Exclusive! DPReview confirms what has already been confirmed. The Canon EOS R3 will be 24mp

[highdesertmesa]

Because the professional sports photographers they surveyed when designing this camera didn't want 45mp or more. The person this camera is aimed at has the glass they need for the venue (i.e. they don't require heavy cropping); needs to move, edit, and publish files as fast as possible; and doesn't normally produce 36" or larger gallery prints which require immersive detail at very close viewing ranges.

I've said many times that I love high resolution 35mm imaging and would not personally want to go back to a lower resolution. Never the less I am surprised at all the hand wringing over Canon's choice here. It makes sense for this market segment. People are acting like 24mp is 4mp. It's not, and if you're not cropping heavily or making very large prints then 24mp vs. 45/50mp isn't all that noticeable or relevant.

This is 24mp with Canon's newer, better AA filter design which likely means overall IQ comparable to a 30mp 5D4 or R. (The latter will still resolve more but the former will be sharper ooc.) It beats the A9 models and can hold off the A1 until Canon releases an R1 for the niche that wants speed at a higher resolution.

Canon may get to second base with the R3, but 24mp is still a bunt.

 

[kaihp]

Just because a 10-year-old 1DX is 20mp is no reason for the R3 to have the same?

For the record, the 1DX is 18Mpixels. At least mine is

 

[Jstnelson]

Eh no. Because Canon will surely overprice the R3 as usual. This R3 will be around 6000 euros. Just for a weathersealed pro body with inbuilt battery grip. So sad... 24mpix.

I think the pro body, ergonomics, far superior screen, better animal eye AF, etc etc is worth the price over the A9. It will sell very well to sports shooters. If you think this has to be the same price as the A9 to compete with it then we’ll have to just disagree.

 

[dtaylor]

For the record, the 1DX is 18Mpixels. At least mine is

I'm still hoping that Canon has multiple versions of the 1DX in testing, and that if I ever buy one it will be 30mp

 

[xps]

It is a pity.
A R3 with around 45Mpixel would have been worth the 6000€.
The coming R1 - an R version of my 1DX III - with 24 MPix would have been great. As some professionals mentioned, they mostly do not need more. So an R1 with high MP? I do not believe that. But who knows? M y A1 has 50 MP and an equal Eye-AF like my R5

I cancelled the R3, as I am not physically able to walk miles around anymore. For my birding sessions, the R5 is the better choice.

What is still missing for me is an lightweight 600mm lens. I do use the 200-600mm with the A1 for carrying around, the R5 and 600mm III for stationary images.

 

[SteveC]

GREAT! An R6 with an inbuilt battery grip.
24mpix? WHYYY????

Are you kidding?? It's twenty percent more megapickles than an R6!!! Huge Improvement!

I might have actually considered the R6 over the R5 if it had 24 MP--though I'd have preferred 32.

 

[Skyscraperfan]

If the market really says that a 24 megapixel R3 is not good enough for $6000, because the Sony A1 can do 30 fps at 45 megapixels, that would be very good news for me. It would mean that that R3 might get cheaper than expected.

 

[Kuau]

Hmmm... 24mpix, Oh well, I was just getting use to my R5 and having great cropping options. I shoot winter sports, downhill racing, freestyle, nordic jumping etc. and this is where the R5 AF is sill not quite there, Can't wait for the R3 and I am sure the AF will be great, it better be or its back to Sony for me...

 

[Dragon]

Bragging about confirming a rumor that was wrong a few times. Lol.

Pretty good odds it will be wrong one more time.

 

[Czardoom]

Oh no! Here come another 600 comments from people who will whine and cry because they didn't get the camera they want.
People who seem unable to understand this camera is a sports camera targeted for a specific consumer.
People who are either ignorant or just don't want to admit that - yes, 24 MP cameras are still being made in 2001 - and it has nothing to do with being "old" or "behind."
People who apparently have missed the fairly obvious conclusion that the closest competitor to the R3 from Sony is the A9 not the A1 - and it has 24 MP also.
People who will whine and cry because they want more MPs and have probably never taken a photo where they need more than 24 MP. (Yes, some people do need more. They probably are smart enough to have a camera that suits there needs like the R5).

And as usually happens, those that get the R3, will be more than happy and satisfied. Because Canon - in my 25 years of experience - makes the best, easiest to use, and most reliable cameras. I doubt the R3 will be any different.

Those that want to compare them to Sony - please go out and buy your Sony. If you are happy with it - great! Everyone should get the camera - and the system - that best suits there needs.

 

[Cochese]

For the holdouts and non-believers

"Um, they're only reporting that because Canon has restricted them to only shooting in mRAW!"

 

[Skyscraperfan]

If the A9 is the main competitor, I hope this means that the R3 will also have the A9 price.

 

[unfocused]

It honestly makes sense to view this as an upgrade for people still using the 1dx, 1dx2, and 1dx3 but wanting to move to RF mount...

My thought process as well. Even though I expect to take a hit on the 1Dx III, it's worth it to me to be able to consolidate everything into a single mount and one set of lenses. I can reduce my bodes from three to two and gradually shift over my lenses. Selling the EF lenses will reduce the overall cost of transition by a small amount.

 

[unfocused]

If the A9 is the main competitor, I hope this means that the R3 will also have the A9 price.

When will people learn. Canon doesn't release cameras to compete with Sony. Sony releases cameras to compete with Canon and Nikon.

 

[Czardoom]

GREAT! An R6 with an inbuilt battery grip.
24mpix? WHYYY????

* Parts of this comment have been moderated* - CR

Because it is a camera targeted for sports shooters. Canon's research no doubt indicates that the majority of those shooters prefers a lower MP count. It is also probably easier to deleiver high FPS (considered more important) than high MPs.

An R6 with an inbuilt battery grip?

Certainly you understand the difference in build quality between this R3 and the R6. The difference in FPS. The almost certain higher level AF system. Much better weather sealing. The R3 will have eye-focus. Just a few differences that you certainly must be aware of but continually choose to ignore.

 

[FrenchFry]

For the holdouts and non-believers

"Um, they're only reporting that because Canon has restricted them to only shooting in mRAW!"

The shots are JPEG.

 

[Atlasman]

If the A9 is the main competitor, I hope this means that the R3 will also have the A9 price.

It probably will be more—and more-than-likely, have better video specs.

 

[Cochese]

The shots are JPEG.

OH, SORRY mJPEG

 

[unfocused]

Personally I think there is a realignment of models going on. I don’t see the R3 as lacking much and there is obviously going to be an R1 that will have all the bells and whistles and resolution, quad pixel etc etc. Clear;y the R3 is a good enough sports camera that it is being used extensively at the Olympics, hardly a place agencies like Getty or Alamy would be ‘testing’

Yes, with the collapse of the professional market for the 1 series, I believe Canon is going to target the R1 (When and if it comes) at the "luxury" market. Clearly the growth market is in enthusiasts who are not price sensitive so it makes sense to focus their top of the line camera on this market. I have no idea what that will mean in specs, because only Canon knows what their market research shows.

 

[FrenchFry]

Oh no! Here come another 600 comments from people who will whine and cry because they didn't get the camera they want.
People who seem unable to understand this camera is a sports camera targeted for a specific consumer.
People who are either ignorant or just don't want to admit that - yes, 24 MP cameras are still being made in 2001 - and it has nothing to do with being "old" or "behind."

Greetings poster from 2001. Some of us on the forum are actually writing from the year 2021. So much has changed in the last 20 years (except the MPs on Canon sports bodies).

There is nothing preventing speed-oriented shooters from using smaller JPEG outputs if they want smaller file sizes. It is not possible, however, to do the opposite. Consumers interested in a do-it-all body can be disappointed that Canon is not offering this yet when other manufacturers already offer it or will offer it this year. If you aren't interested in listening to "whining" about MPs, you might try reading threads that are not focused on MPs.

I agree that not every body will appeal to every shooter. I also think that people should be able to respectfully express their opinions on the thread topic without being criticized for doing so.