Canon EOS R6 Mark III Resolution Increase?

132 comments

1. ... It looks like we may get a 30-32mp Canon EOS R6 Mark III still with a readout speed...

   TBH, a few more pixels would be nice close to 30 MP, hopefully even better s/n than the actual sensors...
   This would make me rethink my "My Mk II is enough!"... I'm doomed... :rolleyes:

   • Reply

   • 0
2. Wouldn't be too bad considering the direct competitor Sony already offers 30MP in their current A7IV model and will likely increase the resolution. And also considering many Fujifilm models (although not directly comparable) now offer 40MP.
   This would be an ideal successor of the EOS R that sat at a perfect spot of not too much and not too little resolution.

   • Reply

   • 0
3. I loved the 30mp on the EOS R! A MP count of 30ish is my personal sweet spot to be honest. It leaves plenty of room for cropping and still all devices can handle the data very well. I know, technically you can't spot the difference between 24mp and 30mp, but for cropping it is good to have a breather. Also, shooting in crop mode with 30 MP or cropping a vertical pic out of an horizontal image still gives you double digits MP count. The EOS R had 11.6 MP in crop mode. I absolutely loved it!
   
   The 45 MP of the R5 are too much for some use cases, e.g. I often take pics in school (I am a teacher) at events and putting several pics in our cloud does slow down the process a looooooot. Also, airdropping the pics of the students on to their iPads sometimes proves to be difficult with big file sizes...At the moment, I often intentionally shoot in crop mode e.g. the 24-105mm F4 is incredibly versatile as an approximately 40-170mm (exactly 38,4 - 168mm) lens. It also keeps the file sizes down.
   
   I might solve this problem by getting a second camera with 24 mp (I see you Canon R8) so I have the best of two worlds.
   
   A R6mkiii with 30mp (stacked or non-stacked... I don't care) could be a perfect comprise for me. I´d have sell my R5 to do so... and wait for rebates/ cash back... I don´t know. Just a thought. If the body is a bit smaller and especially lighter, I might switch.

   • Reply

   • 0
4. Hmmm. Curious about this quote here: "It’s not a camera that will be on our wishlist, but I think a resolution boost will be welcomed, even if just from a marketing standpoint."
   
   For me, I have been drooling over this camera since it was suggested that it will have those action priority settings like the r5m2 and r1.
   
   I'm an SLR holdout. I would have gotten an r5m2, but then I would have had to get a divorce, too. This seems like the absolute best camera for what I shoot, can afford and want to lug around. (probably 95% soccer.)
   
   Anyway, back to the original thought - what should I know about this camera which makes it less than exciting? Not enough to separate it from the m2?

   • Reply

   • 0
5. I hope if the megapixels increase that the CRAW files don’t increase in size. Maybe they can also implement a more efficient compressed raw algorithm.

   • Reply

   • 0
6. The internet will go crazy if it\'s \"still only a 24mp sensor...\"
   Which is exactly why it should be a 24mp sensor.
   Because, like in most things, it's idiots that drive the narrative on the internet.

   • Reply

   • 0
7. 30mp would be ideal , looking to update my R . Any resolution will get old for the internet in time. Hopefully it will have cfexpress B . If it has both it will be in my bag.

   • Reply

   • 0
8. Wouldn't 30ish megapixels screw up the potential for Raw 4k video?
   I know downsampling in canons "fine" modes is quite nice, but it also heats up the cameras quite a lot and limits the record times due to battery life and heat management.
   And 30mp would probably mean 4k lineskipping like in the R5 is necessary right? Sounds like a downgrade for videography to me

   • Reply

   • 0
9. Don\'t care about megapickels...I prefer R6 maintaining sub-30MP to achieve oversampled 4k60 with fast readout. Higher MP should focus on R5/R7-series.

   • Reply

   • 0

10. This would be an ideal successor of the EOS R that sat at a perfect spot of not too much and not too little resolution.

    Not too many and not too few megapixels, is what you mean. In terms of real resolution (i.e, spatial resolution defined as the ability of an imaging system to distinguish between two close but discrete points), the 24 MP sensors in the R6II, R3 and R1 have higher resolution than the 30 MP sensor in the 5DIV / EOS R. That's because the low-pass filter on the newer sensors has a different design.

    • Reply

    • 0

11. The internet will go crazy if it\'s \"still only a 24mp sensor...\"
    Which is exactly why it should be a 24mp sensor.
    Because, like in most things, it's idiots that drive the narrative on the internet.

    Even if it gets a 30MP sensor, the R6 III will get heavy flak from the internet "experts".
    Maybe they'll say 30MP is too much? Or not enough?
    I wouldn't be surprised. :p

    • Reply

    • 0

12. Even if it gets a 30MP sensor, the R6 III will get heavy flak from the internet "experts".
    Maybe they'll say 30MP is too much? Or not enough?
    I wouldn't be surprised. :p

    I would be personally pleasantly surprised if they will indeed go beyond the magic number (24).
    If 30(ish) will be the new magic number, I am confident the creative folks on the internet will find something else to complain about, like not enough FPS...
    Because in a world where there are fools that want high resolution, there are also fools that apparently cannot take photos without 40 FPS.
    Oh well :sneaky: (we do need a "shrug" emoji)

    • Reply

    • 0

13. I would be personally pleasantly surprised if they will indeed go beyond the magic number (24).
    If 30(ish) will be the new magic number, I am confident the creative folks on the internet will find something else to complain about, like not enough FPS...
    Because in a world where there are fools that want high resolution, there are also fools that apparently cannot take photos without 40 FPS.
    Oh well :sneaky: (we do need a "shrug" emoji)

    And this is why there are so many different cameras. :)

    • Reply

    • 0

14. Not too many and not too few megapixels, is what you mean. In terms of real resolution (i.e, spatial resolution defined as the ability of an imaging system to distinguish between two close but discrete points), the 24 MP sensors in the R6II, R3 and R1 have higher resolution than the 30 MP sensor in the 5DIV / EOS R. That's because the low-pass filter on the newer sensors has a different design.

    It's an example of the Goldilocks Effect, named after Goldilocks and the Three Bears fairy tale. Goldilocks discovered a house belonging to three bears, finds that each item (porridge, chair, bed) is either too hot/big/hard or too cold/small/soft, but one is "just right". In real life, like these threads, there are those who think they are the universal Goldilocks but have the temperament of a grizzly.

    • Reply

    • 0
15. For the love of all that is good in this world please keep it at 24mp!!!! I want 6K raw video internally and don’t want the added trouble from a high resolution sensor in a hybrid. 24 is the sweet spot and it should stay there for now.

    • Reply

    • 0
16. I'd be disappointed with any change from 24MP as this is plenty for everything I do and any increase will increase the file size and slow down the frame rates and increase the overheating.
    I'd prefer a faster stacked sensor and at least 1 CFe card (2 x CFe cards should become the standard anyway as SD cards are too slow, expensive and fragile)

    • Reply

    • 0

17. Not too many and not too few megapixels, is what you mean. In terms of real resolution (i.e, spatial resolution defined as the ability of an imaging system to distinguish between two close but discrete points), the 24 MP sensors in the R6II, R3 and R1 have higher resolution than the 30 MP sensor in the 5DIV / EOS R. That's because the low-pass filter on the newer sensors has a different design.

    Is it possible to get a low-pass filter on the potential 30 mp sensor so it as even better spatial resolution than the R3 & R1? If so, it seems like that would be ideal for some people.

    • Reply

    • 0

18. Is it possible to get a low-pass filter on the potential 30 mp sensor so it as even better spatial resolution than the R3 & R1? If so, it seems like that would be ideal for some people.

    That’s up to Canon, but given that they used the ‘new’ 16-point AA filter on the R6II, I suspect they will use it on the R6III.

    • Reply

    • 0

19. That’s up to Canon, but given that they used the ‘new’ 16-point AA filter on the R6II, I suspect they will use it on the R6III.

    The AA-filters on the R1 and R3 are symmetric with equal effects in the horizontal and vertical directions. Those on the R6ii, R5 and R5ii are different: asymmetric with little or no vertical component and strong in the horizontal. Canon have, as far as I know, never advertised this but optyczne has measured the horizontal and vertical components. The sites doing standard IMATESTs report just the average resolution of the sensor components. I've picked it up the asymmetry in chart tests. I originally thought it was a lens flaw!

    • Reply

    • 0