Sorry, but I still think that $6,000 is too high for this. $5,500 would be more in line. Pro or not, camera sales are still going down. This might just encourage more buyers to get the R5 instead. And where does this leave the yet to be announced (or finished) R1 Canon has pretty much said is coming? $7,500, $8,000, $8,500?
that’s already in larger format territory. Is this a hint as to that from Canon? The speculation over that just won’t die. I can’t see a FF camera hiking that high these days. What super features could it have that would justify that kind of pricing? That is, realistically?
Perhaps the higher price is to make the R3 a more direct competitor to their own 1Dxiii. There was huge demand for the latter, but Canon obviously wants as many people as possible to switch to RF mount so they can sell more lenses. All this stuff from Canon about the R3 *not* being their flagship camera is pure baloney, it's just a message that something even better (the R1) is in the pipeline. So despite their proclamations, the R3 most definitely
is their flagship camera, and will remain so for about another 18 months. Then the R1 will be launched - and yes, IMO it will cost $8K+.
As for "What super features could it have that would justify that kind of pricing", realistically I think we can expect:
global shutter (zero rolling shutter artefacts, flash sync at all speeds)
45MP+
8K with no overheating or time limit
new class of high performance battery
faster and more advanced data transmission
twin CF Express slots
higher magnification EVF with faster refresh rates
more powerful twin processors
... and possibly an entirely different body design (as per recent patents)
The price will put the R1 beyond the reach of almost all amateurs, but in all seriousness $8K isn't a huge amount of money for a *business* buyer - just look at the cost of big whites...