I reached out to someone that may be able to clarify this query. However, that's one of those things some people wouldn't notice during an intro.
Upvote
0
Canon EOS R6 Mark III & RF 45 F1.2 STM November 6
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
I reached out to someone that may be able to clarify this query. However, that's one of those things some people wouldn't notice during an intro.
Got my R5 in August 2020, and have loved it. The R5 II was a bit more than I was willing to invest, since I don't shoot fast action subjects. But...I envied the two generations better AF. The R6 II is only one generation better AF, and the 24 mp was a disappointment. The R6 III is exactly suited for me - big step up in AF, 32mp, and $1k less than the R5 II. I'll keep my R5 (I) for when I need two bodies, and/or even more detail.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Good points here. It is interesting that some feature improvements, perhaps even just one (the right one for that person) may be sufficient to upgrade (such as the improved EVF). I suppose across a fairly large target market a lot of improvements will make it easier for a lot of people to upgrade. Even if individually, there may have been just a couple of key features that they wanted. For me, the video features are key. And price.
Upvote
0
Thanks
Of course it is, and that's exactly the point: they could have made all these lenses with internal focus.
With internal focus at least I can put my camera face down in my shoulder bag, or put the lens face down with an attached hood in the right position, knowing I won't find the lens fully extended when I take it out, like with the RF 35mm f/1.8, neither it will damage the motor if I turn my camera on/off/wake it from sleep/change SD card when it's facing down, gets knocked, neither will water enter the lens barrel as easily.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I like to do these comparison spreadsheets for myself and thought it could be helpful to others. If I had more money, only a couple key features would probably be enough to justify buying the latest model (although I cannot always buy, window shopping is still a weakness). And so, the R6ii is seriously being considered over the R6iii. It is an unfair comparison since these specs are still just rumors, but the list of features that improved the R6ii over the R6 was quite a bit longer than this one (so far), and primarily for video. But there were notable photography upgrades as well including 40 fps electronic vs 20 fps, much better battery life, dedicated video/stills switch, preshooting buffer, lens breathing correction, focus stacking and muli-function hot shoe. Not including video upgrades... the R6ii is such a good hybrid camera it is a high bar to raise even in 2025 compared to its competitors. I am not being critical of the R6iii if it does in fact have a shorter list of upgrades. It just might confirm for me that the R6ii is the best camera for me over the next 5 years.
Upvote
0
The person I was talking to appologizes for explaining it incorrectly.
"This let's you select framerates based on a multiplication factor more efficiently. If you're shooting at 24fps, you can easily switch to 12fps by selecting 0.5x or double the frame rate by selecting 2x."
I am not sure if that are all of the multiplication factors.
Upvote
0
That's the thing, they're fallacious.
For instance, by your spreadsheets, the original R6 and the R6 Mark II would be rated at the same level of IBIS. Actually, all cameras with IBIS would, yet there are at least three different versions of Canon IBIS.
The same with pre capture, only the R5 Mark II and the R1 have real pre capture, all other cameras released so far are a PITA to use it.
Lens breathing correction also requires compatible lenses.
You just can't put numbers against numbers on what is not quantifiable, that's exactly the problem with online comparison websites.
Upvote
0
And a new camera model is usually much more than the sum of the individual feature upgrades.
As an example: I did a comparison of the changes between the different Mk's of the EOS 5D, See: https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/t...-r1-is-now-expected-in-july.43625/post-997909
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I think this should be considered a successor to the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM. It is about the same price point (after inflation) and a third of a stop faster and a bit wider in terms of field of view. It won't have any of the L lens build or weather sealing or USM, but that's fine given the price point.
Upvote
0
Thanks for clarification. Maybe this is one "gene" they keep for their C50 to have some differences. If the price of R6 iii is 3200 € in Europe the C50 at 3800 € is in the same ballpark and the better choice.
To much to choose from in our times - on the other hand: All the tools are really great today if used with knowledge!
Upvote
0
OK, that's a fair concern, though I don't know if a camera in a padded bag is enough to ruin the AF mechanism. Hopefully Canon took that into consideration; I'd wager the focusing elements retract on shutdown.
How is this any less stills focused than the Mk II? Same 40fps with 40% more stills resolution. It's not like the Mk II was some pure stills camera to begin with.
Plus its worth considering that generation updates rarely warrant upgrades. I.e. the MkII wasn't a "must buy" from the MkI and that didn't make it a failure or bad camera. And IMO the step up from Mk2 to Mk3 is much bigger than the step up from Mk1 to Mk2. I had an EOS R and currently have an a7C II. R6's 20-24MP was a non-starter. Now the R6 is interesting to me.
Upvote
0
i wonder is an upgrade from R worth it for landscape / portraits?
3 fps -> 40fps
30 Mpix -> 32 Mpix
no ibis -> 6.5 stops ibis
already paid for -> $2800
R takes good pictures, the speed improvement is nice. ibis could help some handheld shots.
3 fps -> 40fps
30 Mpix -> 32 Mpix
no ibis -> 6.5 stops ibis
already paid for -> $2800
R takes good pictures, the speed improvement is nice. ibis could help some handheld shots.
Upvote
0
It could be on top of your desk, for instance...
You know how the lenses react when you open and close the battery or memory card door, while your camera is off, right? They extend and retract a little.
Last week I went for a stroll with a camera, something I haven't done in years. Usually I don't shoot 35, so I decided to take it as main lens, that day.
I didn't put the JJC lens hood on. I barely use this lens, might as well try making it simpler. Plus, the hood is weird anyway.
5 minutes on, I take the RP out of my shoulder bag, and the lens is like this.
It would have extended completely, with a little more time. This is the worst lens I have regarding lens creep.
Later, I get home, put the camera on my desk, remove the SD card, close the battery door, hear a weird noise, and then I realise the lens is trying to extend while the camera is on top of it. I had put the camera face down, without lens hood.
I just said in my language "I had forgotten why I hate this lens...".
Yes, I have other external focusing lenses, the 16, the 28 and the 50, but the 28 is too small to put the camera face down, and I always use lens hoods on the others - they're too small to put face down without hoods anyway.
With the exception of the 16mm, that I actually use for work, I own the 28, 35 and 50 for personal stuff.
I work mainly with the 28-70 and 70-200, two somewhat big lenses, so I usually put my cameras vertically on the table, it's not on purpose.
Seriously, I'm fed up with these weird designs...
Last edited:
Upvote
0
It could be on top of your desk, for instance...
You know how the lenses react when you open and close the battery or memory card door, while your camera is off, right? They extend and retract a little.
Last week I went for a stroll with a camera, something I haven't done in years. Usually I don't shoot 35, so I decided to take it as main lens, that day.
I didn't put the JJC lens hood on. I barely use this lens, might as well try making it simpler. Plus, the hood is weird anyway.
5 minutes on, I take the RP out of my shoulder bag, and the lens is like this.
It would have extended completely, with a little more time. This is the worst lens I have regarding lens creep.
Later, I get home, put the camera on my desk, remove the SD card, close the battery door, hear a weird noise, and then I realise the lens is trying to extend while the camera is on top of it. I had put the camera face down, without lens hood.
I just said in my language "I had forgotten why I hate this lens...".
Yes, I have other external focusing lenses, the 16, the 28 and the 50, but the 28 is too small to put the camera face down, and I always use lens hoods on the others - they're too small to put face down without hoods anyway.
With the exception of the 16mm, that I actually use for work, I own the 28, 35 and 50 for personal stuff.
I work mainly with the 28-70 and 70-200, two somewhat big lenses, so I usually put my cameras vertically on the table, it's not on purpose.
Seriously, I'm fed up with these weird designs...
There is no justification for these annoying external focus designs that make lenses more fragile and slower to focus. The minuscule size saving is not worth it.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I can totally see Canon including the Digital Accellerator chip in this camera as part of why there is a price bump. The autofocus capabilities, including learning faces, is going to be a big part of what's different between Canon MILCs and your phone. Are there any patents out there relating to focus tracking of people or even subject learning?
The next big question is at what point will that capability trickle down to the R8? Will it go into the R7? Or R10? At what point will Canon deem it critical for inclusion in the camera to generate revenue?
In 5 years, will that be present in all of Canon's MILC cameras just like IBIS is now?
The next big question is at what point will that capability trickle down to the R8? Will it go into the R7? Or R10? At what point will Canon deem it critical for inclusion in the camera to generate revenue?
In 5 years, will that be present in all of Canon's MILC cameras just like IBIS is now?
Upvote
0
Similar threads
