Latest activity

Click · Dec 30, 2025

That's a very nice shot,ISv. We have a clear view of the bird. I really like it.

ISv · Dec 30, 2025

Many times the conditions are not right and most importantly the birds are not collaborating...
This is from today.

ISv · Dec 30, 2025

becceric said:
Reading your description and looking at the first photo, I saw Darth Vader with very large ears.

I wish I had time to decrease the speed, then, maybe the wings would appear as they should: he was actually taking off on the first frame!

becceric · Dec 30, 2025

ISv said:
Somehow this Carpenter bee looks to me as a Darth Vader with wings...View attachment 227289 View attachment 227290

Reading your description and looking at the first photo, I saw Darth Vader with very large ears.

neuroanatomist · Dec 30, 2025

Copland said:
In practical terms, within the Canon system you seem to need the R5 II for high resolution, ~~the R3 II for speed, resolution, and ruggedness,~~ and the R1 for speed and ruggedness ~~personal status~~ and the few technical features only it offers. That’s absurd.

Excluding a camera about which we know nothing including if it will even exist, it seems a basic choice between resolution and speed. Sounds a lot like the choice between the Sony a1 and a9III.

Copland said:
Does Canon seriously expect its professional users to have this entire lineup in their kit?

More likely, Canon expect their professional users to know what they need and buy that.

scyrene · Dec 30, 2025

Copland said:
The big problem with Canon is still that all bodies involve compromises. None of them can truly do everything. Even now. And I find that very unfortunate—and honestly a bit weak—for a manufacturer like Canon.

Does any other manufacturer do that? In any field? A body that did everything would have at least one compromise: price. It would cost a lot more.

Copland said:
In practical terms, within the Canon system you seem to need the R5 II for high resolution, the R3 II for speed, resolution, and ruggedness, and the R1 for personal status and the few technical features only it offers.

If this rumour is in any way accurate, then you won't need the R5II for resolution, will you? So it's still a two-way choice (the same choice that has been there since the 1Dx/5D3 days).

Xopher78 · Dec 30, 2025

I think it’ll be a shame if the R3 is a mish-mash of the R1 and R5 that it will inevitably be… I’d love a professional APS-H camera to supersede the R7 or 7DII, like the original 1D. 24MP would be just fine.

Toamelicious · Dec 30, 2025

AccipiterQ said:
It's important to note that for this review, and for subsequent updates, I will do my best to shoot as much footage as possible in the XF-AVC S YCC422 10 bit flavor of the h.264 codec, in Intra frame compression

Why not use h.265? I don't shoot a ton of video, so this may be a silly question, but does h.264 offer any advantage?

I think H.264 is easier on the processor for playback and generally more compatible with possibly older devices.
H.265 does better compression, resulting in smaller files, but also more load on the CPU.

danfaz · Dec 30, 2025

AlanF said:
The Eurasian Kingfisher is much smaller and faster than the Belted, and rather difficult to get good shots in flight.

Well, then even more props to Nemorino, and I'm doubly hosed!

AlanF · Dec 30, 2025

danfaz said:
Very nice shots! There are a couple of Belted Kingfishers in my area, but I just can't ever get close enough to them.

The Eurasian Kingfisher is much smaller and faster than the Belted, and rather difficult to get good shots in flight.

Copland · Dec 30, 2025

For me personally, it would be a moderate disappointment if a new R3 line with significantly higher resolution were to appear in the near future.
About a year ago, I switched from my R3 bodies to the R1. There were a few small reasons for that (age/wear, minor functional improvements, viewfinder, dual CFexpress slots, app compatibility), but it wasn’t really necessary. Economically, certainly not. At the time, I could have bought four new R3 bodies for the price of two new R1s.

Pure speed or the even more robust body were not my main reasons for switching. I got along extremely well with the R3s; they were, in fact, the best cameras I had ever owned up to that point. And over 35+ years with Canon, I’ve had pretty much everything that was state of the art at the time. Still, the manufacturer’s “best” camera always has a certain appeal.

That’s also why I was disappointed that the R1 again came with only 24 MP and was not a step up in that regard. But okay, it is what it is.

In principle, I’d be fine with Canon continuing the R3 line. But in that case, the R1 series should clearly remain the highlight, with everything else always following behind.

Even as someone who switched from the R5 to the R5 II, I would be extremely annoyed if a 50 MP R3 were to appear shortly afterward. Not every R5 user can deploy that camera without compromises.

The big problem with Canon is still that all bodies involve compromises. None of them can truly do everything. Even now. And I find that very unfortunate—and honestly a bit weak—for a manufacturer like Canon.

I would really wish for Canon to offer a single body that combines high resolution, speed, and all state-of-the-art features in one camera. Price is “irrelevant,” as long as it’s appropriate for “the best of the best.”
The price of the R1 certainly suggests that… ;-)

In practical terms, within the Canon system you seem to need the R5 II for high resolution, the R3 II for speed, resolution, and ruggedness, and the R1 for personal status and the few technical features only it offers. That’s absurd.
Does Canon seriously expect its professional users to have this entire lineup in their kit?

AlanF · Dec 30, 2025

GMCPhotographics said:
AlanF, yes i'm very aware of those figures. However, we all make a choice of where on that scale we choose to buy into the MP density scale. For me, I prefer the lower noise in my final images and post production file handling of the R6ii and I'm not seeing a massive amount over extra fine detail in my images from my R5. It's there but nit as much as I was expecting.

If we are talking about printing to the same size equivelence, then why isn't the R7 more popular?

The R7 is very popular with me and with other birders here like @Dragon as we do squeeze out extra detail compared with cropping FF to the same image sensor size with the same lens on both. Equivalence is for when you blow up the whole of the sensor to the same output size, using a shorter focal length lens for the smaller sensor.

According to the optyczne site you referred to, the R5 resolves up to 28% more detail in good light with a wide lens. Whether or not you see or need this extra resolution depends on what you are photographing. If it's a jumbo jet you don't have the fine detail to resolve. If it's a bird too far away that the feather detail is not resolved by both the R5 and R6ii then you won't see much difference in resolution. If the bird is so close that both can fully resolve the details on the feathers, then it doesn't make much difference. If you have a coke bottle for a lens and it is in deep shade, then you won't see much difference. But, if there is a bird that is in the range of distances where it is just beyond the resolution of the R6ii but enters the resolution of the R5 that can see its feathers, then it does make a difference. It's roughly equivalent to having a 640mm lens vs a 500mm lens. And, if the image is such that I have to crop the FF image, which is usuaI for me, and I want to squeeze out another 20% or so, I grab the R7.

Test Canon EOS R5 - Rozdzielczość - Test aparatu

Test aparatu Canon EOS R5 - Rozdzielczość ...

www.optyczne.pl

Test Canon EOS R6 Mark II - Rozdzielczość - Test aparatu

Test aparatu Canon EOS R6 Mark II - Rozdzielczość ...

www.optyczne.pl

kraush · Dec 30, 2025

EOS 4 Life said:
I think they are reading way too much into the meaning of the numbers.

1 is top.
5 is midrange.
9 is the theoretical bottom, before we head into the double-digit APS-C camera range.
There are a bunch of numbers in between.
None of this tells us what specific features a camera will have, but we can go back to history for existing model names.

That is my opinion too. It's sort of numerology. Especially the comparison of xyzD and Ru models. Canon itself made it moot by slicing the APS-C R7 between the FF R6 Mark v and the R8 Mark w specimen.
Regards, Hans

AccipiterQ · Dec 30, 2025

It's important to note that for this review, and for subsequent updates, I will do my best to shoot as much footage as possible in the XF-AVC S YCC422 10 bit flavor of the h.264 codec, in Intra frame compression

Why not use h.265? I don't shoot a ton of video, so this may be a silly question, but does h.264 offer any advantage?

AccipiterQ · Dec 30, 2025

The most disappointing camera I have ever used was the R7, I see it as more a 90D successor than anything else. I'm hoping that the R7ii is a true successor to the 7D ii. Just make it usable above 1600 ISO, make it so that the shutter slap doesn't set off local richter-scale sensors, and have the construction of the body actually feel solid, and that's a win to me.

Olli · Dec 30, 2025

Sadly not as Canon bring just one Body after the next. Really annoying me to not finally getting a new tele lens which seems to have a need for a lot people dont want to spend +10k on one but need a lighter than the existing ones...
Of course just my 2 cents...

Bob Howland · Dec 30, 2025

Mark flyer said:
Are u being sarcastic? In my experience, a 45-60mp takes almost identical pics to a 24mp camera in the same price range.

A 6000 X 4000 sensor gives a 20in X 30in print at 200 Pixels/inch. That's enough for me. It seems that the most important reason for more is to allow more cropping, including video. Video aficionados sometimes say that 8K video allows them to be looser (sloppier?) in their composition and to make their 4K decisions later, especially if important stuff unexpectedly happens near the edge of the 8K image..

Red Dog · Dec 30, 2025

More than happy to welcome an R3 Mkii with slightly more megapixels than the current one, provided it can still produce as clean an image as the current version at high ISO values. As a freelance sports photographer the R3 has been my go to body since I bought it several years ago, and apart from a few teething issues getting to understand how to get the best AF tracking settings for my usage, its been a terrific camera.
I also now have the R5mkii in the armoury and it serves 2 purposes, a back up to the R3 on match days, but its also now my main body for motorsports events, provided the light is good. The extra MP is a great benefit especially when shooting at distance, as H&S don't really like you standing a couple of yards from a 200 mph missile these days (unless you're in the Isle of Man of course).

Apart from high ISO performance the R5Mkii is let down by shocking battery performance. It just eats them. A full days shooting requires a pocket full of batteries at present whereas the R3 could handle the same on 2 batteries at most. If the R3mkii does appear I hope Canon retain the current battery otherwise it'll be staying well clear. Whilst 2 CFExpress card slots would be a bonus, the current card slot set-up doesn't impact on my use of either camera, so it wouldn't be a massive incentive. I'll be watching for any action images from the Olympics with interest, as I know one particular photographer going who was given the original R3 to test before it came onto the market. He was very straight and honest in his opinion of its overall performance including the things which didn't work particularly well for him.

GMCPhotographics · Dec 30, 2025

Surab said:
Maybe the R3 will become to R5 what the R6II is to the R8. Same imaging platform but more advanced hardware features.

My main doubt with this hypothesis is that Canon would decrease, albeit only slightly, the sensor read-out speed for the R3 line if they did this step.

If true, it might be the only way to get a R5ii camera with a decent buffer size! The R6iii’s buffer is way superior!

Mark flyer · Dec 30, 2025

gdanmitchell said:
The good news is — I guess — is that if we extrapolate the photosite density of the APS-C sensor… Canon might eventually catch up with the 60MP FF sensors that Sony has had for a few years… as Sony is rumored to go beyond that.

Swell.

Are u being sarcastic? In my experience, a 45-60mp takes almost identical pics to a 24mp camera in the same price range.

Bob Howland · Dec 30, 2025

Craig, is there any more word on an R7V?

EOS 4 Life · Dec 30, 2025

Michael Clark said:
By the time we pay sales tax is the U.S. (taxes are not included in posted prices in the U.S.), for the R5 Mark II that's another $312-390 depending on location as tax rates are different in different states, counties, and cities. If we want more than a 1-year warranty it's another $199 for 2 years, $280 for 3 years, and $390 for 4 years. So with sales tax and a 5-year warranty, we pay around $4,600 USD.

For the R6 Mark III, that adds $224-280 in sales taxes and $290 for four years of CarePAK past the one-year warranty, though some dealers are giving the 2-year CarePAK version at no additional charge as an incentive at the moment. So it's actually around $3,050 with sales tax and a 3-year warranty or $3,340 for a 5-year warranty.

Not everyone pays sales tax in the USA.
There is also Payboo on B&H.

EOS 4 Life · Dec 30, 2025

Michael Clark said:
These are similar to the positions of the EF mount DSLRs. Of course there was no 8D. There were no 2D, 3D, 4D, or 9D series, either. Just 1D, 5D, 6D, and 7D.

There's no guarantee there will ever be an R2 or R4 camera. Or R9 for that matter. The R6 was the continuation of the EOS R. (Yes, The EOS R has the 5D Mark IV sensor, but most everything else about it was squarely in the 6-Series niche rather than the 5-Series.) The R8 is the budget FF that began with the EOS RP. (Again, the RP had the 6D Mark II sensor, but it was not a 6-Series camera in many other respects. It was more like a FF version of the 77D: A little more than a Rebel, not quite an x0D.)

The EOS 3 FILM body was the first to offer eye controlled AF.

Prior to 2012 The 1Ds series were the resolution kings.

For all practical purposes, the 5D Mark III was the continuation of the 1Ds line, other than the gripped indestructible body and larger battery.

The 2007 1Ds Mark III was 21.1 MP, compared to the 2008 5D Mark II at 21.0 MP (which seemed at the time to be intentional to not exceed the 1Ds Mark III)
The 2004 1Ds Mark II was 16.7 MP, compared to the 2005 5D at 12.7 MP.

The 5D Mark II had only a slightly better than x0D grade AF system with only 9 AF points (plus 6 AF "Assist Points" unmarked in the viewfinder that were only active when using AI Servo AF). It was fairly poor at shot-to-shot AF consistency. It was a consumer grade AF system.

When Canon introduced the FF 18 MP EOS 1D X in 2012, they claimed it unified the APS-H 1D Series and FF 1Ds series (the most current models were the 16.1 MP APS-H 1D Mark IV that could shoot at 10 fps and the FF 21.1 MP 1Ds Mark III that was limited to 5 fps). They said they did this because processing power had reached the point where one no longer had to trade resolution for speed.

But in reality the 18 MP 1D X was a FF 1D Mark IV successor that handled faster than the APS-H 1D Mark IV but gave up resolution compared to the 21.1 MP 1Ds Mark III.

It's no coincidence that just after the 1D X was introduced, the 5D Mark III followed with 22.3 MP and the same PDAF array part number found in the 1D X. (There were some slight differences in firmware and AF menu options. A few AF menu options were only available with the 1D X, but the 5D Mark III allowed the selection and customization of several AF "cases", just as the 1-Series had exclusively offered in the past.) The frame rate increased to 6 fps from the 5D Mark II with 3.9 fps. The 5D Series now had a pro grade AF system that it had previously lacked, a frame rate faster than the 5 fps 1Ds Mark III, higher resolution than the 1Ds Mark III, and a substantially lower price tag. Many 1Ds Mark III shooters, particularly wedding photographers, migrated to the 5D Mark III or later to the 5D Mark IV.

From the 5D Mark III on, the 5-Series was the functional continuation of the 1Ds line. Higher resolution but slower handling than the 1D series. The ultimate model in terms of resolution was the 50 MP 5Ds/5Ds R.

I think they are reading way too much into the meaning of the numbers.

1 is top.
5 is midrange.
9 is the theoretical bottom, before we head into the double-digit APS-C camera range.
There are a bunch of numbers in between.
None of this tells us what specific features a camera will have, but we can go back to history for existing model names.

Viddrumr32 · Dec 30, 2025

GMCPhotographics said:
That's maybe your prediction, but that's not what the artical reports. It's looking a lot like a super-pro version of the R5 linage.
The R1 is sports dedicated camera. It can easily shoot most things and it's very versatile. But the designers have honed and forged it for a life of profressional sports photographers. But this is a small niche in the professional world of photography, but it's the niche that grabs the headlines and it's where Canon likes to place it's top tier camera. If those photographers like a non extended 70-200/f2.8....then we get the new Z lens option. If those photographers don't want 45mp, but prefer 24mp...then that's what gets delivered, regardless of the wants / hopes / needs of any other type of photographer. It's been like this for years and years. Even pre digital...rememerber those days?

For years, (pre mirrorless) a pair of 5D series camera bodies were the staple of working pro photographers. They just worked, had the right level of build , durability and features. They were do it all cameras. Canon split this line into the 5D and 6D cameras, with the 5D going up in price and the 6D being a more budget friendly option (considering most pros buy a pair of these). In the mirrorless world, Canon pushed this envelope even further. The R5ii is a far more porfessional camera than it's 5DIII forebare, with a higher price tag to suit. I suspect that the near miss with the EOS R (many considered it to be an immature project camera), Canon threw everything the had at the R5 and it's the first camera in living memory where Canon poured so much tech and ability into it.
As a consequence, the R5 has become the pinaccle of versatility with the cropablity of it's 45mp sensor. You can do top tier landscapes, wild life...pretty much anything that you can throw at it. You see a lot of profressional wildlife, landscape, portraiture, wedding, events...all using a R5 or R5ii. It's THAT versatile.
Since the stacked sensor in the 5D mkII, it's easily THE most versatile camera Canon have ever made. The 45mp is actually overkill for many photographers, it seems to be the standard that we have all gotten used to. Which is why the R6 range is so popular, it's a slightly less extreme R5.

Which means that from a product and development point of view, Canon really have only one play with the R3II. Essentially making a R5II in a sports pro body, like the 1Ds series used to be, and make it a dev tray / play pen for fancy things like global shutter options. If Canon had put a stacked sensor in the R6iii, then it would seriously rob sales of the R5ii. An R3ii would never rob sales of a R5 series...more likely sell a few more R5ii's as a backup to the R3ii. The R5 range is the camera that Canon makes it's super profit from and it's the camera they will endeavour to protect it's market. A 50mp R3ii won't rob sales from the R1 either, because those photographers are not interested in post production or crop-ability. They need speed and a fast workflow. Shoot....get it right in frame....send to agency.

I don't think a R3ii will be a particaulrly big seller, and in some repects it's a halo camera, so it doesn't need to sell well. Both the R6 and R5 sell in far more profitable quantaties.

We have amazing choices and options in the Canon range as we enter 2026!

Now that's intriguing to think about. To have the R5ii sensor in a pro-style body would be nice. But that's such a significant departure from what the R3 has been. I feel like that's too big of a leap for the marketing department to sign off on. But I agree about your thoughts for the R3ii being a testing zone. It feels ripe for their first global shutter foray just like the Sony A9iii. I wouldn't be surprised if they use a 24-30mp resolution for the global shutter sensor at $6000. That grabs headlines while comfortably avoiding impact on the R5ii (resolution will be too low and price too high) and R1 (worse image quality from global shutter and unproven tech the pros won't want to deal with).

Selfishly, it would work perfectly for me to help solve the banding/flicker issues I deal with on a weekly basis so I'd be first in line. I just hope the timing is accurate. I remember thinking in fall 2024 that the R6iii was imminent.

Click · Dec 30, 2025

Same here. Lovely series, ISv.

Latest activity

Latest activity

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics