The question I recall answering was: "Can you point to any study/research to show that optical is better than digital correction?"
Upvote
0
The Canon EOS R6 Mark III is Canon’s Next Full-Frame Release
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
The question I recall answering was: "Can you point to any study/research to show that optical is better than digital correction?"
Rule556
I see no reason for recording the obvious. -Weston
I generally agree, however, there are times where I wish my R6mkii had just a little bit more resolution. I do miss the 30ishMP of my original R. I feel like 32 is a great sweet spot for this camera. I might even consider upgrading just because of that.
Upvote
0
totally agree with that. Never had a issue with 24MP, but with the limitation of 12bit RAW in EL mode...
Upvote
1
I still hope it will be 14bit RAW in electronic shutter mode.. hope dies at last...
Upvote
0
The final result might be similar and the digital corrected image could look even better but the complete black corners (on lenses like the 24-50 and 24-240) will need to be filled with stretched pixels. In that sense is not very different than filling missing parts with AI generated (fake) pixels.
Upvote
0
Would the rumored
- Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS VCM (Or maybe USM)
Upvote
0
I´m guessing Nov 26, 2025. Maybe autocorrect messed that up@Canon Rumors and what was the second date?20 or 26
Upvote
0
If the R6mkiii really hits 30-32 MP it basically counts a EOS RiiAny rumors about an R Mark II? Never mind.
Ah, I would have loved a truly mkii version of that camera! Just should've kept the size, replace the Touch Bar with a joystick, give it proper FPS and new AF
voila, my absolute perfect camera! R5 comes close though.
Upvote
0
Canon is pulling back from the "pure hybrid" . It actually dilutes the "Cine" line. One would say "Why have an overlaping compact "Cine" line with a half dozen "pure hybrid" niche cameras. Still photography includes many more high resolution photography genres than simply 24mp. Sorry, when the client request high resolution quality images, it only takes a 5 minute google search for anyone to know that 24mp is NOT a high resolution image in all genres. One simply can not substittute a 24mp image for a 45mp or a 102mp image and say that they delivered the "highest resolution" image possible for the price quote. Its an outright lie. Who's sweet spot? A myth and a lie. Photography is an element of the Arts. Like telling an art painter "this acrylic paint is the sweet spot for all your works". Ludicrous and absolute garbage.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
It is not gonna happen in nearest future. R3/R1 sensors are too expensive - reason is, that those are stacked sensors - meaning they have extra layer of RAM, which is extra cost and expensive one. I was replacing my sensor in R6 (mk I) in authorised service and it cost aroun 800 USD. From curiosity I have asked, how much it would be for my R3 and they said, that cost is around 2500 USD - which is almost same price as brand new R6 (that time). I really wish it would happen (R3 in R5 style body), but I am affraid, that it is not possible in price bracket of R6
That is main reason, why I went route R3 + R5 mk II - I wanted 2 stacked sensors, as I am shooting quite often under LED lighting and R6 mk II was slow for me
Upvote
0
Canon is doing very well in the mid-tier mirrorless camera market. A quick look at the Amazon best selling cameras shows that Canon has 7 of the top 10 and number two is the R6 Mark II. At nearly $2,000 (USD) it is priced well compared to the competition, and has great specs for both photo and video to the most people. By contrast, look at Sony who is now pricing their 3.5 year old A7IV at $2,700 USD. The Canon R6 Mark III doesn't have to introduce huge improvement to compete well. Sony is behind and the A7V is likely to be priced at or over $3,000 USD without a stacked sensor. Rumors are pointing to a non-stacked, perhaps slightly faster sensor but still close to 30megapixels. Again, price to spec ratio and value matter a lot and Canon's only real competition is Nikon. But Nikon have not convinced very many consumers yet, with nothing in the top 10 and barely cracking the top 20.
Upvote
0
In almost all cases that I have seen compared, digital correction is more effective and sharper than optical correction. If you are worried about fake pixels, then I guess you never use noise reduction or sharpening, which, of course, also produce "fake" pixels.
Upvote
0
Well, if the pricing is intriguing on this lens, that might give us a hint what Canon is up to and why they are locking out other companies. Not saying it is a great strategy, but at least we´d know a bit more about their plans.
Upvote
0
