It’s Canon EOS R6 Mark III Week With a Fresh Teaser
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
I really can’t see the readout being that fast if they didnt go stacked. My guess would be it just has the same mechanical shutter mechanism as the r5ii (hence the matching sync speed), but won’t be able to sync at all in E shutter due to the slower sensor readout speed.
The E-shutter only C50 doesn’t support flash sync at all
Upvote
0
Top LCD screen, video capabilities, eye-control AF, I would guess QF in general, maybe pre-capture.
Upvote
0
I was wondering what would be the downside of omitting the digic accelerator. Worse AF maybe? We are about to find out how much the accelerator contributes in real life (compared to cameras having one).
Also, introduction of R6 III kills off the R3 line pretty much IMO. On paper, the R6 III is an upgraded R3 apart from the chasis.
Also, introduction of R6 III kills off the R3 line pretty much IMO. On paper, the R6 III is an upgraded R3 apart from the chasis.
Upvote
0
I don’t think you’ll lose anything. The R is a 30Mpix camera but when I compared it to the original R6 (20Mpix) it didn’t provide any more details and the R6ii is gonna be even better.
The R had a really soft AA filter in front of the sensor.
Upvote
0
Maybe the digic accelerator is needed for higher pixel count. They don’t use it for “AI” as Sony does. The digic X can already do ML AF. It may be a bit slower or may not provide some of the AF modes.
Some people still prefer the R3. I tried it at a Canon even and there’s something to the integrated vertical grip. Feels much better than a smaller camera with an ad on grip. And the R3 is much lighter than the R1
Upvote
0
There are probably many advantages besides the main specs people usually look at. The quality and features of the EVF for example (including eye-control).
But much faster sensor readout from stacked sensor in R5II makes electronic shutter much more usable for action photography. There are some confusion in this thread (and the rumor-post) about relation between flash sync speed and sensor readout speed. That the R6III has a fast mechanical flash sync speed, does not mean the sensor readout is fast (*). Electronic shutter in R6III will have the normal limitations of a non-stacked sensor.
(*) It is true there is a relation between sensor readout speed and flash sync if you look at flash sync speed using the electronic shutter. But flash sync speed with mechanical shutter has nothing to do with that. The sensor readout speed in R6III wont be fast enough to support flash sync at all when using the electronic shutter. It is only a few high-end stacked sensor cameras that can do flash sync with electronic shutter (at least when looking at "big sensor" cameras).
Last edited:
Upvote
0
The R6ii would be great for kids sports: fantastic AF and low light performance.
The difference from your 6dii would be night & day
The R6iii won't be any better than the R6ii for your use case and you'll save a lot of money
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Sometimes it’s just about feeling more “pro”. People buy more expensive clothes or cars to feel better. I’m pretty sure some people buy more expensive cameras to feel better. And sometimes it’s about the clients. They see a photographer with a bigger camera as a more professional
Upvote
0
On the topic of R6 III not having the Digic Accelerator, i was thinking that maybe Canon have integrated the Digic Accelerator on to the processor itself. I would assume that the term Digic X is more of a family of processors rather than one processor model. Maybe this next iteration of the Digic X contains the Digic Accelerator and the functionalities of it. There are many advantages of integrating chips together: minimizing energy consumption, minimizing communication latencies etc. Downsides are heat dissipation and space but as the efficiency of the microchip architecture and fabrication techniques advances, it makes this less of an issue.
Upvote
0
That is also the impression I have got for the "Digic X" monikor. I believe there already several versions of Digic X, and it could easily have received another update with the R6III release.
In the end it doesn't matter if some "spec" mentions a "Digic Accelerator" or not. It is features and performance of the camera that counts.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Yes please. The current one seems to be just a tweaked EF version. Not the sharpest lens (but plenty sharp for me) but what I'd really want is to make it smaller and lighter. Seeing what they've done with the 28-70 f/2.8, there must be a way how to shave off some grams and millimetres. It's also among the four oldest RF lenses.
Upvote
0
The 28-70 f/2.8 is smaller because of 28mm. My problem with the 24-105L is the price. It's way too expensive for what it is. The Nikon 24-120 F4 is almost 50% cheaper in UK.
Upvote
0
The DIGIC accelerator takes the heavy lifting from the main processor. It is what deals with processing the crazy amount of data that come from speed and resolution. The DIGIC processor is left to deal with rendering and whatnot.
It also deals with autofocus, the "learning" and the cross-type R1 stuff as well as exposure. Features like shooting video and stills at the same time, and offloading them to separate memory cards.
Think of the DIGIC Accelerator as a powerful GPU taking some of the processing duties from the CPU.
Dual DIGIC processors in some cameras used to be a thing. The difference here is the accelerator has specific duties, it's not just two processors working in parallel.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
