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

[st jack photography]

For the price to come out right, any time you go faster on fps, you have to increase buffer size AND limit file size, which usually means low megapixels. This is digital camera engineering 101. Faster fps trends towards action shooters and sports shooters, while slower fps allows for longer bursts and larger files, trending towards landscape shooters and commercial shooters.

30mp would be about right, considering that it is 30fps. The BSI probably allowed them to go from 30mp/10fps to the aggressive 30mp/30fps. People may remember that the 5DSr, which had a big jump in resolution and file size, had to take a huge hit in fps, and also they had to DOUBLE the DIGIC processors. ISO and video was 5Dm2 quality.

Even with all of the advances including BSI and extra lens contacts, it would be very unlikely for Canon to produce a 60mp camera that can do 60fps and 100-shot bursts in RAW. They can probably do that at this point, but the camera would cost an easy $10k, and at what size to dissipate the heat?

As far as 4, 6, or 8k goes, I would not look for them to do much. If I pay $6k on a R3 camera, by Jolly it better be still camera-focused and it better specialize in taking the types of stills I want to take, and forget about the video or how many Ks it does or C-Log or whatever. If I want to do video, I will do it right and get a C body. If I want to v-blog, I'll go cheap and get an RP. I would expect Canon to put out a half-crippled 5-series camera that does good video and good stills, but not great at either, with lousy ISO and lousy fps - a camera perfect for the peasants that require a camera to do both. To expect the R1 or R3 or R5S to do anything decent regarding video is outrageous and silly.

 

[stevelee]

Since the bat and ball are only in contact for about 1/2000 or less, even 30 fps is still a crap shoot.

I have wondered about that sort of thing but haven’t tested it out. I feel more confident trusting in my ability to anticipate the peak of the action than in the luck of the camera’s hitting the right moment. Perhaps that is a delusion on my part, especially as my reflexes slow with age. And maybe I was more at one with my film camera years ago, and maybe the slight digital lag is not so predictable. But rational or not, that is how I feel. I use multiple shots for bracketing mainly.

i had my Rebel with me at a football game a few years back. I took a shot from the stands of a touchdown pass being caught. The official ruled that his feet landed behind the end zone. My picture showed the feet as they touched inside it. More telling was that the picture showed that the official was looking elsewhere when the feet landed.

 

[Billybob]

While the A1 may be quite impressive by all accounts. according to the sources I have read, you won't get 30 FPS with tracking. To get 30 fps you need the compatible lenses along with these settings according to alphashooters.com:

1. You need to be shooting in compressed raw or jpeg file format.
2. Focus mode should be set to AF-C and drive mode to Hi+.
3. Electronic shutter speed between 1/250 – 1/32000 sec.
4. Priority Set in AF-C set to ‘Release’. The default is ‘Balanced Emphasis’. With it set to ‘Release’ the shutter will be released even if the subject is out of focus. With ‘Balanced Emphasis’ the camera tries to achieve a balance between focus and shutter release, however this reduces the maximum FPS slightly.
5. Use a focus mode other than tracking. If any of the tracking focus modes are used then you will not achieve the maximum FPS. So you’ll need to use a focus area like Wide or Zone instead.

And according to colbybrownphotography.com:

• You have to be in compressed RAW or the JPEG file format (uncompress RAW or lossless compressed RAW has a maximum FPS of 20)
• AF-C mode selected and Drive mode set to Hi+
• Selection of an Electronic shutter and shutter speeds selected between 1/250th and 1/32000 of a sec
• Priority Set in AF-C to Release (not balanced emphasis)
• The “Tracking” AF modes will drop a few FPS, so try to stick with the other AF areas such as Zone or Wide.

And how is that not 30fps with tracking? Note, tracking with the a1 is possible, actually preferred, with an AF mode other than "Tracking AF".

We're talking about cutting-edge technology. Of course there are limitations (I'm impressed with the R5's 8k video with all its warts and limitations), but nonetheless with the right gear and the right settings you get 30fps with tracking (see my earlier post). As your quoted comment from CBP states or suggests, "Tracking" AF mode is not the correct setting to track a moving object at 30fps. But, nonetheless, with the right settings and right gear (are you shocked that 30fps is not possible with non-Sony lenses? I just know that it works with my 135GM and 200-600G lenses, the only lenses I have that I would want to work at that burst rate) you can track moving objects at 30fps with a high hit rate.

Now, although I have Sony gear, I am not a Sony FB. Although I'm impressed with what Sony has accomplished with the a1, I'm not in the market to purchase one. I grabbed the R5 on release and love it. I want to add a body with a stacked sensor for the faster and more accurate AF and would prefer that camera be a Canon. I'll see what the R3 and Nikon Z9 offer. Perhaps I'll wait for the R1. I currently don't have enough information to make that decision. Thus, even though I prefer Canon--Canon will eventually get there--it does not stop me from admiring what Sony has accomplished. Should I ignore or denied Sony's achievement simply because I'm invested in Canon? I don't think so.

 

[Loswr]

When the Fed's decided the individual states could require merchants to charge sales tax on merchandise shipped out of their states, I, like everyone else, was not happy. My purchases amounted to $800.00 in sales tax, the amount of which was not required to be taxed for out of state shipments, until the ruling came down.

In general states don’t charge ‘sales tax’, they charge Sales and Use Tax. Anything you purchased from out of state was almost certainly subject to a use tax by your state, and you were supposed to declare such purchases on your state tax return each and were responsible for paying that tax to your state at the time you filed the return. In other words, to be blunt, until the law was changed you were committing tax fraud by buying out-of-state products and not paying use tax on them. You were never caught, but it was still tax fraud and thus illegal.

Now, when you buy some thing through the normal purchase process from B&H, you’re not paying New Jersey sales tax, B&H is collecting whatever tax you are supposed to pay to your own state and then remitting that amount to your state on your behalf. With the PayBoo card, B&H is still paying your state use tax on your behalf, they’re just not passing the cost along to you (it’s ultimately paid by the aggregate interest collected on the credit card accounts).

 

[stevelee]

They have to call it something else since tariffs on interstate commerce are not legal or maybe even constitutional.

 

[canonmike]

In general states don’t charge ‘sales tax’, they charge Sales and Use Tax. Anything you purchased from out of state was almost certainly subject to a use tax by your state, and you were supposed to declare such purchases on your state tax return each and were responsible for paying that tax to your state at the time you filed the return. In other words, to be blunt, until the law was changed you were committing tax fraud by buying out-of-state products and not paying use tax on them. You were never caught, but it was still tax fraud and thus illegal.

Now, when you buy some thing through the normal purchase process from B&H, you’re not paying New Jersey sales tax, B&H is collecting whatever tax you are supposed to pay to your own state and then remitting that amount to your state on your behalf. With the PayBoo card, B&H is still paying your state use tax on your behalf, they’re just not passing the cost along to you (it’s ultimately paid by the aggregate interest collected on the credit card accounts).

No doubt, you are technically correct, Neuroanatomist but I don't really care about the mechanics of the transaction. The fact is, no other company besides B&H's PayBoo card, that I know of, does this and I take full advantage of it. Now, as to the tax fraud comment, one would then infer you always filed a tax and use return, thus avoiding tax fraud as you refer to it, every time you purchased camera gear from out of state. Very commendable on your part. Attaboy!!! For the record, I never minded buying locally and paying sales tax but due to local camera stores closing their doors, I ultimately was forced into purchasing my gear on line. Sadly, there are no camera stores within 50 mi of our home, not one. So, instead of visiting a local store for that hands on experience, I have to rely on social media platforms for pertinent information. I so envy those living close enough to visit stores like B&H, Adorama, Samy's or whomever, wherever, where you can speak with informed sales help personally, helping you to make a much more informed decision. For years, I drove to Atlanta and supported stores like Crown Camera, Wolf Camera and a handful of smaller local camera merchants, sadly all of which are now out of business. Best Buy is the only store that I can visit to purchase very limited Canon gear inventory and their sales people have only basic knowledge of the equipment they are selling, across all brands.

 

[emailfortom]

In general states don’t charge ‘sales tax’, they charge Sales and Use Tax. Anything you purchased from out of state was almost certainly subject to a use tax by your state, and you were supposed to declare such purchases on your state tax return each and were responsible for paying that tax to your state at the time you filed the return. In other words, to be blunt, until the law was changed you were committing tax fraud by buying out-of-state products and not paying use tax on them. You were never caught, but it was still tax fraud and thus illegal.

Now, when you buy some thing through the normal purchase process from B&H, you’re not paying New Jersey sales tax, B&H is collecting whatever tax you are supposed to pay to your own state and then remitting that amount to your state on your behalf. With the PayBoo card, B&H is still paying your state use tax on your behalf, they’re just not passing the cost along to you (it’s ultimately paid by the aggregate interest collected on the credit card accounts).

I am glad you posted your remarks about use tax. Same here in Pennsylvania

 

[Czardoom]

And how is that not 30fps with tracking? Note, tracking with the a1 is possible, actually preferred, with an AF mode other than "Tracking AF".

We're talking about cutting-edge technology. Of course there are limitations (I'm impressed with the R5's 8k video with all its warts and limitations), but nonetheless with the right gear and the right settings you get 30fps with tracking (see my earlier post). As your quoted comment from CBP states or suggests, "Tracking" AF mode is not the correct setting to track a moving object at 30fps. But, nonetheless, with the right settings and right gear (are you shocked that 30fps is not possible with non-Sony lenses? I just know that it works with my 135GM and 200-600G lenses, the only lenses I have that I would want to work at that burst rate) you can track moving objects at 30fps with a high hit rate.

Now, although I have Sony gear, I am not a Sony FB. Although I'm impressed with what Sony has accomplished with the a1, I'm not in the market to purchase one. I grabbed the R5 on release and love it. I want to add a body with a stacked sensor for the faster and more accurate AF and would prefer that camera be a Canon. I'll see what the R3 and Nikon Z9 offer. Perhaps I'll wait for the R1. I currently don't have enough information to make that decision. Thus, even though I prefer Canon--Canon will eventually get there--it does not stop me from admiring what Sony has accomplished. Should I ignore or denied Sony's achievement simply because I'm invested in Canon? I don't think so.

It appears that you are using the term tracking as in, "I am tracking an object." I think you can understand that this might be confusing to some (me, certainly) when cameras today have a mode specifically named "tracking." And in this specific mode, you won't get 30 fps. So, basically - despite it being confusing - you are saying that you are tracking an object using an AF mode other than tracking. Or am I more confused than I thought??

 

[Billybob]

It appears that you are using the term tracking as in, "I am tracking an object." I think you can understand that this might be confusing to some (me, certainly) when cameras today have a mode specifically named "tracking." And in this specific mode, you won't get 30 fps. So, basically - despite it being confusing - you are saying that you are tracking an object using an AF mode other than tracking. Or am I more confused than I thought??

Yes, that is exactly what I'm saying.

The reviews you referenced and the review I referenced (Mark Galer) all document that the a1 fails to achieve 30fps in "tracking AF mode". However, if you define "tracking" as following a moving object from one location to another while maintaining focus during this period, then the a1 is able to track moving objects at 30fps with a very high hit rate.

Yes, it is confusing and clearly unintuitive that achieving tracking requires the photographer to avoid "tracking mode". Sony apparently provides no guidance, and only reviewers and experienced users who have spent time with the camera understand the issue. I suspect that Sony has lost sales and, perhaps, received multiple returns from buyers/users who are unaware of this operational peculiarity. It's also likely the reason why many believe the camera is incapable of 30fps when it is, in fact, capable albeit with stringent requirements (certain Sony lenses and camera settings).

 

[Michael Clark]

I have wondered about that sort of thing but haven’t tested it out. I feel more confident trusting in my ability to anticipate the peak of the action than in the luck of the camera’s hitting the right moment. Perhaps that is a delusion on my part, especially as my reflexes slow with age. And maybe I was more at one with my film camera years ago, and maybe the slight digital lag is not so predictable. But rational or not, that is how I feel. I use multiple shots for bracketing mainly.

i had my Rebel with me at a football game a few years back. I took a shot from the stands of a touchdown pass being caught. The official ruled that his feet landed behind the end zone. My picture showed the feet as they touched inside it. More telling was that the picture showed that the official was looking elsewhere when the feet landed.

Yeah. But no matter how good your timing is, at some point enough fps can tilt the odds in favor of random machine-gunning. Consider something like 8000 fps video. No one has timing accurate to 1/8000, and even if they did, even bodies like the α1, future R1, future Z1, 1D X, etc. aren't consistent from shot to shot to within 1/8000 (0.125 microseconds) in terms of shutter lag.

 

[Michael Clark]

I have wondered about that sort of thing but haven’t tested it out. I feel more confident trusting in my ability to anticipate the peak of the action than in the luck of the camera’s hitting the right moment. Perhaps that is a delusion on my part, especially as my reflexes slow with age. And maybe I was more at one with my film camera years ago, and maybe the slight digital lag is not so predictable. But rational or not, that is how I feel. I use multiple shots for bracketing mainly.

i had my Rebel with me at a football game a few years back. I took a shot from the stands of a touchdown pass being caught. The official ruled that his feet landed behind the end zone. My picture showed the feet as they touched inside it. More telling was that the picture showed that the official was looking elsewhere when the feet landed.

This play late in the third quarter was ruled a touchdown. Notice the ball was already falling out and next to the runner's knee when he was at the 2 yard line in the second frame. In the third frame only the top of the runner's helmet has crossed the goal line and his hands are empty. The fourth frame shows the player on the ground to far left covering the ball as the runner's body finally crosses the goal line. The ball is even clearer in the fifth frame. The sixth is an extreme crop of the far left of the fifth frame. When the players got up after the play, the defender in the black jersey had the ball. The game ended with the team in the white jerseys winning 13-10.

 

[stevelee]

Yeah. But no matter how good your timing is, at some point enough fps can tilt the odds in favor of random machine-gunning. Consider something like 8000 fps video. No one has timing accurate to 1/8000, and even if they did, even bodies like the α1, future R1, future Z1, 1D X, etc. aren't consistent from shot to shot to within 1/8000 (0.125 microseconds) in terms of shutter lag.

I would suggest that the point would come a long time before that. My 6D2 is more on the order of 6.5 FPS, so I trust myself more in some circumstances. I don’t shoot sports that often anyway. Since I live near a college, in normal times I attend a lot of sports (and concerts, plays, and lectures—why I chose to retire here, after all). When I get a new camera, I’m likely to take it to a game and shoot pictures in part to get used to using it. I took the football shot with my T3i. I used the cheap 75-300mm lens. I was surprised that 75mm on a crop camera was too long, even from the stands, to take some of the pictures I wanted to, especially the video that shows the whole lineup and movement.

When I got the G5X II, I took it to a game and got surprisingly good video. I was trying out the 4K mostly. There was a VIP area behind an end zone, and I was there. Even video of plays on the other end of the field looked great. Obviously our touchdown near me looked even better. I got used to the camera, but on my travels in Europe shortly thereafter, I shot no video at all.

 

[melgross]

And people tend to compare European prices that include VAT to American prices without sales tax, so it looks even worse.

True. But a number of states have have no sales tax, and many have only 1-3%. It’s easy to evade the higher taxes if you just go to a state right next door and buy it there.

 

[melgross]

Can you provide a link showing a combined CFe type B/SD card slot? either existing camera or OEM part?

I read it in a trade article more than two months ago. I can’t remember where the article was. Trying to find it seems impossible because entering dual slot just seems to come up with dual slot readers.

 

[melgross]

No didn't revela res, just we know it has to be a minimum of 39MP for 8K (7840 x 4320) or 42MP for DCI 8K, which no one but CAnon seems to use. I doubt it will be less than the D850 res.

Sure, it needs to be around 40mp, as I said earlier. Other than that, we don’t know. It could be 40, or 45, or even 50. Just guesses.

 

[Loswr]

True. But a number of states he have no sales tax, and many have only 1-3%. It’s easy to evade the higher taxes if you just go to a state right next door and buy it there.

Indeed, and that's why many people in MA travel a bit north to NH (where there is no sales tax) for major purchases. However, that doesn't exempt them from the use tax, if the item is bought with an intent to use it in MA people are still required to declare such purchases and pay the sales/use tax when they file their annual state tax return (not that most people do, but just like the fact that most people drive a bit over the speed limit, it's still illegal).

In fact, MA took a tire chain to court a decade ago over that issue, arguing that if a car had MA plates, tires put on the car in NH were intended for use in MA and subject to the use tax. MA lost the court case, not because the tax isn't due but because MA could not force an out-of-state retailer to collect taxes on their behalf. But that situation changed with the Supreme Court ruling in 2018, that allowed states to require out-of-state businesses to collect sales tax on items shipped to their residents.

 

[SteveC]

True. But a number of states have have no sales tax, and many have only 1-3%. It’s easy to evade the higher taxes if you just go to a state right next door and buy it there.

Not everyone lives near a state line. It's a 2+ hour drive for me to any of four different state lines, perhaps 3 hours to a fourth one, 4 1/2 hours to the one furthest away. And when I get to those lines, I'm basically that far away from a sizeable town I could make a major purchase in...that town being the one I just left.

 

[stevelee]

Not everyone lives near a state line. It's a 2+ hour drive for me to any of four different state lines, perhaps 3 hours to a fourth one, 4 1/2 hours to the one furthest away. And when I get to those lines, I'm basically that far away from a sizeable town I could make a major purchase in...that town being the one I just left.

I live just over 30 miles from a state line, but their tax rates are similar to ours. Plus it seems unlikely that there are camera stores in Rock Hill, SC, that carry a broad enough selection of equipment to be worth the trip.

 

[ColorBlindBat]

I live just over 30 miles from a state line, but their tax rates are similar to ours. Plus it seems unlikely that there are camera stores in Rock Hill, SC, that carry a broad enough selection of equipment to be worth the trip.

Save the drive distance and time.

Get a PayBoo card through B&H Photography, purchase what you want with it, and then the sales tax will be paid by B&H as an instant discount.

 

[Peter Bergh]

True. But a number of states have have no sales tax, and many have only 1-3%. It’s easy to evade the higher taxes if you just go to a state right next door and buy it there.

Yes, but in doing so you need to factor in the cost of the trip. In my case, the nearest state is some three to four hours away by car. Thus, for the trip to the next state to be economically justifiable, I would have to save some 250 miles times two (there and back) times 55 cents per mile, or some $270. (This calculation makes the assumption that the store I wish to visit is just across the state line.) It would have to be a pretty large purchase to make a sales-tax profit on such a trip. Furthermore, my state collects, or attempts to collect, a use tax on out-of-state purchases. Thus, if I completely comply with the law, such a trip would always result in a net loss, even if I could walk to the next state.