Canon EOS R3 to have a 30mp sensor? [CR1]

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
3,821
2,182
I posted yesterday a burst of 21 shots of a dragonfly in flight using ES on the R5 + 100-500 and according to the EXIF data 20 of those were in one second (frames 2-21 all dated 13 June 2021 at 12:53:33, frame 1 12:53:32) so I don't think Canon is lying.


With the right EXIF viewer you can actually see the sub-second that each image was exposed. I imagine this is the time when the shutter starts to open, or maybe when it closes? With E-shutter that would be the beginning or ending of readout? Maybe when ADC begins/ends? Whatever it is, Canon includes the sub-second in a separate "maker note" field apart from the standard date/time field that does not allow for anything shorter than one second. But most applications that read EXIF info do not display it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: usern4cr and AlanF

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,604
11,380
Lower noise, higher dymamic range and higher f-stop possible before diffraction is visible on a pixel level. Of course you could always downsample a highe resolution image to a lower raeolution, but why not use a low resolution in the first place? Getting a high resolution image sharp, requires less camera shake, less subject movement or a much shorter exposure which you have to compensate by either higher ISO of a lowr f-stop. So your photography will change a lot. You might even be required to use a tripod in situations where you would to a hand held shot if the resolution was smaller. And you might need to buy a much sharper and therefore more expensive lens. It is much easier to take photos in way that they look good at 20 megapixels.
There are real reasons for using low resolution sensors, but not the ones you have just listed. There are good reasons for using a higher resolution sensor in the first place. At the worst, the higher megapixel sensor can be down sampled (= viewed at the same output size in inches or cm) and will have about the same noise, DR, diffraction effects, aberration of lens effects, size of shake etc as the lower resolution. But, if the conditions are favourable, it will give a sharper image with more detail. Also, importnatly, you can user shorter focal length telephoto lenses on the higher resolution sensor to give the same overall resolution as longer, heavier and much more expensive lenses with a low resolution sensor. These are good reasons why some of us will sensibly decide for our purposes to go for high resolution sensor in the first place.

Some advantages of a low resolution sensors are smaller file sizes, faster read out, lower cost of production etc. For many, the lower resolution sensors are more than good enough.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
3,821
2,182
Like I said in my previous comment, I'm okay with 20fps and 40-50MP. Regardless, 50MP at 30fps even with caveats is damn impressive and is superior to the rumored specs for both Canon and Nikon's forthcoming pro-level offerings. What the Sony specs with caveats means is that you can expect at least 20-25fps with Sony lenses and on occasion hit the 30fps figure. That works just fine for me, and is still superior to the rumored R3 specs if you value high resolution(40-50MP is optimal for me; I don't want 60-80MP, but who's asking for my opinion?). However, if the Nikon Z9 hits 40MP at 20fps, I'll give it a hard look. I prefer Nikon ergonomics and a unigrip design over the Sony. Choices are wonderful, but I may just find that none of the pro-level bodies are sufficiently better than my R5 to make me swipe my credit card.

Do you ever actually go out and shoot?

Who actually shoots at 30 fps when you can't track a moving subject at that rate? The best fame rate the Sony α9 can do with Sony lenses when AF is tracking the subject between frames is 15 fps. The α1 is similar.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
3,821
2,182
And people tend to compare European prices that include VAT to American prices without sales tax, so it looks even worse.

Especially when the laws in Europe require multi-year warranties while here in the U.S after one year it is KMAG YOYO unless you pay another 10% or so of the camera or lens' price for an extended warranty.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
3,821
2,182
No way a global shutter FF sensor will be very high MP, not for a first gen sensor. R1 will differentiate itself, with higher res faster refresh EVF, probable ability to shoot 40fps, dual CFE A cards, even more rugged, QPAF, higher performing FTP, Wifi. Global shutter is a big deal, falsh sync at any shutter speed and no rolling shutter in video. But todate global shutter sensor have been hampered by much lower DR. Canon, Sony and Panasonic have alternative patents to get around this however, but I highly doubt they could full frame high readout of a lot more than 20-30MP and meet noise targets. Also R3 might be closer to $6K.

It would be to position the R3 as the flagship for sports journalists and the R1 would then be targetted at who exactly.

IMO the R3 should be the R5 on steroids, does everything better, no heat issues with 8K video, higher res EVF, bigger buffer, stacked sensor. R3 should be of appeal to a huge audience (price aside). R1 would be in a unique position if it has global shutter and would be perfect for serious pros.

No doubt this is the exact opposite of how it will pan out, but I would be disappointed to see the R1 be the high MP camera and the R3 the low res one.

Flash sync at any Tv is a red herring. Sure, 1/500 or 1/1000 would be nice.

But past that you start running into the time the flash needs to release all of its energy. Speedlites are called that because their low power allows them to release a low power burst very quickly. At, say, 1/128 power they can have durations as short as 1/10,000. But even speedlites at full power usually take longer than 1/1000 or even 1/500 to do a full dump. Most larger studio lights are even slower at full power unless you spend a ton of money.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,610
3,954
TN's pixel shift explanation is fantastic!!! :)
Maybe, I wouldn't know. The first...and last...TN video I ever watched was where he compared the ‘sports performance’ of the D800 and 5DIII and concluded that the D800 was much better for sports; sports in his context was his subject/wife walking towards him at the pace of a garden snail.

I started using pixel shift in Zeiss cameras back in 2001.
 

JoseB

EOS M50
Aug 16, 2013
36
6
www.facebook.com
Maybe, I wouldn't know. The first...and last...TN video I ever watched was where he compared the ‘sports performance’ of the D800 and 5DIII and concluded that the D800 was much better for sports; sports in his context was his subject/wife walking towards him at the pace of a garden snail.

I started using pixel shift in Zeiss cameras back in 2001.
You shoud view his explanation of pix shift...
 

cayenne

EOS R6
CR Pro
Mar 28, 2012
2,626
586
Corona isn't over. Not by a long shot.
I dunno where you live, but it pretty much is here and for most of the US I'd guess.

I'm in the New Orleans area...and you see old crowd levels out a restaurants, public gatherings, etc....hardly a mask in sight.

No mandates here...actually there were very few at all during the whole thing.

YMMV.
 

cayenne

EOS R6
CR Pro
Mar 28, 2012
2,626
586
My condolences (sincerely). I hope you have gotten the vaccines. We have them now, after hiding away for a year. While I now feel freed, I try not to talk too much about it as so many others in the world have not had the option to choose that we have had.
I got my 2x round shots of Pfizer by end of March...it's been wonderful to go back to my normal life again.

It is sad that numbers have fallen off here for vaccinations, you can get them walk in right now.

I think I saw on new that some states, possibly including mine...are sending doses back so they don't get wasted....the demand for shots has plummeted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: usern4cr

cayenne

EOS R6
CR Pro
Mar 28, 2012
2,626
586
Lower noise, higher dymamic range and higher f-stop possible before diffraction is visible on a pixel level. Of course you could always downsample a highe resolution image to a lower raeolution, but why not use a low resolution in the first place? Getting a high resolution image sharp, requires less camera shake, less subject movement or a much shorter exposure which you have to compensate by either higher ISO of a lowr f-stop. So your photography will change a lot. You might even be required to use a tripod in situations where you would to a hand held shot if the resolution was smaller. And you might need to buy a much sharper and therefore more expensive lens. It is much easier to take photos in way that they look good at 20 megapixels.
But most of the new cameras have IBIS and other things to help with the camera shake, etc.
It seems that the new cameras now have tech that mitigate the problems you mentioned for the most part.

And between 20 and 30....hard to imagine that's enough difference to make a difference?

C
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,604
11,380
But most of the new cameras have IBIS and other things to help with the camera shake, etc.
It seems that the new cameras now have tech that mitigate the problems you mentioned for the most part.

And between 20 and 30....hard to imagine that's enough difference to make a difference?

C
For those of us using telephoto lenses, an increase from 20-30Mpx means that in reasonable light a 400mm has the resolution of a 500mm, and 500mm the resolution of a 600mm lens. And from 20 to 45Mpx, a 400mm gives 600mm of resolution and a 500mm 750mm. Quite a saving in weight and money. It's worth it for any downsides.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
3,821
2,182
I dunno where you live, but it pretty much is here and for most of the US I'd guess.

I'm in the New Orleans area...and you see old crowd levels out a restaurants, public gatherings, etc....hardly a mask in sight.

No mandates here...actually there were very few at all during the whole thing.

YMMV.

So Mardi Gras was the same as usual in 2021? That's not what I heard.
 
Aug 7, 2018
347
294
For those of us using telephoto lenses, an increase from 20-30Mpx means that in reasonable light a 400mm has the resolution of a 500mm, and 500mm the resolution of a 600mm lens. And from 20 to 45Mpx, a 400mm gives 600mm of resolution and a 500mm 750mm. Quite a saving in weight and money. It's worth it for any downsides.
Depends on the resolution of the lens. Once that limit is reached, it can't resolve more line pairs even if the resolution of the sensor gets higher. If a lens can resolve 5,000 lines or so, that is already quite a lot. If you make sure that the sensor has a lower resolution that the lens, you have a high chance of very crisp looking photos.

Even some L-lenses have a low resoultion. For example the famous 17-40 f/4. If I would put that on a higher resolution body, it might be somewhat sharper in the center, but the rest would look like an already blur photo upsampled even further. For 45 megapixels or even more, you really need very sharp and very expensive lenses.

I really like my Tamron 200-500, because it is very light and affordable, but on a 45 megapixel body the photos would look blurry. I would have to downsample all of them to make them look better. And even with the sharpest lens, hot air will spoil your image.
 

Billybob

800mm f/11 because a cellphone isn't long enough!
May 22, 2016
228
479
Do you ever actually go out and shoot?

Who actually shoots at 30 fps when you can't track a moving subject at that rate? The best fame rate the Sony α9 can do with Sony lenses when AF is tracking the subject between frames is 15 fps. The α1 is similar.
Lol, reading comprehension is obviously not your strong suit. I stated not once but twice that I'd be happy with a high-rez camera that does 20fps, so I don't know why you're focused on my comments about 30fps.

Regardless, you obviously have never shot with the A1--or never shot competently with the A1--or you are just intent on spreading misinformation. There are reasons to criticize the A1, but claiming the camera is incapable of tracking moving objects at 30fps with AF is not one of them. Sony has something it calls "tracking mode", which attempts to track a moving object even when things momentarily obscure it. That mode hardly ever works. Instead, most competent Sony photographers use the AF-C focusing mode. There are dozens of examples of the A1 tracking moving objects with a high in-focus rate. Check out the A1 work of wildlife photographer Alex Phan and this video review from Mark Galer
, start at 29:45 mark.
Accordingly, after looking at their work, I rate your claims as "pants on fire" in terms of accuracy.

You also seem to suffer from a failure of imagination. Those who shoot at 30fps are not looking for 30 keepers in that second. Rather, they are hoping to get the perfect capture in an action sequence. The instance the bat hits the ball (if you've ever shot a baseball game, you know how difficult that is), a cornerback reaching in and taking a football away from a wideout, a barn swallow cavorting in midair, or killer whales playing "catch" with a seal. So, yes, there is value to a fast burst rate, but if you had understood my clear statements, you would have notice that I find 20fps adequate.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand why they wouldn't go with 2 CFExpress B cards. Can SD cards really keep up with 30 fps? People purchasing this camera will want speed and no buffer. I get the cost difference but if you are buying a camera to use it for speed and at >5K, why use an SD card that will limit the speed of the camera. Body size shouldn't be a limitation.
Before I purchased my own R5 and a CFExpress card I did many days of testing my friends' R5. I used my high-end UHS_II SD cards (Sony Tough and Delkin Power). I really had no issues running into buffer stall. Sure CFe makes the write light go out faster but you really have to be pushing your bursts for a long while in order to get a pause in the FPS.

If we look at data rates R5: 20x45=900.....take a guess what 30x30 equals ;)

I usually prefer matching fast slots over two different slots. I certainly valued that on my 1DX. But at that point in time it really did affect you if you had to use the slower SD slot in other mixed cameras or shoot mirrored. With the R5 I just wasn't affected by using SD cards. With my A1 doing 30x50 I'm also only using UHS-SDII cards and also have never hit the buffer or stalled out my FPS. Sony made some major writing improvements compared to my previous A9II and A7RIV. CFe-A would be nice back on the computer but way too expensive at this time.

I think the mixed slot CFe-A/SD is a great slot. Gives maximum choice for people who want the fastest possible or the slow, old cards. But CFe-B is faster so a similar slot designed to do CFe-B/SD would be ideal.