Canon EOS R6 Mark III Resolution Increase?

[Chig]

Distance isn't the issue with atmospheric degredation of an image, Whether it's snow crystals, dust, insect swarms, pollen, and other oddities. Focal length/magification is. This is why 600mm is the absolute longest focal length recommended for safari. Sure bring a TC, you never know what you may see.

Wherever you plan to shoot, pay attention to temperature, wind, air pressure, pollen, the ceiling, PM2.5 and PM10 reports of the day, that will dictate how much of an issue it could potentially be and help guide you to the proper focal length to work with. This also comes with experience.

You can shoot 800-1200mm just fine in the right conditions.

I disagree: even under ideal conditions air will affect the image if you're too far away but high magnification at close distances won't
This was shot from less than 5m away at 1120mm (200-800mm with 1.4x) in good light uncropped, 1/500s at f/14 iso 8000

 

[EverydayPhotographer]

This could be kind of a game-changer for me. Hard to say. I am presently shooting the R8 and R10 in tandem. I like them for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that they're pretty close to one another control-wise, so I have them both set up identically, and it's really easy to go from one to the other without giving a lot of additional thought to which one I am holding. It also means that I am carrying one type of battery for the pair, and everything is cross-compatible. A similar arrangement could involve the R6 and R7 combo.

I've never used a camera with in-body IS. That will change tomorrow, as I am renting an R7 as a second camera for an event this coming weekend where I will be loaning my R10 to my son. But in the back of my mind, I'm really curious about the benefits of IBIS for my type of shooting. Most everything this weekend will be done with telephoto, which I have read is kind of not where IBIS excels. I guess we shall see. To this point, I have resisted even going that direction because of the costs, and the difference in image size between the two, and the expectation that I didn't want to pay the extra money for IBIS alone, which is about the only compelling difference for me between the R6 line and the R8. Honestly, I just upgraded my full frame camera into the R8 from the RP at the end of the year. That decision was driven a lot by the AF system on the R10, which outshined it in a lot of situations.

If this test with the R7 is revelatory, and if the forthcoming R6mkIII gets a resolution boost, I may have some thinking to do. Especially if the R7mkII gets a feature and control set that compliments the R6-3.

 

[Sporgon]

Canon would have data to how many 5DRS were sold vs 5DS - at least for the highest res full frame bodies of the time.

Be interesting to know ! Given that the 5DSR stayed in production longer than the 5DS (judging by the reported end of service support date) I would assume the former sold quite a few more than the latter.
The SR had a £300 premium (in UK) over the S. Canon pulled a classic marketing stunt in initially not making enough SRs available, and so created a pent up demand for the more expensive product.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Unless 30MP remain a rumor...

It is all rumors until it is announced.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

I disagree: even under ideal conditions air will affect the image if you're too far away but high magnification at close distances won't
This was shot from less than 5m away at 1120mm (200-800mm with 1.4x) in good light uncropped, 1/500s at f/14 iso 8000
View attachment 224476

The problem with using super telephotos at close distance is that you are generally not getting the full magnification.
The 200-800 is basically a 600.
It is nice that it can focus so much closer than a normal 800, but it sacrifices magnification to do so.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

This could be kind of a game-changer for me. Hard to say. I am presently shooting the R8 and R10 in tandem. I like them for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that they're pretty close to one another control-wise, so I have them both set up identically, and it's really easy to go from one to the other without giving a lot of additional thought to which one I am holding. It also means that I am carrying one type of battery for the pair, and everything is cross-compatible. A similar arrangement could involve the R6 and R7 combo.

I've never used a camera with in-body IS. That will change tomorrow, as I am renting an R7 as a second camera for an event this coming weekend where I will be loaning my R10 to my son. But in the back of my mind, I'm really curious about the benefits of IBIS for my type of shooting. Most everything this weekend will be done with telephoto, which I have read is kind of not where IBIS excels. I guess we shall see. To this point, I have resisted even going that direction because of the costs, and the difference in image size between the two, and the expectation that I didn't want to pay the extra money for IBIS alone, which is about the only compelling difference for me between the R6 line and the R8. Honestly, I just upgraded my full frame camera into the R8 from the RP at the end of the year. That decision was driven a lot by the AF system on the R10, which outshined it in a lot of situations.

If this test with the R7 is revelatory, and if the forthcoming R6mkIII gets a resolution boost, I may have some thinking to do. Especially if the R7mkII gets a feature and control set that compliments the R6-3.

The R7 is much bigger than the R10, but it is not much bigger than the R8.

 

[AlanF]

The problem with using super telephotos at close distance is that you are generally not getting the full magnification.
The 200-800 is basically a 600.
It is nice that it can focus so much closer than a normal 800, but it sacrifices magnification to do so.

The RF 200-800mm focuses down to 3.3m at 800mm whereas the RF 800mm f/5.6 is gets even closer at 2.6m. That's because it's really a 400mm f/2.8 with a 2xTC on it so it has the mfd of a 400mm lens. The classic EF 800mm has an mfd of 6m.

 

[Chris69]

24 MP, c’est beaucoup, quelle résolution voulez-vous ?
Personnellement, je suis satisfait des 24 millions de pixels de mon R6ii.
Recadré de 24 MP à 11 MP, pris à 200 mm à 2,5 m de distance, 1/1600s à f/5,6, ISO 6400 View attachment 224461

 

[Chris69]

Bonsoir.
Étant un peu novice en photo, j’aimerais que l’on m’explique à quoi sert d’avoir 30 MP ce qui fait une photo d’environ 6600x4400 pixels alors qu’un écran 4k en affiche 3840 x 2560 en 2/3. Sauf à vouloir imprimer des affiches, je n’en vois pas l’utilité.
Chacun doit choisir son matériel en fonction de ses activités photos.
Faisant beaucoup de photos de concerts, salons, défilés de mode, je préfère un boitier qui monte en ISO sans bruit.
Je suis équipé d’un R6MII, 14/70 2.8 et d’un 70/200 2.8

 

[Del Paso]

Bonsoir.
Étant un peu novice en photo, j’aimerais que l’on m’explique à quoi sert d’avoir 30 MP ce qui fait une photo d’environ 6600x4400 pixels alors qu’un écran 4k en affiche 3840 x 2560 en 2/3. Sauf à vouloir imprimer des affiches, je n’en vois pas l’utilité.
Chacun doit choisir son matériel en fonction de ses activités photos.
Faisant beaucoup de photos de concerts, salons, défilés de mode, je préfère un boitier qui monte en ISO sans bruit.
Je suis équipé d’un R6MII, 14/70 2.8 et d’un 70/200 2.8

De gustibus non est disputandum...
Ou, pour citer Pirandello: "A chacun sa verite"
L'avantage d'avoir plus de MP c'est de pouvoir agrandir une fraction de l'image. Tres utile pour la photo animaliere quand on ne peut pas s'approcher du sujet (oiseau en vol...)

 

[Michael Clark]

Hmmm. Curious about this quote here: "It’s not a camera that will be on our wishlist, but I think a resolution boost will be welcomed, even if just from a marketing standpoint."

For me, I have been drooling over this camera since it was suggested that it will have those action priority settings like the r5m2 and r1.

I'm an SLR holdout. I would have gotten an r5m2, but then I would have had to get a divorce, too. This seems like the absolute best camera for what I shoot, can afford and want to lug around. (probably 95% soccer.)

Anyway, back to the original thought - what should I know about this camera which makes it less than exciting? Not enough to separate it from the m2?

The writer of the OP already shoots with the R1.

 

[Michael Clark]

Anything over 12 MP is too big for 4K RAW video.30 MP is 7K.

If the sensor is 16:9, then 7K only requires 25MP.

If the sensor is 3:2 cropped to 16:9 (fully preserving the long dimension), then 7K requires 30MP.

 

[Michael Clark]

Distance isn't the issue with atmospheric degredation of an image, Whether it's snow crystals, dust, insect swarms, pollen, and other oddities. Focal length/magification is. This is why 600mm is the absolute longest focal length recommended for safari. Sure bring a TC, you never know what you may see.

Wherever you plan to shoot, pay attention to temperature, wind, air pressure, pollen, the ceiling, PM2.5 and PM10 reports of the day, that will dictate how much of an issue it could potentially be and help guide you to the proper focal length to work with. This also comes with experience.

You can shoot 800-1200mm just fine in the right conditions.

Both distance and magnification each have influence. It's neither one or the other. It's both combined in a complex interaction.

 

[Michael Clark]

Be interesting to know ! Given that the 5DSR stayed in production longer than the 5DS (judging by the reported end of service support date) I would assume the former sold quite a few more than the latter.
The SR had a £300 premium (in UK) over the S. Canon pulled a classic marketing stunt in initially not making enough SRs available, and so created a pent up demand for the more expensive product.

Just my opinion, but I don't think it was a marketing stunt. I think they were truly surprised by the heavily biased demand for the 5Ds R versus the 5Ds. Based on analysis of serial numbers (those reported to crowd sourced databases and those listed on used camera websites), there were very few additional runs of the 5Ds after the initial batches around 2015. The 5Ds R has more production run codes among the various publicly known serial numbers.

[The first two and last four digits of each Canon DSLR body (for the single digit model numbers) appear to be the unique six-digit serial number for that body. The third and fourth digits are almost always the same for every body of the same model, and the fifth through eighth digits are batch codes that seem to be more or less sequential: e.g. 3700, 3800, 3900, etc. for each batch of cameras made during a production run or made without any revisions to internal parts. Here's a detailed analysis of around 60 5D Mark IV serial numbers.]

 

[Sporgon]

Just my opinion, but I don't think it was a marketing stunt. I think they were truly surprised by the heavily biased demand for the 5Ds R versus the 5Ds. Based on analysis of serial numbers (those reported to crowd sourced databases and those listed on used camera websites), there were very few additional runs of the 5Ds after the initial batches around 2015. The 5Ds R has more production run codes among the various publicly known serial numbers.

[The first two and last four digits of each Canon DSLR body (for the single digit model numbers) appear to be the unique six-digit serial number for that body. The third and fourth digits are almost always the same for every body of the same model, and the fifth through eighth digits are batch codes that seem to be more or less sequential: e.g. 3700, 3800, 3900, etc. for each batch of cameras made during a production run or made without any revisions to internal parts. Here's a detailed analysis of around 60 5D Mark IV serial numbers.]

You may be right of course, but if that’s the case Canon must have been asleep at the wheel, which I think is unlikely.
Nikon had introduced the D800 and D800e in March / April 2012, three years before the 5DS/sr with the latter having the same cancelled AA filter as the later 5Dsr. The D800e also carried a price premium, and at least judging by the used market was much more popular than the straight D800, with a significant price premium, to the extent that people were fitting “D800e” top plates with the model badge on the D800 to charge a fraudulent higher price.
On the other hand, Canon do (rightly IMO) believe in the AA filter so maybe they felt the customer had to too.

 

[John Wilde]

" in-person at a Canon headquarters."

It was nice of Canon USA to give you "approved leaks" rather than having security guards throw you out.

 

[Cerulean42]

28-30MP would be ideal. The sharpness difference between R6II and R5 is very apparent to me personally.

 

[AdamBotond]

Wouldn't 30ish megapixels screw up the potential for Raw 4k video?
I know downsampling in canons "fine" modes is quite nice, but it also heats up the cameras quite a lot and limits the record times due to battery life and heat management.
And 30mp would probably mean 4k lineskipping like in the R5 is necessary right? Sounds like a downgrade for videography to me

Same thing poped on in my head. Assuming its going to be 30 MP, should we say goodbye to oversampled 4K60fps? I would rather stick to 24 MP then.

 

[Quack]

24 MP today (june 2025) in full-frame is ridiculous. Even aps-c cameras have 24-32 MP... Even Canon R have 30 MP... Even Sony entry level full-frame have 32 MP...

Thinking 24 MP in 2025 is ridiculous is ridiculous. Pros certainly think it is enough, I guess not photographer wannabes. And, of course, we have the Sony A9 II, Nikon Z6 III and Nikon Z5 II all sporting those ridiculous 24 MP sensors.

 

[bn5fg]

Thinking 24 MP in 2025 is ridiculous is ridiculous. Pros certainly think it is enough, I guess not photographer wannabes. And, of course, we have the Sony A9 II, Nikon Z6 III and Nikon Z5 II all sporting those ridiculous 24 MP sensors.

MPs are irrelevant because Canon has no lenses!