Canon officially announces the Canon EOS R3

JustUs7

EOS RP
Feb 5, 2020
238
441
I'm not suggesting that you are. What I am saying is that if you look at the wildlife photographers who have been successful in getting their images into the public eye over the last few years there does not appear to have been a rush to the high mp version of the camera make that they choose to use. Inevitably this will change in the future as models become both high mp and offer the specifications that they want, but to my mind it shows that other aspects of the cameras performance were more important to them than just high mp, and I'm not specifically talking about amateur bird photographers, where 'crop factor' and high pixel density do seem to be valued.
Don’t know that it will be intentional replacement because the new stuff gets better. It’s just that the new stuff will be whats available when existing equipment wears out. Kind of happens organically.
 

Codebunny

Elil
Sep 5, 2018
966
1,028
Scotland
The Bird Photographers of the year were announced a week or so ago https://www.imaging-resource.com/ne...otographer-of-the-year-2021-winners-announced
The Nikon D850 and D500s were the most prominent bodies. Gordon Laing said at the end of the review of the R3 it’s not aimed at wild life shooters.

The car AF gives away the use and also the eye thing. Still for wildlife I would use the R3 over the R5 any day. Stacked sensors are really just that much better and I like foxes, deer, bears, snakes, anything not a bird.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sporgon

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,673
11,658
The car AF gives away the use and also the eye thing. Still for wildlife I would use the R3 over the R5 any day. Stacked sensors are really just that much better and I like foxes, deer, bears, snakes, anything not a bird.
Before making that decision, it might just be a good idea to compare the two directly. Gordon Laing's choice was to use the R5, but he is only one point of view.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pj1974

Jack Douglas

CR for the Humour
Apr 10, 2013
6,847
2,464
Alberta, Canada
I'm not suggesting that you are. What I am saying is that if you look at the wildlife photographers who have been successful in getting their images into the public eye over the last few years there does not appear to have been a rush to the high mp version of the camera make that they choose to use. Inevitably this will change in the future as models become both high mp and offer the specifications that they want, but to my mind it shows that other aspects of the cameras performance were more important to them than just high mp, and I'm not specifically talking about amateur bird photographers, where 'crop factor' and high pixel density do seem to be valued.
Speaking strictly for myself, when I bought the 1DX2 it was a serious conundrum of what compromises to prioritize and the only alternative in Canon was the 5D4 and I wanted more FPS and video features. That purchase served me reasonably well but left a bad taste when it was recently sold. It did not prevent me from acquiring some sweet photos but that was to a large extent because I also sprung for the 400 DO II and ended up shooting at 800mm almost exclusively (some quality loss) because of the 20 MP.

I'm not blaming Canon because I simply got caught purchasing at the wrong time. Now the R5 is solving almost all of the issues and has the features that lots of us said Canon could put in a 1 series camera but refused (the flip-screen, intervalometer, etc.) with only a small number of compromises, one of which is the ergonomics of a pro body for use with large lenses and so many had their hopes up that the R3 would have substantial MPs, but it doesn't.

I don't have the finances to simply throw at each new compromised camera. I feel the R5 purchase was money well spent but the 1DX2, while being so sweet in many ways, just didn't cut it - for me. We the higher MP fans know why we "need" the MPs. For wildlife (birds) with the lenses now available and good extender performance and 45 MPs, there is no longer a significant issue with not having enough reach. After all, it becomes increasingly difficult to "find" the critters quickly at such high focal lengths (narrow FOV).

And of course, "we", speaking for the old-timers on CR, are not getting any stronger or more agile and so are increasingly needing lighter gear. Sadly, there is no perfect solution to aging other than grinning and baring it. :giggle: :cry:

Jack
 
  • Like
Reactions: digigal and pj1974

Codebunny

Elil
Sep 5, 2018
966
1,028
Scotland
Before making that decision, it might just be a good idea to compare the two directly. Gordon Laing's choice was to use the R5, but he is only one point of view.

I have tried the Z6, R6, R5, and A9ii. While the Sony doesn’t have any lenses it had the best EVF latency when tracking fast moving squirrels. Second I would say was the Z6. The R6 and R5 aren’t bad and I wouldn’t say they where worse than the Z6. But nothing comes close to a stacked sensor just now, stacked sensors put mirrorless ahead of DSLR. The battle is between the R3 and Z9, currently there is nothing as good as the R3 on the market until Nikon shows it’s hand.
 

YEUP

I'm New Here
Feb 26, 2021
12
18
I am so excited about the customizable Q menu!
Been hopping between the different reviews. Would you mind sharing where you saw this?
Watch the long FroKnowsPhoto video review. Around 40 minutes in, a very very brief explanation, like maybe 30 seconds. Basically it looks like the same sort of customization the 5D IV has.
 

SereneSpeed

EOS 90D
Feb 1, 2016
121
65
A good wildlife photographer doesn't significantly crop, if you have to, the photo goes in the bin because you weren't close enough. Unless there is something exceptional or rare that you want proof of. I know a few PhaseOne pros that don't crop beyond something distracting on the edge of the frame or to straighten a horizon.

Why would you waste your time trying to make a good frame and then hack off a bunch of the data? That's a waste of the photographer's time and quite frankly lazy.

I'm just talking about pros, not folks that are on a tight budget and learning.
"A good wildlife photographer doesn't significantly crop, if you have to, the photo goes in the bin because you weren't close enough." - It goes in the bin, because there wasn't enough pixel density. If there'd been enough pixels to crop and the shot was fantastic, why, really, honestly, why would anyone 'bin it'?

"Why would you waste your time trying to make a good frame and then hack off a bunch of the data? That's a waste of the photographer's time and quite frankly lazy." - I'm sure you'll forget this post in ten minutes, let alone ten years. But, (I believe), in ten years, a line like that will date you. With the D800 and then the 5DSR, commercial and studio photographers with malleable skillsets have expanded the limits of compositional constraints to better harness the new flexibility afforded by higher density sensors. It took me nearly 5 years to re-learn how to look through a viewfinder. Why? Because for the first 20 years I shot, I needed to 'fill the frame' to get the required amount of detail. But now, I 'shoot loose'. Sounds lazy? No, sounds like money. I sell different crops of the same image. I licence different crops of the same image. One for the banner on a website (4x1 aspect ratio), one for a magazine add (9x12), three for socials (1x1, 4x3, 4x5). All from the same image. And no - no - I'm not lazy. It takes a lot of work to previsualize that. To allow for multiple compositional outcomes in a single frame. I see multiple crop options when I shoot portraits, too. And, pros in other fields have already adapted in the same way. There's no way someone shooting an animal hundreds of meters out isn't going to be able to make a business case to 'shoot loose'. Many will - not all (I don't want to generalize and polarize - shooting styles are personal). It seems to me that other than crop sensors, wildlife photographers just haven't had the option yet. There isn't a 45mp R3... Times change. Techniques change. Skillsets required to monetize images change.

:steps off his soapbox:

(And yeah, although I'm a fulltime 'working pro', you'd never catch me on safari, so, feel free to ignore the above - or remember me in 10 years)
 
Last edited:

ConanRumours

I'm New Here
Aug 11, 2021
18
5
I have tried the Z6, R6, R5, and A9ii. While the Sony doesn’t have any lenses it had the best EVF latency when tracking fast moving squirrels. Second I would say was the Z6. The R6 and R5 aren’t bad and I wouldn’t say they where worse than the Z6. But nothing comes close to a stacked sensor just now, stacked sensors put mirrorless ahead of DSLR. The battle is between the R3 and Z9, currently there is nothing as good as the R3 on the market until Nikon shows it’s hand.
The a1 is better and also faster, 120 focus calculations per second VS 60 for the R3. Look forward to Nikon's Z9 though. IMO Canon's best camera is still the r5 due to its size, features and performance.
 

privatebydesign

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
10,496
5,721
The a1 is better and also faster, 120 focus calculations per second VS 60 for the R3. Look forward to Nikon's Z9 though. IMO Canon's best camera is still the r5 due to its size, features and performance.
Doesn't it just become an argument in irrelevant statistics? Who says 120 is 'better' than 60, surely the only relevant measure of AF is shots in focus?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jack Douglas

Codebunny

Elil
Sep 5, 2018
966
1,028
Scotland
The a1 is better and also faster, 120 focus calculations per second VS 60 for the R3. Look forward to Nikon's Z9 though. IMO Canon's best camera is still the r5 due to its size, features and performance.

The main issues with the A1 is that it isn’t a gripped body, Sony haven’t got a good track record with weather sealing so I don’t know if I can trust shooting in a extreme downpour or minus 30 for weeks, and they only have two of the six wildlife lenses I use, and Canon’s and Nikon’s are better. So Sony just aren’t in the race, it’s R3 or Z9. I wouldn’t give up my Z6 for a R5, not enough differences and in a heavy rain in Sri Lanka I watched as the 5D’s of various generations shut down while the 1Dx II/III and Nikon D4 and D5’s kept running even when the rain got even heavier. When I look a BBC documentary crew it is telling that they bring the big bodies to the same places I go and plan to go.
 

Bdbtoys

R5
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2020
414
298
I just put in a preorder on Amazon, as well as a small box store online shop. Hope to get this one soon!

Amazon is saying "This item will be released on November 30, 2021". Hopefully thats not the release date for everyone

Hopefully they put a box around the retail packaging. I had preordered the 100 Macro, and they slapped a label on the retail box and shipped it that way for contents anyone could see, while beating up the retail box in the process.
 

Jack Douglas

CR for the Humour
Apr 10, 2013
6,847
2,464
Alberta, Canada
Hopefully they put a box around the retail packaging. I had preordered the 100 Macro, and they slapped a label on the retail box and shipped it that way for contents anyone could see, while beating up the retail box in the process.
That is completely unacceptable and hard to believe - reason for a complaint for sure.

Jack
 

SHAMwow

EOS M6 Mark II
CR Pro
Sep 7, 2020
50
86
Hopefully they put a box around the retail packaging. I had preordered the 100 Macro, and they slapped a label on the retail box and shipped it that way for contents anyone could see, while beating up the retail box in the process.
Hate when they do that. Never order my camera gear on Amazon, but just hate that regardless.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,791
4,196
Hate when they do that. Never order my camera gear on Amazon, but just hate that regardless.
Ordered my RF 100-500 from Amazon as they were the only ones with availability. The lens box was in a larger box surrounded by air-bag packaging, quite well protected. That's not always the case with Amazon, of course.
 

ConanRumours

I'm New Here
Aug 11, 2021
18
5
Doesn't it just become an argument in irrelevant statistics? Who says 120 is 'better' than 60, surely the only relevant measure of AF is shots in focus?
it's simple math, it takes half the time for the A1 to acquire focus when compared to anything else on the market at that price point. It basically performs double the amount of calculations so there is less opportunity to miss your shot when compared to let's say the r3 or r5 and even the a9. If your shots are still not in focus, I am afraid it's "user error".
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,791
4,196
it's simple math, it takes half the time for the A1 to acquire focus when compared to anything else on the market at that price point. It basically performs double the amount of calculations so there is less opportunity to miss your shot when compared to let's say the r3 or r5 and even the a9. If your shots are still not in focus, I am afraid it's "user error".
So you believe that speed is synonymous with accuracy? In practice, the opppsite is usually true.

Simple math…
  • Person A: My math speed is really fast.
  • Person B: Really? So what is 371–129?
  • Person A (replies in 1 second): 94.
  • Person B: That’s wrong! You said you were really quick at math?!
  • Person A: I said I was always fast — not always correct.
 

privatebydesign

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
10,496
5,721
it's simple math, it takes half the time for the A1 to acquire focus when compared to anything else on the market at that price point. It basically performs double the amount of calculations so there is less opportunity to miss your shot when compared to let's say the r3 or r5 and even the a9. If your shots are still not in focus, I am afraid it's "user error".
No it isn't simple maths, the random statistic of x somethings per second is meaningless when the x's being measured are different. Is a Sony calculation the same and/or as accurate as a Canon calculation? But more to the point how relevant is that frequency, number, or accuracy when translated to in focus shots?

Now you can compare one Sony to another, or one Canon to another, in raw metrics, but across brands the numbers you are giving are irrelevant to the photographic output, and call me stupid but I buy cameras to take in focus shots not because I extrapolated incomparable spec numbers across brands.

Further, you say the Sony acquires focus twice as fast as anything else available, that isn't what Sony claim. They say the AF system does twice the calculations per second of other systems, nothing about acquiring focus in that time. See how the extrapolating random numbers leads to entirely inaccurate assumptions?
 
Sep 25, 2020
8
2
Hopefully they put a box around the retail packaging. I had preordered the 100 Macro, and they slapped a label on the retail box and shipped it that way for contents anyone could see, while beating up the retail box in the process.
ive ordered from them before plenty and and it was always double boxed. I would have definitely been pissed if I was you!
 

SHAMwow

EOS M6 Mark II
CR Pro
Sep 7, 2020
50
86
ive ordered from them before plenty and and it was always double boxed. I would have definitely been pissed if I was you!
I think it definitely depends on which distribution center you get and stuff. Which is odd there's so much variability since the bigger the business the more standardized things become.