The Canon EOS R3 will be $5999 USD

[Dragon]

View attachment 200128

Here's the dollar/yen chart for the last 5 years. Where is the dollar dropping like a rock?

All the chart means is that the yen is losing value as fast as the dollar. Have you been to the store lately? Everything is smaller and more expensive at the same time.

 

[Talys]

Sorry, I speaking to value, not currency exchange. Inflation is affecting almost all currencies. By "dropping like a rock" I meant relative to what you can buy with a dollar. Anyone who has been shopping lately and can't see the change is, to put it politely, not very observant.

It's actually been very region-dependent. For example, France and Finland have had very little inflation, when compared to Germany and the United States. China and Greece have had negligible inflation.

International inflation rates in 2021

Inflation rates in 2021 | Overview of the historical Inflation rates of a lot of countries in the year 2021 | Charts and tables

www.global-rates.com

I live in Canada, and certainly, we have felt it here in some goods. It's very supply chain dependent.

 

[Dragon]

It's actually been very region-dependent. For example, France and Finland have had very little inflation, when compared to Germany and the United States. China and Greece have had negligible inflation.

International inflation rates in 2021

Inflation rates in 2021 | Overview of the historical Inflation rates of a lot of countries in the year 2021 | Charts and tables

www.global-rates.com

I live in Canada, and certainly, we have felt it here in some goods. It's very supply chain dependent.

And in the last year and half, the dollar is down roughly 10% against both the the Euro and the Yuan. Those are the ones that count. I might add that the cpi has a lot of flaws, like using only rent rates to determine housing costs. That is not a useful measure during a period when rents are being controlled by the govt.

 

[Loswr]

And in the last year and half, the dollar is down roughly 10% against both the the Euro and the Yuan. Those are the ones that count.

In the present context of a Japanese company pricing goods for sale in the US? No.

 

[navastronia]

I'm not... they're perpetually out of stock. If raising them slightly helps keep them slightly longer on the shelves, it's only profit to canon and the camera stores (since they can't restock them quickly enough).

I waited months for my 28-70... even given the hefty price, I'm pretty sure I would have been happier if I didn't have to wait and paid 10% more.

Oh, I understand the economics behind supply and demand. I just don't want to pay more for the same product.

 

[Dragon]

In the present context of a Japanese company pricing goods for sale in the US? No.

Sorry, the background was the rumored Euro price, and a very large part of any camera is made in China, so those two measure are very important.

 

[HotPixels]

That is irrelevant to my point.

If the R3 was meant to be the R1 but they changed the name, they still have to develop an R1.
If the R3 was meant to be the R3 and they didn't change the name, they still have to develop an R1.
Either way, they still have to develop an R1.

So again, changing the name would likely be the least amount of effort if they kept the internals exactly as developed and designed. But help me understand why the R3 couldn't possibly have been intended as the R1 because "Canon has never put eye tracking in a flagship"? So Canon can never be innovative with their flagship camera?

But let me be clear - I'm NOT saying the R3 was meant to be the R1, I just don't understand why folks are acting like it's an impossible theory. People are so adamant in calling people foolish for thinking it was meant to be the R1, when none of us have any more credence over the other with our opinion on the matter.

If the R3 was meant to be the R3 then they already had started development of the R1 and had developed a product segmentation strategy. They had also built their development and release schedule for the R1 in the context of their plans for other models and lenses.

If the R3 was meant to be the R1 but the renamed it the R3 presumably after seeing the A1, then they have to start development of an R1 when none was planned, juggle all of their resources, including human resources, materials, manufacturing, marketing, etc, decide on a new product segmentation strategy, and then decide how all of this impacts their other planned releases.

So that is a huge difference. Imagine the product planning meetings, the marketing meetings, the engineering meetings, the manufacturing resources and logistics meetings, etc.

It is totally naive to believe that such a name change is trivial. To believe that shows no understanding of what it takes to plan and develop and bring to the market these very sophisticated technology products.

A well run company cannot function that way.

 

[Nemorino]

The main advantage of the R3 will be the focus system. If you can select and focus as fast as Canon promises this camera will sell well; very well!
Canon Germany says it "would feel like the camera is reading your mind"

Hast du schon einmal eine Kamera benutzt, die so fortschrittlich ist, dass es sich anfühlt, als würde sie deine Gedanken lesen?Mit unserer einzigartigen Eye-Control-Autofokus-Technologie fokussiert die EOS R3 dort, wohin deine Augen blicken. Diese unvergleichliche Steuerung des Autofokus ermöglicht es der Kamera, so schnell zu reagieren wie du selbst es tust – eine unbezahlbare Fähigkeit bei dynamischen Szenen.

canon.de

We shouldn't judge if the price is to high before we see the real performance.

 

[unfocused]

In the present context of a Japanese company pricing goods for sale in the US? No.

Absolutely. Why is that some people think that a product is priced solely on the cost of parts and assembly in the country of origin? It's as though marketing, shipping, packaging, sales, service centers, research, development and the thousand other things that represent a company's costs are free. Canon USA employees are not paid in Yen. Do Rudy Winston and the Canon Explorers of Light get paid in Yen? Do the shipping companies that deliver Canon products around the world do it for free? I could go on and on, but the fact is that people would be surprised at how little the actual cost of manufacturing has to do with the in-country cost of any product, especially when dealing with a multinational corporation like Canon. It makes as much sense as weighing a camera and calculating it's price based on the raw materials.

 

[gavinz]

Continue reading...

Bit higher than I thought. However it is a specialized camera so whoever needs it will get it anyways. I was thinking of getting it instead of the R5 but still have not decided yet.

 

[EricN]

We shouldn't judge if the price is to high before we see the real performance.

It's sad you needed to say this, but it is an internet forum...

 

[lawny13]

They really should have called this the R1.

Why not? Modest bump in resolution over the 1DXIII, same ergonomics, same weather sealing. They could even come up with some marketing reason to excuse the mismatched card slots.

At the end of the day, it's too expensive to not be the flagship

Why??

The fact that they didn’t means than the R1 will be superior to this camera. Just cause it seems to be on par or better than Sony’s A1 (MP wars adie) doesn’t mean that canon should make it their flagship, especially if they have a better cam in the works.

 

[unfocused]

But what would be the point?

Suppose it is true that Canon aimed to release the R1 in 2021 and called it R3 at a late stage in development. In that case, what will be called the R1? Likely the successor to this camera, right? And that has to be a full development life cycle away, so multiple years.

So Canon would have created a new line, giving people who are buying it the impression that they'll get a mark II version with similar characteristics in 3 to 5 years. And they gave people who won't buy it the impression that the R1 will be coming in the near future - which can't be true if the R1 is what would originally have been called the R1 II. You can't accelerate development of a professional product that has to be fully fleshed out and reliable by that much.

So the name change would lead to Canon eventually disappointing both those who believe the R3 to be the start of a new line, and those who are holding off to buy the R1 once it comes around. In other words, they reduced the number of short to medium term R3 buyers, and set themselves up to screw over the current buyers in the long term. For what benefit? I don't see how changing the name makes any sense.

Also, why is the price lower than the 1DX III? Even if they could have changed the name in response to the A1, could they also have shaved off what is likely over 1000 bucks of the cost? After all, with the other RF equipment launching at higher prices than their EF counterparts, they surely would not have aimed at undercutting the 1DX III price point from the start if the R3 was to be there absolute top end camera.

You are correct.

Adding a few thoughts.

I am willing to entertain the possibility that the R3 might be a one and done model. That's not to buy into the silliness of a name change, but rather suggesting that Canon might be planning to fold the R1 into the regular 1 series replacement cycle, placing an R1 in the mix in 2024. But, they may have recognized that they needed an interim model to compete. So, they may have developed the R3 as a placeholder that can serve the market until they are confident that the technology has advanced to the point where a mirrorless offering can carry the 1 series label without damaging the carefully developed branding.

It's possible that in 2024 they merge the 1D and R3 into a single mirrorless R1 line, just as they did with the 1Dx.

Arguments for this, in my opinion, would be that the R3 does not seem to have held back on anything except dual CFexpress slots. I continue to wonder what an R1 might offer if released in the near term and don't see a lot to differentiate it from the R3. But, if Canon continues to develop the technology, by 2024, an R1 could be loaded with awesome features. If a 2024 R1 is priced $1,000 more than a 2021 R3, I don't think most R3 users would be that upset if a Mark II never materialized.

Other possibility, the R1 will be released in late 2022 early 2023 with a 45mp or higher mp sensor, dual CFexpress slots and a few other tweaks. Basically, the relationship between the R1 and the R3 would be similar to that between the R6 and R5, with a similar price differential. In this case, the R1 moves to a primarily enthusiast camera for consumers with high disposable income and the R3 serves working pros in photojournalism and sports. The market formerly met by the 1D series. I can make some good arguments for this as well, especially since I'm not sure the shrinking professional market can really sustain the 1 series, while the high disposable income enthusiast market certainly can.

 

[JamesG25]

While the $5999 price tag is a little higher than I thought it does make sense. An R5 with a LAN grip and an additional battery comes out at $4999. So a $1000 difference between a equivalently gripped R5 and an R3 makes sense when you consider the full pro body, weather sealing, BSI stacked sensor with 30fps and eye control autofocus. I also imagine with the general chip shortage the build cost has escalated since 2020 when 1DX MK3 and R5 launched. Based on an R3 at $5999, think we will see the R1 somewhere in range of $7499 to $7999.

 

[dirtyvu]

To all those kvetching about price, the value of the dollar is dropping like a rock and if Canon doesn't forward price, they will either have to raise the price shortly down the road (which is damn hard) or take a bath on the currency exchange. Be prepared for this strategy from all the camera manufacturers.

It's not the value of the dollar causing the increasing prices. The entire supply chain is affected. The raw elements are really expensive now. The chip manufacturers are already passing their expenses on due to higher cost of raw materials. TSMC will be passing on a 20% increase. As a result, Apple and others will be raising prices. I'm curious what Microsoft and Sony will do. As soon as their current batches run out (as dictated by how much quantity they negotiated in their contracts), they will have to either eat the cost by maintaining their MSRPs on Xboxes and PS5s or raise them.

 

[Loswr]

In this case, the R1 moves to a primarily enthusiast camera for consumers with high disposable income and the R3 serves working pros in photojournalism and sports. The market formerly met by the 1D series. I can make some good arguments for this as well, especially since I'm not sure the shrinking professional market can really sustain the 1 series, while the high disposable income enthusiast market certainly can.

I agree with most of your argument, but I’m not sure about Canon wanting their ‘second-string’ R3 representing them on the sidelines of major events once the R1 is their flagship.

 

[navastronia]

Why??

The fact that they didn’t means than the R1 will be superior to this camera. Just cause it seems to be on par or better than Sony’s A1 (MP wars adie) doesn’t mean that canon should make it their flagship, especially if they have a better cam in the works.

Of course the R1 will be better. What I'm saying is that the R3 is too expensive not to be the flagship.

My argument in the post you quoted is that because of the ergonomics, weather sealing, and more, it's close enough to a flagship body that I think they should have just released it as the R1. I know it's a semi-facetious argument because the actual R1 will have a fast mechanical shutter, matching card slots, and other things, but this body is like 80% of the way to a flagship model -- the price, however, is 95% of one

 

[unfocused]

I agree with most of your argument, but I’m not sure about Canon wanting their ‘second-string’ R3 representing them on the sidelines of major events once the R1 is their flagship.

A valid point. The R1 could remain the top sports shooter camera while the R3 might be targeted at people like me who have to buy their own equipment.

In that case though would the R1 need a more conservative resolution, say 30 mp?

On the other hand, it might be a good argument for a one-off R3, with the 1D remaining the top sidelines camera for another year or two.

 

[Loswr]

A valid point. The R1 could remain the top sports shooter camera while the R3 might be targeted at people like me who have to buy their own equipment.

In that case though would the R1 need a more conservative resolution, say 30 mp?

On the other hand, it might be a good argument for a one-off R3, with the 1D remaining the top sidelines camera for another year or two.

You suggested that Canon recognized they’d need an interim MILC model to bridge the temporal gap and release the R1 on the recent cycle of 1-series updates, i.e., around 2024. I think that’s very likely. So the R3 will meet the needs of 1-series shooters who want to use a MILC for whatever reason – faster frame rate, using the new RF lenses like the 28-70/2, etc.

The R1 then ‘replaces’ both the 1D X III and R3. I do think that means the R1 keeps a moderate resolution, 24-30 MP.

As I often say, Canon has the data on who uses what bodies where…but it would seem logical to keep the lighter, less rugged R5-series as the higher resolution bodies. Studios aren’t war zones, and wedding photographers aren’t likely to be bowled over by a linebacker and need to get up and keep shooting.

I think those on this forum predicting the R1 will be a high-MP body are hoping for wish fulfillment (whether or not they’d actually buy one).

It’s possible Canon will go high MP with the R1, in which case I’d expect it in a year or so. In that case, they’d be reversing course on combining the 1D and 1Ds lines. But the 1D X was basically the 1D IV with a FF sensor, and the high MP torch was passed to the 5-series. They kept the 1D X II and III at 20 MP and released a 45 MP R5, suggesting the course they set with 1- and 5-series DSLRs will carry through to MILCs.

 

[john1970]

Of course the R1 will be better. What I'm saying is that the R3 is too expensive not to be the flagship.

My argument in the post you quoted is that because of the ergonomics, weather sealing, and more, it's close enough to a flagship body that I think they should have just released it as the R1. I know it's a semi-facetious argument because the actual R1 will have a fast mechanical shutter, matching card slots, and other things, but this body is like 80% of the way to a flagship model -- the price, however, is 95% of one

I really agree with your last sentence of your post. The R3 is 80% of the way to a flagship model at 95% of the cost...