Canon releases firmware v1.4.0 for the Canon EOS R3

[LSXPhotog]

The Panning Assist in this update does not work at all. It makes a faint clunking noise and the viewfinder becomes unstabilized. Used it for about 20 seconds and determined it wasn't usable. Swing and a miss, Canon.

Didn't have any need to test the preregistering of faces, but that's a great sleeper feature to have on this camera that nobody seems to be talking about. It appears to be implemented well and you can use photos on your memory card to register faces or register them immediately and take a photo from that menu? This seems like it could be valuable under certain conditions.

 

[LSXPhotog]

I have to disagree. the R3 has way better hardware specs to do this. This is just a matter of effort from Canon and this is Canon's ignorance. I'm finding the R3 becoming more irrelevant for the asking price as time moves on.
the stack sensor readout is slower than those in A1 and Z9 higher res cameras, it has less features that matters especially the pre-capture one which makes more sense for a sports camera. there is no hi res mode. For a first time Canon potential buyer, the R3 is the least attractive camera when you factor price and RF lens options. I can see EF users interest with it but new buyers ??? Canon is only sustaining this Stills camera business via its DSLR and lower end MILC. In my opinion, R5 is the flagship camera. R3 is a pointless venture by Canon.

Resolution doesn't define the quality of a camera. It may be all that you are worried about. If I could justify purchasing a third R3, I would do it in a heart beat. It's simply the greatest camera that has ever been developed for my needs and I'm thrilled it doesn't have 45mp.

 

[john1970]

I just updated my R3 camera to the latest firmware. I have not tried the panning assists, but will be interesting to try. I am more interested in the minor bug fixes at this stage anyway. This will likely be my last firmware update before my summer travels. I do not plan on updating firmware for a month prior to my travels just in cases there are issues.

 

[neuroanatomist]

This will likely be my last firmware update before my summer travels. I do not plan on updating firmware for a month prior to my travels just in cases there are issues.

I plan to update my R3 this week, and like you no more updates applied until after summer travels. I have several lenses to update, as well. However, I’m still undecided on whether I’ll take the R3 on our summer holiday, or the R8 that I preordered.

 

[Skybox]

I came from a 1Dx II, and the R3 has much better autofocus than the II did. It is the best autofocusing camera to date from Canon.

Won’t disagree, however since this is my first mirrorless camera i definitely wasn’t prepared for the major shift between aim and shoot to the aim and make sure the AF is on the subject you are looking to capture images with. I shoot 100% sports. To my surprise when I was using the R3 while shooting an ice hockey game I was blown away at the crisp, sharp images. This was while I was taking images during warmups. I was getting mostly individual shots. Once play began where I would be focusing on the home team I couldn’t get the AF to stay on the “home” player. I was glad this wasn’t a paid gig but more testing to see what I can do with this camera. The 1dxmk2 granted doesn’t have the same capabilities but you knew when you aimed at the subject the AF wasn’t moving around. I have relearned and changed my tactics since having the R3. I simply love this camera. I was just speaking that I still get the occasional AF bounce. Which can be frustrating. I was hoping there would be a firmware update to address the AF bouncing around. You could argue it’s the Indian not the arrow and maybe it is? I just would like to see some improvements.

 

[LSXPhotog]

Won’t disagree, however since this is my first mirrorless camera i definitely wasn’t prepared for the major shift between aim and shoot to the aim and make sure the AF is on the subject you are looking to capture images with. I shoot 100% sports. To my surprise when I was using the R3 while shooting an ice hockey game I was blown away at the crisp, sharp images. This was while I was taking images during warmups. I was getting mostly individual shots. Once play began where I would be focusing on the home team I couldn’t get the AF to stay on the “home” player. I was glad this wasn’t a paid gig but more testing to see what I can do with this camera. The 1dxmk2 granted doesn’t have the same capabilities but you knew when you aimed at the subject the AF wasn’t moving around. I have relearned and changed my tactics since having the R3. I simply love this camera. I was just speaking that I still get the occasional AF bounce. Which can be frustrating. I was hoping there would be a firmware update to address the AF bouncing around. You could argue it’s the Indian not the arrow and maybe it is? I just would like to see some improvements.

I treat my R3 autofocus like a DSLR most of the time. I DO NOT use the subject tracking most of the time. I have my front Mfn button set to enable and disable tracking so I can turn it on the moment I want to use it (people celebrating, an individual portrait, etc.) but if you treat the R3 autofocus like it's a 1DX Mark III it will almost certainly blow you away. I find that using the tracking features can often be too distracting and lead to poor disciplines that are required for panning shots or tracking a moving subject.

My suggestion is to disable subject tracking and begin exploring the beautiful world of the customizable zone AF, traditional DSLR tracking of expanded AF areas, and then assign subject tracking to a preferred button so it's there when you want it and gets out of the way when you don't need it.

ALSO, I can't say that I've had the problem you've described, but I haven't shot team sports in 4-5 years and before the mirrorless days. But I would suggest playing around with custom AF menus and try to keep the camera locked on. Even after well over a year with this camera and owning 2 of them, I'm still learning new little tweaks that have made it better to use for me. I even now believe that the the Case settings are more important than I imagined. Their description is essentially the main focus of the AF system...I always thought I could just run Case 4 with settings I carried over from my 1DXII...nope. I'm shooting in Case 2 and 4 all the time now.

 

[Skybox]

I would say my autofocusing issues have improved immensely. I scoured the internet and read numerous posts about the issue I was having. I have thoroughly enjoyed the learning process. With the 1dxmk2 it was there in front of you. With the R3 you can seek out anything and the customizations are endless. I have been forced to learn how to use this camera and all the features it comes with. I have recently shot a baseball game and lacrosse game. different sports which need different strategies to make sure you capture the images you want.

 

[Birdshooter]

Yes, but the AF in the Sony A7RV smokes the Canon R3 for 1/2 the price. And you can be certain, that same type of AF is going to show up in every future Alpha series Sony.
Canon needs to unlock the R3. Give user 14 bit internal RAW video. It fast enough to do it. How do I know. Because I’ve created videos using the high speed drive mode with my R3. No sound of course, and the stills need to be imported into Resolve as an image sequence. The R3 is plenty capable but Canon have chosen to not release its full potential.

The Zony can't keep up to the R3, hard to believe you own the A7RV and say that, as the A1 is the fast camera not the A7RV, that's like comparing the R5 to the R3 one a sports camera the other a good all arounder... I know many Sony shooter that own both cameras and say the A7RV is not for birds in flight.
And have they fixed the Nikon Z9 issue of it not picking up birds on a green background yet? I know many Z9 owners that could not get on a bird on a green background. what a joke that is for such an expensive camera, and green of all colors. lol

 

[Birdshooter]

I treat my R3 autofocus like a DSLR most of the time. I DO NOT use the subject tracking most of the time. I have my front Mfn button set to enable and disable tracking so I can turn it on the moment I want to use it (people celebrating, an individual portrait, etc.) but if you treat the R3 autofocus like it's a 1DX Mark III it will almost certainly blow you away. I find that using the tracking features can often be too distracting and lead to poor disciplines that are required for panning shots or tracking a moving subject.

My suggestion is to disable subject tracking and begin exploring the beautiful world of the customizable zone AF, traditional DSLR tracking of expanded AF areas, and then assign subject tracking to a preferred button so it's there when you want it and gets out of the way when you don't need it.

ALSO, I can't say that I've had the problem you've described, but I haven't shot team sports in 4-5 years and before the mirrorless days. But I would suggest playing around with custom AF menus and try to keep the camera locked on. Even after well over a year with this camera and owning 2 of them, I'm still learning new little tweaks that have made it better to use for me. I even now believe that the the Case settings are more important than I imagined. Their description is essentially the main focus of the AF system...I always thought I could just run Case 4 with settings I carried over from my 1DXII...nope. I'm shooting in Case 2 and 4 all the time now.

 

[Birdshooter]

Later reply but i agree, and turn off the damn eye auto focus at times for birds in flight an use the camera like a dslr.
Zone auto focus is great feature for shooting fast small birds. Like crazy erratic swallows.

 

[entoman]

I have to disagree. the R3 has way better hardware specs to do this. This is just a matter of effort from Canon and this is Canon's ignorance. I'm finding the R3 becoming more irrelevant for the asking price as time moves on.
the stack sensor readout is slower than those in A1 and Z9 higher res cameras, it has less features that matters especially the pre-capture one which makes more sense for a sports camera. there is no hi res mode. For a first time Canon potential buyer, the R3 is the least attractive camera when you factor price and RF lens options. I can see EF users interest with it but new buyers ??? Canon is only sustaining this Stills camera business via its DSLR and lower end MILC. In my opinion, R5 is the flagship camera. R3 is a pointless venture by Canon.

I certainly wouldn't consider the R3 to be a "pointless venture". I do however agree that it's overpriced to a degree that I wouldn't personally consider it. The R5 is better suited to my purposes.

But for any professional (or affluent amateur) sports/wildlife photographer who is already invested in the RF mount, it's probably a better bet than the R5, due to the tougher build quality, integral grip, more advanced AF system, better EVF, better battery performance and other factors.

It's only real limitation IMO is the 24MP sensor, which limits cropping ability and thereby forces users to use longer focal lengths, adding considerably to the overall cost (and weight).

It's frustrating that certain aspects (mainly a faster and higher res sensor) of the Z9 and A1 are superior to the R3, but there's little point in comparing it to them, as anyone considering a flagship sports camera is likely to be a very experienced photographer who is already heavily invested in their system. People with that level of investment rarely switch brands. "New buyers" won't be entering any system at the high end - they'll be buying consumer models and then gradually working their way up as they become more experienced photographers.

 

[LSXPhotog]

I certainly wouldn't consider the R3 to be a "pointless venture". I do however agree that it's overpriced to a degree that I wouldn't personally consider it. The R5 is better suited to my purposes.

But for any professional (or affluent amateur) sports/wildlife photographer who is already invested in the RF mount, it's probably a better bet than the R5, due to the tougher build quality, integral grip, more advanced AF system, better EVF, better battery performance and other factors.

It's only real limitation IMO is the 24MP sensor, which limits cropping ability and thereby forces users to use longer focal lengths, adding considerably to the overall cost (and weight).

It's frustrating that certain aspects (mainly a faster and higher res sensor) of the Z9 and A1 are superior to the R3, but there's little point in comparing it to them, as anyone considering a flagship sports camera is likely to be a very experienced photographer who is already heavily invested in their system. People with that level of investment rarely switch brands. "New buyers" won't be entering any system at the high end - they'll be buying consumer models and then gradually working their way up as they become more experienced photographers.

Just speaking for myself: somehow, there is this notion that all professionals want more resolution and I just have to disagree. Of the 3 current “flagships” available, I’m more satisfied that my main camera has 24mp than I am missing out on 45 megapixels. The R5 does exceptionally well as the kind of camera I want to use for high resolution situations. But wildlife and some sports photographers are absolutely the other way around and WANT the higher resolution.

That argument that the Z 9 and A1 are better cameras because of their resolution is odd to me. If Canon came out with an R1 right now with 45-80mp, I would STILL keep my R3 because I don’t want that kind of resolution all the time. Until there is a true reduced RAW file size where we can essentially downsample 45mp into something more manageable like 20-30mp with minimal trade off, I personally don’t want to use the camera as my main workhorse.

Case in point: I just went though my external SSD and was archiving the race I shot last month, as well as last months real estate listings. The race was close to 300GB, or roughly 75GB a day in CRAW. Each real estate listing was between 30-40GB after editing and compositing shot in RAW. All said and done, I cleaned off 1TB of images from last month - that’s all at 24mp. When I replaced my 1DXII with the R5 I was blowing through external storage at races! Even in CRAW, the files are still large and create a heavy burden on computers when compositing or going through so many images. I live on my M1 Pro Max computer editing almost every day of the week. I don’t want to work with high resolution images every day…it would be so slow and take up even more space.

I don’t think this Vignes guy couldn’t be more incorrect in his statement about the R3.

 

[entoman]

Just speaking for myself: somehow, there is this notion that all professionals want more resolution and I just have to disagree. Of the 3 current “flagships” available, I’m more satisfied that my main camera has 24mp than I am missing out on 45 megapixels. The R5 does exceptionally well as the kind of camera I want to use for high resolution situations. But wildlife and some sports photographers are absolutely the other way around and WANT the higher resolution.

That argument that the Z 9 and A1 are better cameras because of their resolution is odd to me. If Canon came out with an R1 right now with 45-80mp, I would STILL keep my R3 because I don’t want that kind of resolution all the time. Until there is a true reduced RAW file size where we can essentially downsample 45mp into something more manageable like 20-30mp with minimal trade off, I personally don’t want to use the camera as my main workhorse.

Case in point: I just went though my external SSD and was archiving the race I shot last month, as well as last months real estate listings. The race was close to 300GB, or roughly 75GB a day in CRAW. Each real estate listing was between 30-40GB after editing and compositing shot in RAW. All said and done, I cleaned off 1TB of images from last month - that’s all at 24mp. When I replaced my 1DXII with the R5 I was blowing through external storage at races! Even in CRAW, the files are still large and create a heavy burden on computers when compositing or going through so many images. I live on my M1 Pro Max computer editing almost every day of the week. I don’t want to work with high resolution images every day…it would be so slow and take up even more space.

I don’t think this Vignes guy couldn’t be more incorrect in his statement about the R3.

Yes of course, there are many genres of pro and amateur photographer, some will be absolutely happy with 20MP, others will want/need more. For me, 45-50MP is the sweet spot, I don't really have a need for more. As a wildlife photographer, I'd happily use a 90MP camera, but *only* if the image quality and DR was at least as good as the R5, and *only* if there was an option to shoot pixel-binned "RAW" at a lower resolution (e.g. 22.5MP with a 90MP sensor). For some work, when using the RF100-500mm or anything larger, a gripped and highly durable body like the R3 would work very well for me, for other work I prefer the more compact, un-gripped R5. It would be nice to have both.