Jeff Cable talks about what it’s like to shoot with the Canon EOS R3 as a pro

CanonFanBoy

Purple
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,683
4,115
Irving, Texas
Canon is an Executive Board member of the SD Association.
Sony is there. Canon is there. Fuji is there. Panasonic is there. Microsoft is there. What are you trying to imply? It is not as though this association is some kind of money machine. I doubt this causes Canon to keep the SD slots on cameras. My goodness.
 

CanonFanBoy

Purple
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,683
4,115
Irving, Texas

degos

EOS RP
Mar 20, 2015
421
356
As I have often stated, Canon has data on who buys what and when, so for example they know how many 5DIV cameras were bought by 5DIII owners vs. those with a 5DII, 7D, 80D, etc. I suspect the latter group is much larger than the former.

How do they have such data? Beyond CPS members who fill-in their profile, that is. Which is a tiny proportion of purchasers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SereneSpeed

CanonFanBoy

Purple
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,683
4,115
Irving, Texas
It's professional on this one
Well, my sarcasm was more to do with people that freak out over whether or not their preferred brand labels what they use as "professional" or not. My thought are, "Who cares?" A professional isn't a professional because of the gear he/she uses. Anyone who gets butthurt because there isn't a label that suits them (Including freaking over model naming conventions) is more interested in gear and self-perceived status than they are about photography. :)
 

CanonFanBoy

Purple
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,683
4,115
Irving, Texas
How do they have such data? Beyond CPS members who fill-in their profile, that is. Which is a tiny proportion of purchasers.
Everyone who fills out a warrantee card. Many don't, but many do. They might also buy meta-data from credit providers, retailers, etc. Even sites like Flickr can provide data about who's using what and who's switched or tried something new. The data is out there for those with deep enough pockets. Sites like flickr have data showing, for example, who was shooting with a 5D III? What are they shooting with now? How many people had the R? How many will switch to something else? Flickr and Facebook and such will know before Canon does.
 
Last edited:

Codebunny

Elil
Sep 5, 2018
995
1,045
Scotland
Some but not all. Many of us wildlife photographers shoot with $13000.00 lenses. A camera that cost $2500 more than an R5 is not the issue.

Well, wildlife shooters wanting to run their new $13,000 lenses will want the R3. Otherwise the lenses aren't focusing as fast as they are capable off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FramerMCB

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
26,128
4,728
How do they have such data? Beyond CPS members who fill-in their profile, that is. Which is a tiny proportion of purchasers.
As @CanonFanBoy stated, everyone who fills out a warranty registration card. They're not required for coverage, but many people do still fill them out or register their products online. Even if it's just a small fraction, it's a good sample and more importantly unlike CPS it's likely a random sample across the customer base. They also ask for demographic info like income, main uses for the gear, etc. They do occasional surveys of owners – I've gotten a couple, and I'm not registered with CPS (though I have more than ample 'points'), and those ask for the gear you own as well as what you'd like to see more of from Canon (features, products, etc.).

That's what market research is all about, and that's why it's so ridiculous when people here claim to know what 'most people want' better than Canon does, when they really only know what they personally want.
 
Sep 21, 2021
3
2
A .CR3 file from the EOS R includes a 1620x1080 jpg file. That’s 1.8 MP and is smaller than the smallest in-camera jpg setting (Small 2, 2400x1600).
That still means to produce a RAW file you also need to produce a jpg and now resize it, I think twice as research does suggest there are two jpegs stored in a RAW file, so I can't see how the original supposition, in the article, that writing two RAW files is fast than RAW and jpeg.
 

CanonFanBoy

Purple
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,683
4,115
Irving, Texas
Few photographers, many wildlife photographers. It's all lovely that the wedding guys can use the a 'cheep' trinity of f/2.8 zooms, but those don't work for wildlife shooters.
Aw heck! I knew I was doing it wrong with a couple of old 135mm f/2.8s and a 400mm f/6.3 manual focus lens. That 200mm f/4 Takumar I have can't shoot wildlife either. The vast majority of wildlife shooters do not have super-tele lenses. Unless, of course, we wish to be snobby and say they are not wildlife shooters if they don't get paid, go on safari, or take whale watching trips. ;) We could just ignore those paupers.... but they are the biggest slice of the market. Cheap lenses CAN and DO regularly and frequently photograph wildlife. What about the wildlife shooters who shoot underwater or macro? What should I use my 60mm f/2.8 macro for? Coins? Bicycle chains? Glad I have not bought one of Canon's new cheap f/8 RF supers. Gotta be faster than f/2.8, right? Gotta be longggggg too.
 
Last edited:

Codebunny

Elil
Sep 5, 2018
995
1,045
Scotland
Aw heck! I knew I was doing it wrong with a couple of old 135mm f/2.8s and a 400mm f/6.3 manual focus lens. That 200mm f/4 Takumar I have can't shoot wildlife either. The vast majority of wildlife shooters do not have super-tele lenses. Unless, of course, we wish to be snobby and say they are not wildlife shooters if they don't get paid, go on safari, or take whale watching trips. ;) We could just ignore those paupers.... but they are the biggest slice of the market. Cheap lenses CAN and DO regularly and frequently photograph wildlife. What about the wildlife shooters who shoot underwater or macro? What should I use my 60mm f/2.8 macro for? Coins? Bicycle chains? Glad I have not bought one of Canon's new cheap f/8 RF supers. Gotta be faster than f/2.8, right? Gotta be longggggg too.

Many is not all. Are you trying to pick a fight? You don't seem to have a problem with me saying wedding photographers will be using the f/2.8 trinity (which is also a rather expensive set.)
 

CanonFanBoy

Purple
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,683
4,115
Irving, Texas
Many is not all. Are you trying to pick a fight? You don't seem to have a problem with me saying wedding photographers will be using the f/2.8 trinity (which is also a rather expensive set.)
Not trying to pick at all. You said f/2.8 trinity lenses don't work for wildlife shooters, full stop. Not true. Entirely dependent on genre. Entirely dependent on the user's pocket depth too. The f/2.8 trinity may not work for some, but can absolutely be used for wildlife. Neuro is correct. Very few wildlife shooters own $13k lenses. Very few. Frogs and centipedes are wildlife too. I'd be saying the same if you said certain lenses don't work for weddings. Poppycock.
 
Last edited:

DBounce

EOS RP
May 3, 2016
378
395
I’m not sure there’s really a trade-off between performance and resolution. The performance is high, the resolution is lower but that was a declarative choice by Canon since the R5 clearly shows at least 30 MP was possible at 30 fps.

Regardless, 24 MP is not enough for you. What did you do before there were 24 MP cameras?
I heard it said that the 24MP image from the R3 seems to resolve similar detail to the 30MP images of the R. From what I’ve seen in the Vanessa Joy video where she is editing the raw files, I believe this may be true. Look @ 5:39, she zooms in 300% and the image looks quite good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FramerMCB

EricN

EOS 90D
Aug 10, 2021
133
229
Not trying to pick at all. You said f/2.8 trinity lenses don't work for wildlife shooters, full stop. Not true. Entirely dependent on genre. Entirely dependent on the user's pocket depth too. The f/2.8 trinity may not work for some, but can absolutely be used for wildlife. Neuro is correct. Very few wildlife shooters own $13k lenses. Very few. Frogs and centipedes are wildlife too. I'd be saying the same if you said certain lenses don't work for weddings. Poppycock.
I'd like to see someone with a 600mm at a wedding...
 
  • Like
Reactions: FrenchFry

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
26,128
4,728
That still means to produce a RAW file you also need to produce a jpg and now resize it, I think twice as research does suggest there are two jpegs stored in a RAW file, so I can't see how the original supposition, in the article, that writing two RAW files is fast than RAW and jpeg.
Yes, when you parse a .CR3 file there are two JPGs, one is a thumbnail image (tagged THMB) that's 160 pixels wide, another is a preview image (tagged PRVW) that is 1620 pixels wide (sizes for an EOS R .CR3 file). Not really relevant to Cable's post, though.

The statement by him you're referring to is: "The SD Card slot is slow. I was shooting RAW plus JPEG to both the CFexpress card and the SD card since I couldn’t easily open the R3’s RAW files yet and needed the JPEGs. Some people don’t know this but shooting RAW plus JPEG slows the camera down more than shooting two RAWs because the camera has to process the image twice."

I'm not sure he's correct that the camera has to process the image twice for RAW+JPG (seems inefficient and therefore unlikely), but he is correct that shooting RAW+JPG is slower than RAW alone, if only because the camera has to store both the RAW and the JPG files in buffer and then write both the RAW and the JPG files to the card, instead of just the RAW file.

The way he describes it, he had it set up to write RAW+JPG to Card 1 and RAW+JPG to Card 2. In other words, he selected RAW and JPG (presumably large/fine) under image Quality and has Record Options set to Rec. to Multiple so both formats are written to both cards.
Screen Shot 2021-09-22 at 11.22.29 AM.png
So he's talking about writing RAW+JPG to two cards simultaneously vs writing just RAW to two cards simultaneously (which is the same as comparing write speeds for RAW vs. RAW+JPG) and of course writing just RAW will be faster. In other words, he really means that writing two RAW files is faster than writing two RAW files plus two JPG files.

What I think you're talking about is writing RAW to the CFe card and JPG to the SD card, with the above Rec Options set to Rec. Separately and RAW set for one card, JPG for the other. That would be faster than writing RAW+JPG to the same card, and I think faster than writing RAW to both cards because of the slower speed of the SD slot.

Although RAW to CFe and JPG to SD is faster, there's the (slim) chance that a card failure would mean the loss of one file format, meaning no RAW file for him to play with later if the CFe failed, or there's no way to convert R3 RAWs for now, no way to use the image immediately if the SD card failed. So Cable chose RAW+JPG to both cards as the safer choice, but slower meaning he missed some shots.
 
  • Wow
  • Like
Reactions: scyrene and HMC11

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
26,128
4,728
Few photographers, many wildlife photographers. It's all lovely that the wedding guys can use the a 'cheep' trinity of f/2.8 zooms, but those don't work for wildlife shooters.
'Many' is relative. The reality is that there aren't many Wildlife Photographers, so even if 'many' of that niche group use $13K lenses, it's very, very few in absolute terms. However, there are probably a reasonably large number of photographers who shoot wildlife, and very very few of them have $13K lenses.