areas. Think of it this way - you might like or dislike a portrait, but basing that on whether the fine pores are visible 1:1 is esoteric at best. Comparing equipment on that basis is even stranger.

*printing is rather irrelevant to this discussion, but you brought it up. The same principles apply to making an image your desktop or phone wallpaper, viewing it on social media, etc.


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Jun 14, 2021)

If people do not print, I wonder why they ask for 45 or even 86 megapixels. Isn't that just for printing? Most images we see are on the internet and they usually have a resolution of less than two megapixels. That does not mean that cameras should only have two megapixels, but 20 should be more than enough unless you are planning an exhibition with large format prints.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 14, 2021)

scyrene said:


> Don't forget the Ra!



Too late, I already did.


----------



## usern4cr (Jun 14, 2021)

rick1 said:


> I was under the impression that the 5ds cameras or whatever were specifically made for astrology, that they didn't have some filter on them that made them better for taking pictures of the stars. Is this incorrect? I don't know a single person that owns a 5ds. I was under the impression that it was a gimped 5d for most general purposes and that it was specifically for astrology. Do you know anyone that even owns one?


Do you mean "astronomy" instead of "astrology"? If so, then I'm glad to mention it so that the rest of us don't get the wrong impression of your intent. Best regards.


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Jun 14, 2021)

Skyscraperfan said:


> If people do not print, I wonder why they ask for 45 or even 86 megapixels. Isn't that just for printing? Most images we see are on the internet and they usually have a resolution of less than two megapixels. That does not mean that cameras should only have two megapixels, but 20 should be more than enough unless you are planning an exhibition with large format prints.


YES - in a word. 

In more words: there are always use cases for being able to crop further in, albeit electronically, before presenting your shots on the birds in flight or bird portrait threads


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 14, 2021)

Skyscraperfan said:


> If people do not print, I wonder why they ask for 45 or even 86 megapixels. Isn't that just for printing? Most images we see are on the internet and they usually have a resolution of less than two megapixels. That does not mean that cameras should only have two megapixels, but 20 should be more than enough unless you are planning an exhibition with large format prints.


It is not just for printing. Not. Just. For. Printing.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 14, 2021)

CanonFanBoy said:


> It is not just for printing. Not. Just. For. Printing.


Then what do you need 50+ mp for? Even an 8k screen, which very few of us have, is only 33mp, if people aren’t printing with all those pixels why do they need them? To display on a screen that can’t resolve them?


----------



## usern4cr (Jun 14, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Then what do you need 50+ mp for? Even an 8k screen, which very few of us have, is only 33mp, if people aren’t printing with all those pixels why do they need them? To display on a screen that can’t resolve them?


Cropping is as important as printing, to me. But I think that the 30MP(assumed) R3 will have a better image quality than the 45MP R5. If a future body had a 30MP QP sensor then I'd prefer it over an 80MP DP sensor as I value the best eye AF much more than the diminishing returns of ever tinier pixels with questionable matching lens resolutions. So it's more about the image quality than the MP (and that is a much harder thing to quantify).


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 15, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Then what do you need 50+ mp for? Even an 8k screen, which very few of us have, is only 33mp, if people aren’t printing with all those pixels why do they need them? To display on a screen that can’t resolve them?


1. I never said I needed it. Don't put words in my mouth. I never said it. It is not just for prints. That's a fact.
2. People like the extra leeway for cropping or even getting more than one composition from the same photo. More versatility. I know I have very much enjoyed the extra mp of my R over my former 5D Mark III. Especially when photographing birds in my backyard. Not all of us can afford a super-tele.
3. "Need" is something of a subjective thing. You might say they don't need it. You might be correct. However, a person doesn't need to justify to you or anyone else what they think they need.
4. Canon obviously believes there is a need out there, or Canon wouldn't be pushing the count so far.

*I've never said I needed 50+mp. However, there are people here who want it or think they have a reason for it. That's their business. I find it bad form to try and second guess what others (who we don't know at all) want or need based on our own use cases... and then use that to try and tell them they are "wrong" for wanting or needing. Sometimes "need" is moot. The fact is, many of us are hobbyists. It is want, not just need.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 15, 2021)

CanonFanBoy said:


> 1. I never said I needed it. Don't put words in my mouth. I never said it. It is not just for prints. That's a fact.
> 2. People like the extra leeway for cropping or even getting more than one composition from the same photo. More versatility. I know I have very much enjoyed the extra mp of my R over my former 5D Mark III.
> 3. "Need" is something of a subjective thing. You might say they don't need it. You might be correct. However, a person doesn't need to justify to you or anyone else what they think they need.
> 4. Canon obviously believes there is a need out there, or Canon wouldn't be pushing the count so far.


All right let me rephrase it even though I wasn’t putting words in your mouth, what is 50mp needed for if not for print?

I see two caveats, enough to crop for aspect ratio changes and leveling horizons etc, and the focal length limited scenario where ‘pixels on duck’ does make a difference.

I didn’t say people didn’t need it, I asked what they think it is needed for. You know from my posting history I have repeatedly said people don’t need a reason to want or use something, just feeling good about something is plenty good enough justification were any needed. I’m just interested in why people think they need it. Personally I believe it is good marketing that has convinced the majority of buyers that ‘more is better’ and I haven’t seen much in the way of practical uses to change that thinking.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 15, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> All right let me rephrase it even though I wasn’t putting words in your mouth, what is 50mp needed for if not for print?
> 
> I see two caveats, enough to crop for aspect ratio changes and leveling horizons etc, and the focal length limited scenario where ‘pixels on duck’ does make a difference.
> 
> I didn’t say people didn’t need it, I asked what they think it is needed for. You know from my posting history I have repeatedly said people don’t need a reason to want or use something, just feeling good about something is plenty good enough justification were any needed. I’m just interested in why people think they need it. Personally I believe it is good marketing that has convinced the majority of buyers that ‘more is better’ and I haven’t seen much in the way of practical uses to change that thinking.


You’ve listed two reasons yourself as to why someone might need it. That ain’t good enough?

You mention screens that can’t resolve. Well, what a man has today isn’t, probably, what he’ll have in 10 years. In the mean time, those photos won’t look worse on what he has now, and they’ll look fantastic on what he’s got years from now. So I really do not understand your thinking. Most of us out here have to make choices on how we spend our money over time. We don’t go out and overhaul our whole home electronics kit all at once. So we look ahead towards what we might have 5, 10 years from now. What little video I’ve shot on my R looks great on my 1080p television. Should I have looked for a used 70D because my tv can’t resolve 4K? No! Because in the next year or two I will have a 4K tv. So, if I were in the market for a 50+ megapixel camera… should I base the decision to buy it or not on what I have now or on what I might have to watch video 10+ years from now when I want to reminisce? There.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 15, 2021)

CanonFanBoy said:


> You’ve listed two reasons yourself as to why someone might need it. That ain’t good enough?
> 
> You mention screens that can’t resolve. Well, what a man has today isn’t, probably, what he’ll have in 10 years. In the mean time, those photos won’t look worse on what he has now, and they’ll look fantastic on what he’s got years from now. So I really do not understand your thinking. Most of us out here have to make choices on how we spend our money over time. We don’t go out and overhaul our whole home electronics kit all at once. So we look ahead towards what we might have 5, 10 years from now. What little video I’ve shot on my R looks great on my 1080p television. Should I have looked for a used 70D because my tv can’t resolve 4K? No! Because in the next year or two I will have a 4K tv. So, if I were in the market for a 50+ megapixel camera… should I base the decision to buy it or not on what I have now or on what I might have to watch video 10+ years from now when I want to reminisce? There.


No! Conversations involve questions, I am just asking questions nobody seems to want to answer. As far as I can see regular Joe camera buyer who isn’t genre specific focal length limited and doesn’t print large often has little reason to ‘need’ more than 30mp or so. I’m not saying they shouldn’t want it or buy it, I am simply asking why they want it.

I am a working pro with 20mp cameras, my images get used for everything from Facebook posts to billboards, rarely do I encounter issues with a lack of pixels and now there are so many tricks to intelligently increase resolution rarely has gone to never. That doesn’t mean because I don’t find myself needing more others shouldn't, it just means I am curious what everybody else is doing differently from me that they do feel the ‘need’ for more. I don’t understand why that is so antagonistic to you.

If you are buying a 4K tv in “a year or two” then you might be up to 8k in ten years. 8k is 33mp.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 15, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> No! Conversations involve questions, I am just asking questions nobody seems to want to answer. As far as I can see regular Joe camera buyer who isn’t genre specific focal length limited and doesn’t print large often has little reason to ‘need’ more than 30mp or so. I’m not saying they shouldn’t want it or buy it, I am simply asking why they want it.
> 
> I am a working pro with 20mp cameras, my images get used for everything from Facebook posts to billboards, rarely do I encounter issues with a lack of pixels and now there are so many tricks to intelligently increase resolution rarely has gone to never. That doesn’t mean because I don’t find myself needing more others shouldn't, it just means I am curious what everybody else is doing differently from me that they do feel the ‘need’ for more. I don’t understand why that is so antagonistic to you.
> 
> If you are buying a 4K tv in “a year or two” then you might be up to 8k in ten years. 8k is 33mp.


Well, then. You asked me, specifically, why I need a 50+ mp camera if I am not printing. Never said I did. I simply stated that high mp cameras were not there just for printing. We've both covered at least three reasons somebody might want it if they are not printing. So, if you didn't mean me specifically, then why ask me with a quote of my post? You could have asked that as a stand alone post.

I was not being antagonistic at all, yet I feel you were. You implied that I said I needed it, and wanted to know why. Never said it. Then you "rephrased" and said you were not putting words in my mouth. Yes, you were. You are English, correct? Then you know that if you wanted to ask me why anybody or somebody else needed it (You already knew why somebody would think they did), you'd have phrased it differently to begin with. "Why would one, or somebody, or anybody need...". But no, you wanted to see whether or not I had an answer sufficient to justify myself to your imagined idea that I said I needed it. When you realized that I, in fact, didn't say it... you rephrased. Man up.

That's what's got me riled. You're being disingenuous.

Again, you bring up screens. That might be somebody's reason. Will be mine in several years. I don't really care whether or not an 8k tv is 33mp. The fact remains that something shot in 4k today will look just wonderful a decade from now or 2 decades... 1080p by then? meh, compared to what is available screenwise by then. My dad has a bunch of 8mm film reels. Hard to watch. I can imagine that 1080p might look bad in 20 years compared to where screen are in decades on.

Nobody wants to answer your question? Hell, man! It's been answered on this forum by various individuals for years. Besides, you already knew the answer.

I am positive you are great at what you do.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 15, 2021)

scyrene said:


> Don't forget the Ra!



I did. 

Must be because I'm not into solar astronomy?


----------



## Toglife_Anthony (Jun 15, 2021)

scyrene said:


> You say 'continue to decline', 'continue to dwindle' but they haven't declined, they've maintained their position if not slightly strengthened it relative to their competitors. Also are they focusing more on entry level? Nothing much new has been released for APS-C in a couple of years, it's all been about (FF) RF.


What I said was "Canon's overall market lead will continue to decline"; just as an FYI, one can still hold first position but their LEAD can decline, which Canon's is in the FF sector in many markets. You can't run a race at the same speed just because you're first. If the person behind you is getting closer and closer, stagnation will get you beat. Canon is seeing some good results with their RF line thanks to the R5 and R6, which IMO, was equivalent to them running a bit faster, but that won't be enough to keep them ahead long-term if they stick to their old strategies.


----------



## Sporgon (Jun 15, 2021)

StoicalEtcher said:


> And not to mention sticking it in the sand too!
> 
> You'd be hoping it was securely propped up - I wouldn't fancy handing it back to Canon at the end of the week with sand inside


So not only is it weather proof, it’s sand proof to. Given the location and venue I wonder if it’s bullsh!t proof too ?


----------



## scyrene (Jun 15, 2021)

Toglife_Anthony said:


> What I said was "Canon's overall market lead will continue to decline"; just as an FYI, one can still hold first position but their LEAD can decline, which Canon's is in the FF sector in many markets. You can't run a race at the same speed just because you're first. If the person behind you is getting closer and closer, stagnation will get you beat. Canon is seeing some good results with their RF line thanks to the R5 and R6, which IMO, was equivalent to them running a bit faster, but that won't be enough to keep them ahead long-term if they stick to their old strategies.


But has their lead declined? Neuro knows much more about sales figures than me, but that's not the impression I get. In any case we've heard all this before, year after year. They innovate plenty, and seem to have strategies that work in the long run, whilst still being able to surprise us regularly (nobody had any idea this body was coming until very recently).


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 16, 2021)

Skyscraperfan said:


> Actually 98% of my photos will never get printed at all and I think this is true for most photographers. So 1:1 on a monitor is the way I look at them. Of course I also zoom out to see the whole picture, but they should look good at 1:1. My displays still have HD resolution or even less. So defects on a pixel level are visible. I opted against a 4K or even higher resolution display, because I want to see pixel level defects at 1:1.


You keep referring to 'pixel level' sharpness (which doesn't actually exist because a pixel only contains data about the light).
Sharpness is what helps us define detail in an image. A properly focussed 45MP camera will always contain more detail than a properly focussed 8.2MP image - surely you agree with that. 
This is the same fallacy surrounding 'diffraction limiting'. What diffraction does is it reduces the benefits of more pixels - doubling pixels from 40MP to 80MP is unlikely to give you twice the resolution because diffraction will affect it, but the 80MP image will still be higher than the resolution of the 40MP image.



Skyscraperfan said:


> I opted against a 4K or even higher resolution display, because I want to see pixel level defects at 1:1.



If you want to see pixel defects then surely 4k is what you want?
But I guess you mean you don't want to see them? 
You have a real odd way of approaching photography?


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Jun 16, 2021)

Mikehit said:


> If you want to see pixel defects then surely 4k is what you want?
> But I guess you mean you don't want to see them?
> You have a real odd way of approaching photography?


What I meant is that with just an HD display, each pixel is still visible. I would notice a hot pixel at 1:1 for example.


----------



## Toglife_Anthony (Jun 16, 2021)

scyrene said:


> But has their lead declined? Neuro knows much more about sales figures than me, but that's not the impression I get. In any case we've heard all this before, year after year. They innovate plenty, and seem to have strategies that work in the long run, whilst still being able to surprise us regularly (nobody had any idea this body was coming until very recently).


In FF sales in some markets they absolutely were losing market share. The R5/R6 definitely bolstered their position, no doubt, but times are changing. That can't be denied. More people are relying on their phones versus buying entry-level cameras, where Canon has dominated for years. Yes, historically Canon has managed to make enough moves to stay in front, but IMHO I think times are historically different than many years past. I don't think Canon can stick to their same strategies and continue to see long-term success. In my eyes Canon is already doing things different; five years ago the R6 wouldn't have the same AF system and dual-card slots as the R5, we both know that! I don't think Canon will become a Sony-type company any time soon (e.g. releasing cameras on what feels like an annual cycle or taking feedback from us mere mortals and implementing features into new cameras) but I 100% believe Canon's strategies today are changing from what they've historically been.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 16, 2021)

Skyscraperfan said:


> What I meant is that with just an HD display, each pixel is still visible. I would notice a hot pixel at 1:1 for example.


Huh? Or to be less polite, WTF are you talking about?

Looking at an image displayed 1:1 means that one pixel in the image is represented by one pixel on the monitor. Doesn't matter if that's a 4 MP image on an 8K display or a 45 MP image on an HD display. One image pixel = one display pixel. One to one. 1:1. Get it?

Sure, when you look at the 4 MP image on the 8K display the full picture will only take up about 12% of the screen, and when you look at the 45 MP image on the HD display you can only see about about 5% of the whole picture at a time, but 1:1 is just that. A higher resolution display just gives you the ability to see more of the 1:1 image at a time.

Edit: maybe you mean that if you got a 4K or higher display, you'd set the monitor to use a lower resolution, because the UI would be too small, etc. That means you either need a bigger display so each pixel is bigger, or you need glasses to correct your eyesight.


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Jun 16, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> Huh? Or to be less polite, WTF are you talking about?
> 
> Looking at an image displayed 1:1 means that one pixel in the image is represented by one pixel on the monitor. Doesn't matter if that's a 4 MP image on an 8K display or a 45 MP image on an HD display. One image pixel = one display pixel. One to one. 1:1. Get it?
> 
> ...


If the resolution is too high, you might not be able to see a single pixel. Apple calls that "Retina Display" and they say that the resolution is so high that you can't see the single pixels. That is what I want to avoid. Of course you can always watch an images at 200%, but some programs will just interpolate 75% of all the pixels then. It only works if 200% means that every pixel is shown four times like Photoshop for example does it. An 8K display has even tinier pixels than a 4K display. Of course you can see more of the photo at 1:1 then, but you will not notice a single "wrong" pixel because it is just too small.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 17, 2021)

Skyscraperfan said:


> If the resolution is too high, you might not be able to see a single pixel. Apple calls that "Retina Display" and they say that the resolution is so high that you can't see the single pixels. That is what I want to avoid. Of course you can always watch an images at 200%, but some programs will just interpolate 75% of all the pixels then. It only works if 200% means that every pixel is shown four times like Photoshop for example does it. An 8K display has even tinier pixels than a 4K display. Of course you can see more of the photo at 1:1 then, but you will not notice a single "wrong" pixel because it is just too small.


Apple’s retina displays use logical pixels comprising four real pixels. A 1:1 photo viewed on a Retina display is one image pixel rendered as one logical pixel. It’s still 1:1.

Try this: check your screen resolution in System Preferences (default on my 16” MBPs is 1792x1120), then open any large image Photoshop and crop it to the screen resolution dimensions, open the resulting image in Preview, hit command-zero for 1:1 and go full screen; your 1:1 image now fills the screen. Take a screenshot and you’ll get a resulting png file doubled in horizontal and vertical resolution, e.g. that 1792x1120 image yields a 3584x2240 screenshot). At 1:1, Apple is just spreading one image pixel over 4 screen pixels in the GPU that are rendered back down to one pixel. All that is behind the scenes in the GPU. Note that Apppe does that on external displays up to 4K as well, so when you connect your HD monitor to a Retina Mac, everything you see on your display was rendered at 4K in the GPU then downsampled. With display resolutions >4K (at least on my 16”), that doesn’t happen – when the resolution on my 5K:2K ultrawide is set to 4K wide, I get a screenshot that’s 8K wide; when I set the resolution to 5K wide, I get a 5K wide screenshot because the GPU cannot render at 10K.

The bottom line is 1:1 is always 1:1, and your reasons for preferring lower resolution monitors are totally specious (as are your reasons for preferring lower resolution sensors).


----------



## scyrene (Jun 20, 2021)

Toglife_Anthony said:


> In FF sales in some markets they absolutely were losing market share. The R5/R6 definitely bolstered their position, no doubt, but times are changing. That can't be denied. More people are relying on their phones versus buying entry-level cameras, where Canon has dominated for years. Yes, historically Canon has managed to make enough moves to stay in front, but IMHO I think times are historically different than many years past. I don't think Canon can stick to their same strategies and continue to see long-term success. In my eyes Canon is already doing things different; five years ago the R6 wouldn't have the same AF system and dual-card slots as the R5, we both know that! I don't think Canon will become a Sony-type company any time soon (e.g. releasing cameras on what feels like an annual cycle or taking feedback from us mere mortals and implementing features into new cameras) but I 100% believe Canon's strategies today are changing from what they've historically been.



I agree it feels like Canon's made a few changes to their approach, and time will tell how much that helps or hinders them. I don't think "times are changing" though - or rather, they always have been, it's not that right now is a special moment. Naysayers have been telling us that on the forum for as long as I've been here, and I always ask - why? Why is now special? Usually it boils down to, they want something in particular and are impatient for Canon to provide it.


----------

