Canon talks EOS R3, and confirms that it is not the flagship mirrorless

[melgross]

That part about 3rd parties getting access is a worrying sign which would mean that Sigma and Tamron may either take long to make lenses or just decide its not worth the effort in short term.

Nah. Canon is the biggest one out there. They just had an excellent quarterly report. I have no doubt they will surpass Sony’s mirrorless sales. No one can easily ignore the mount. They figured out the EOS DSLR mount, and they’ll figure this one out too.

 

[rbr]

I'm sure they're working on it. It's just going to take some time. I'm hoping soon! They could've just released lenses that used the EF protocol with an RF mount and that would've worked. I'm glad they're working to do it right. It'll be worth the wait. In the mean time, their EF ART lenses work great (at least mine do) so if you need one pick one up used and enjoy it.

I love my Sigma ART lenses on the R5. I also like the fact that I can use the drop in polarizing filter adapter on all my EF mount lenses on the R5. I'm not in any hurry to replace them with RF mount lenses. But I do look at some the DG DN ART lenses that Sigma is releasing for Sony and wish that they were usable on Canon cameras.

 

[LSXPhotog]

No resolution, no care. haha I impatiently await a final number on the resolution and actual specifications. I know what I need and things I want in my next camera upgrade. Video is surprisingly more important for me than ever, thanks to the R5/R6.

 

[privatebydesign]

You're correct (which is why I didn't list Zeiss or Red, and those are really niche manufacturers anyway, relative to the volume of lenses that Tamron/Sigma/Tokina move).

Do you know if the point about regulatory limitations about licensing EF AF protocols to non Japanese lens manufacturers is true too?

 

[neurorx]

I wouldn't draw that conclusion. If the R3 is slotted between the r5 and and 1DX, then the resolution is also likely to be between the two. Actually, I'm optimistic (wishful thinking, perhaps?) that it will be a Sony A1 killer matching the Sony's resolution--or at least 45MP--with better AF and handling in an integrated "professional" body. The integrated body being smaller than the 1DX body is, for me, one of the most attractive features. Note that the Sony is already targeting this same audience, so I don't see how Canon can introduce a camera that doesn't at least match the Sony feature for feature including resolution and video.

I'll let other's speculate on what the R1 will offer. Perhaps it's a global sensor and QPAF that aren't quite ready yet.

The good thing about it not being the flagship camera is that perhaps the R3 might undercut the Sony A1 in price (maybe $5995? again, probably wishful thinking).

If it were similar to the R5 for stills, why would anyone want an R5 other than price?

 

[neurorx]

I am hoping the R3 gives more low light capacity.

 

[AEWest]

Flagships have four year cycles so it would make sense that the R3 is not a flagship.
In two years we’ll get a mirrorless R flagship: EOS-1R

I believe that, because of the change in mount, they will accelerate the upgrade cycle this time and have the flagship ready in 2022.

 

[Dragon]

Fascinating. An APSC lens, not for M, not for EF-S, but for RF. The plot thickens.

I doubt there is any plot here. Fully manual lenses just need a mechanical adapter to connect to any camera that fits in their BF range. You will see the same thing from Viltrox and others. For this kind of lens it makes the most sense to buy it with the shortest mount (on the lens side-typically Nikon F) and then use adapters so it will work on just about any camera, but some folks love "native" lenses, so the Chinese manufacturers will accommodate. If the lens was originally designed for mirrorless, then the variations make more sense since the BF distances are too close for adapters to be used. In any case, don't get your hopes up for an APS-c R.

 

[Dragon]

If it were similar to the R5 for stills, why would anyone want an R5 other than price?

Size.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Do you know if the point about regulatory limitations about licensing EF AF protocols to non Japanese lens manufacturers is true too?

Sorry, no. First I've heard that one. It may be true, I've heard the argument that it's not in Canon's interest to license their AF protocols, but they could certainly do so in a fiscally logical way, i.e. charge 3rd parties for licensing (which may make it illogical for those 3rd parties to do so, because they'd have to pass those costs along to customers and that would narrow the cost gap).

 

[neuroanatomist]

I believe that, because of the change in mount, they will accelerate the upgrade cycle this time and have the flagship ready in 2022.

The EOS 1 was the first Canon professional body for EF lenses, it came out 2 years after they switched from FD to EF, and in that case there was no simple, optics-free adapter to allow use of the older lenses on the newer body.

 

[peters]

true. So the EOS R3 ist for: surprise, surprise: EVERYONE.

(what other categories of photography are there that do not fit this designation??) LOL

Everything where you need or want a higher resoluation or better Studio features.
Like Product photography (most bread and butter work there is I guess), landscape photograhy, wedding photography, portraits, Macro, Architecture... so pretty much most of the work...
All this will certainly be possible with the R3 no doubt (like it is possible with the 1DX), but if the resolution is lower than the R5, than I guess I will keep the R5 for most parts of my everyday work. Even if the R3 will be faster. Sports/Journalism is not everything ;-)

 

[peters]

People keep wishing Canon would just give away the mount tech. I don't understand the thinking behind that. Why should Canon help a competitor? That's a little like expecting Ford to accommodate Chevy engines. Makes no sense to me. Someone will say it'll help Canon sell bodies, when the big bucks are made by Canon through multiple lens sales... Along with a body.

Its certainly much better for the customers. 3rd party offered SO many great lenses, its what made the EF cameras so desirable. Many lenses never got a equivalent from Canon. 3rd party is great, competition is good for business in my opinion =)
From Canons point of view I can totaly understand why they dont want this, but for customers its awesome =)

 

[Ozarker]

No

BSI sensor? Feels like this time the sensor is coming out of Sony factory, as is with so many other brandas: nikon fuji panasonic and others. They are all “designed” by their own and manufactured by sony. Any conspiracy here?

No conspiracy. Canon builds its own sensors.

 

[Ozarker]

Flagships have four year cycles so it would make sense that the R3 is not a flagship.
In two years we’ll get a mirrorless R flagship: EOS-1R

EF cycles have not much to do with RF.

 

[peters]

As pointed out above, Canon never licensed the EF lens mount/protocols to 3rd party lens makers like Tamron, Sigma and Tokina. No reason those manufacturers cannot reverse-engineer the RF mount as they've done for the EF mount. Samyang/Rokinon are already selling RF-mount lenses with autofocus, including a 14/2.8 and 85/1.4. So if you want the RF mount, you can already pay someone other than Canon to get it.

If Canon realy would want to stop this, they could maybe use some encryption on the AF communication. I guess it would be very easy to make reverse engineriing the new AF system as difficult as possible... I hope they dont do this though.

 

[Dearl4]

"Will Canon share the RF mount with other manufacturers?​

It doesn’t look that way. Canon is likely to keep the mount a closed system, so the third parties will have to reverse engineer everything to make RF mount lenses to utilize the new technologies available in the RF mount."

Well if that's the case, I won't be investing in Canon's over-priced RF cameras or zoom lenses.
After testing both the C70 and FX3, I was far more impressed with what Sony has to offer anyway.

 

[unfocused]

I believe that, because of the change in mount, they will accelerate the upgrade cycle this time and have the flagship ready in 2022.

Possibly. Or, they could compromise and release a flagship R1 in 2023, with development announcement in third quarter 2022.

My uninformed opinion:

With the R3 announcement Canon keeps emphasizing that the 1DxIII will remain the "flagship" camera. This may be simply a marketing strategy to keep 1DxIII sales from cratering, or it could be a recognition that the professional customer base for the 1D series is not itching to switch to mirrorless.

That's not to say that the enthusiast base, which probably accounts for more 1Dx sales than the professional base, doesn't want a mirrorless "pro" camera. That segment does and they will get it with the R3. But, with the R3 in the lineup, Canon may feel little urgency to release an R1 geared to the shrinking pool of professional users. Especially since the professional market is more conservative and was always going to be the last segment to move to mirrorless.

The R3 may become the camera of choice for the lucrative enthusiast market that wants the latest and greatest. It could also become a more affordable option for sports photographers and photojournalists who have to buy their own equipment (which is a lot higher percentage of the total market than it once was.) The R3 can also serve as a test bed for high end professional sports and Olympics photographers, allowing Canon to learn what works and doesn't work for these users. Canon could then concentrate on making the R1 a camera for this much smaller and shrinking base of professional users without feeling any urgency to rush the development -- especially since it's unlikely to be much of a profit generator for Canon. It could be a 2023 camera or it could be a 2024 camera, maintaining the traditional four year Olympic cycle.

It's also entirely possible that we are overestimating Canon's own knowledge of what they plan to do. We are in a new and perilous era for camera manufacturers. The market has been totally disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic, making it extremely difficult to get a clear reading on where the market is headed. Even without the pandemic, the market was rapidly shifting and shrinking. One side effect of the pandemic that people don't think about is how it has limited the ability of manufacturers to field test equipment. If an R1 is in development, just where do people think it is being tested, given how many professional and college sporting events have been cancelled over the past year. The pandemic has impacted development cycles in ways that we may never know.

 

[Tremotino]

"Will Canon share the RF mount with other manufacturers?​

It doesn’t look that way. Canon is likely to keep the mount a closed system, so the third parties will have to reverse engineer everything to make RF mount lenses to utilize the new technologies available in the RF mount."

Well if that's the case, I won't be investing in Canon's over-priced RF cameras or zoom lenses.
After testing both the C70 and FX3, I was far more impressed with what Sony has to offer anyway.

That's totally okay for me! Enjoy!

 

[neuroanatomist]

Its certainly much better for the customers. 3rd party offered SO many great lenses, its what made the EF cameras so desirable. Many lenses never got a equivalent from Canon. 3rd party is great, competition is good for business in my opinion =)
From Canons point of view I can totaly understand why they dont want this, but for customers its awesome =)

I'm curious – what great 3rd party lenses are there for which there are no Canon equivalents? The optically stellar manual focus Zeiss lenses come to mind (although there are Canon L-series equivalents, just slightly less optically impressive and much cheaper). There are a handful of 3rd party options for lenses like the TS-E lenses (Schneider) and MP-E 65 (Venus, Mitakon), but again, Canon has versions.

The converse seems more true, for me at least – there's no 3rd party 600/4 for Canon, no 3rd party 11-24 or fisheye zoom, no TS-E Macro lenses.