Is September 14 the day we finally get the official Canon EOS R3 announcement?

[rick1]

Sony (and other manufacturers) routinely compensate influencers to publicly switch. Sure, Sony had FF mirrorless for 5 years longer than Canon. So anyone who wanted a FF MILC went Sony. That has changed. As I stated, 55% of the press at the Olympics used Canon. That’s higher than Canon’s 48% share of the ILC market as a whole.

Bringing personal anecdotes and your own opinion to an objective discussion rarely ends well.

Dude I'm not talking about present day, I'm referring to pre-R5 days. I've made that clear like 5 times in this thread.

 

[dba101]

Dude I'm not talking about present day, I'm referring to pre-R5 days. I've made that clear like 5 times in this thread.

What’s on the menu in Japan baby

 

[neuroanatomist]

Dude I'm not talking about present day, I'm referring to pre-R5 days. I've made that clear like 5 times in this thread.

Oh? In which of these posts on the topic did you ‘make it clear’? The first one below was your initial post in this thread related to the ILC market, and is very much in the present tense.

Sony is on the attack and has poached a crap load of users from canon, and canon is over here just trying to hold on to their own customers

ILC is not only the professional market, it is the consumer market also. Canon has lost huge ground in the professional market in the past few years. I know dozens of canon wedding photographers that have dumped canon for sony.

I meant canon has gained ground with it's low level consumer cameras. Sony prosumer mirrorless has largely devastated canon in the past few years

It’s hard to rewrite history when the forum remembers. Clearly you and facts have only a passing acquaintance. It’s a rather pathetic but common tactic to attempt to reframe the discussion when your opinion is refuted by the data.

 

[stevelee]

"some of which might have been lost in a technically better shot" Why?
"I am looking at the new 102 MP Fujifilm camera" Why, if technically better is not important, sir?

Technically better is not always better. A higher resolution is an artistic choice, among other things. I like impressionist paintings. If you pixel peep at them, they usually don’t look so hot. I’ve never heard their being criticized for not being so sharp. A nice painting of my harbor scene would likely be even lower resolution. As I suggested, I didn’t set out to make an unsharp picture. That was just serendipity. I printed it out anyway and was surprised at how much I like the print.

I might find the medium format camera useful sometimes, and maybe not. That’s why I can’t decide whether to spend a bunch of money on it. But it does seem clear to me that were I to spend that kind of money, I would go to medium format rather than getting an R5 or R3.

 

[stevelee]

Happy Birthday in advance!

Thanks.

 

[GoldWing]

I think most of us are waiting for the R1 after the disappointing news of 24mpix.

Smart Guy! I need a 24MP Camera like I need a hole in the head

 

[stevelee]

As I read it, he's literally more concerned that it be labeled as a 1 series than a 3 series. Same camera, different label--now he's interested.

Somehow that makes sense to me. As we understand their naming conventions, R3 suggests that something better is on the way and might be worth waiting for. R1 suggests this is the ultimate for a good while, until the R1 Mark II.

 

[stevelee]

The very same one who penned: "Better a witty fool, than a foolish wit."

Better well hung than ill wed.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Smart Guy! I need a 24MP Camera like I need a hole in the head

You have a big hole in your head. The Latin name for it is the foramen magnum.

 

[AlanF]

Better well hung than ill wed.

Brevity is the soul of wit

 

[unfocused]

My 5DMkiv has been in the cupboard since I bought an R5 about 6 months ago. This was a deliberate move, because I wanted to concentrate on developing R5 "muscle memory" and the R5 is clearly more capable, with IBIS, higher resolution, silent shutter, faster burst speed and animal-eye AF. Today, just for the heck of it, I got the 5DMkiv out, and to be honest it felt a whole lot nicer in my hands. Looking through the viewfinder I was instantly delighted - bigger, brighter and clearer than the R5. And that nice mechanical mode dial on the 5DMkiv is so much better than the one on the R5.

Don't get me wrong, the R5 is a fantastic camera, but if Canon produced a "5DMk5" with the 45MP sensor, 1DXiii-level AF, and a quieter shutter/mirror unit, I'm pretty sure that the R5 would be the one in the cupboard, and the "5DMk5" would be my go-to camera.

You might, or might not, find this thread worth a look: https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/threads/is-mirrorless-a-giant-con.40770/

 

[unfocused]

Personally, I wouldn't look fwd to culling photos taken at 30fps at any MP level. Adds a lot of down time to the editing process, especially if your photo shoot contains 2-3k photos or more. In my experience, trying to find the best photo out of a multitude of photos in a huge 20fps album becomes very tedious, often causing me to just start picking photos at random and moving on.

I generally agree. For the most part, I feel like the speed of the mechanical shutter is more than sufficient. But, I can see a few cases where I might use the electronic shutter. For example, trying to catch the moment when a bat actually hits the ball. It's still going to be a crapshoot, but the odds get better with each additional frame per second. I could also consider taking the stills from a 30fps sequence and turning them into a short video clip of a player making a layup. I don't like to switch between video and stills while shooting and I need to make sure I've got the still shot first, but having the frames before and afterwards might be nice at times to make a clip. Of course, I know it's likely to stutter a bit since it would be shot at 1/800 of a second rather than 1/60, but for a short clip on social media, it wouldn't be a problem. However, yeah, I definitely wouldn't want to shoot a whole game that way. It takes me too long to cull through the shots as it is.

 

[Skyscraperfan]

Handling the tons of files from a burst would be much faster if you could scroll through them in a much smoother way. Like through the frames of a video. At Lightroom it takes a while to load each frame and you can only click them one by one. Unless there is a trick I do not know yet. That makes handling tons of similar images quite a pain.

If you just try to compare them by sharpness, a look at the file sizes is the fastest way. If shots are quite similar - like frames of a baseball player catching a ball - the files with the largest file size are among the sharpest. That works both with RAW and with JPEG files. Each little blur makes compression algorithms work a little better and therefore make the files a little smaller.

 

[rick1]

Oh? In which of these posts on the topic did you ‘make it clear’? The first one below was your initial post in this thread related to the ILC market, and is very much in the present tense.





It’s hard to rewrite history when the forum remembers. Clearly you and facts have only a passing acquaintance. It’s a rather pathetic but common tactic to attempt to reframe the discussion when your opinion is refuted by the data.

I have mentioned that I am referring to pre-R5 days at least 6 times in this thread. But I am proud of you that you can pick out every response I've made where I don't mention it.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I have mentioned that I am referring to pre-R5 days at least 6 times in this thread. But I am proud of you that you can pick out every response I've made where I don't mention it.

This makes the third time, all coming after several posts where you failed to make any such qualification (I quoted your first three posts on the topic). Evidently you can’t count, either. Perhaps your embarrassment from your opinion refuted by actual data has you flummoxed and that’s why you’re frantically trying to backpedal now. You go right ahead and rewrite history in your head, if that helps you feel better. The truth is right in your posting history for anyone to read.

 

[rick1]

This makes the third time, all coming after several posts where you failed to make any such qualification (I quoted your first three posts on the topic). Evidently you can’t count, either. Perhaps your embarrassment from your opinion refuted by actual data has you flummoxed and that’s why you’re frantically trying to backpedal now. You go right ahead and rewrite history in your head, if that helps you feel better. The truth is right in your posting history for anyone to read.

Let me try to explain this to you really slow so maybe you can understand. Up until the R5 was released canon's mirrorless lineup was absolutely pathetic. It was widely known that sony was stealing long time canon users. I ditched my canon dslr's when the a7iii was released. The release of the R5 was revolutionary. Enough to bring some of their customers back (me included). Although I am in limbo at the moment and using both systems. If the R3 is nothing great compared to the sony A1 (assuming they are the same price) they will not have enough sway to convince sony converts to come back to canon. I hope I explained this well enough for you to understand. You seem a bit slow.

 

[Cyborx]

The price has not been confirmed.
What surprises me is that people are talking like they seem to think the R3 and R1 will cost about the same.
If the R3 is too expensive then I would expect the R5 too be too expensive as well.
I do not at all expect Canon to pull a Black Magic and have an old 4.6 K and more advanced 12 K version cost the same.

Nobody is saying they will cost the same.
The R3 will be around 6000 euro’s.
The R1 will be around 8000 euro’s.

 

[Cyborx]

And I am not willing to spend around 6k (times two, for two bodies) for a camera that is already outdated before it is even launched. 24mpix is disappointing, however you spin, twist or turn it.

 

[kaihp]

Dear Canon,

Please announce the R3 announcement day so we can stop the current mud-flinging threads on CR, so they can be replaced by other mud-flinging threads on CR.

Love, me.

 

[tangerine_sedge]

Let me try to explain this to you really slow so maybe you can understand. Up until the R5 was released canon's mirrorless lineup was absolutely pathetic. It was widely known that sony was stealing long time canon users. I ditched my canon dslr's when the a7iii was released. The release of the R5 was revolutionary. Enough to bring some of their customers back (me included). Although I am in limbo at the moment and using both systems. If the R3 is nothing great compared to the sony A1 (assuming they are the same price) they will not have enough sway to convince sony converts to come back to canon. I hope I explained this well enough for you to understand. You seem a bit slow.

Nice condescending reply in an attempt to reframe your argument. You're the one coming across as not arguing in good faith. The ad-hominem attack undelines the weakness in your argument.