Let’s talk about the Canon EOS R3 [CR2]

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
24,768
2,439
Yep , I didn't realise that either but a round sensor of 27mm diameter would fit for aps-c
Ever roll out cookie dough into a large circle, then cut out a bunch of round cookies? There’s a lot of dough left over, right?

The 300mm silicon wafers used to make image sensors are an expensive part of the cost of goods, and you can’t just gather the left-over material up and roll it out again to cut out more sensors.

In a mass-produced camera, a round sensor is Never. Going. To. Happen. Just let it go.
 

privatebydesign

EOS-1D X Mark III
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
9,983
4,746
... had 21 Mpx. Ok this is long ago! :)
But there is an untapped demand for a higher megapixel sensor in a 1 series style and built body. None of us can even fathom a guess at that number, but the logic of an R3 and an R1 that share a body, or very close, but have very different feature sets makes sense to me.

Technology has moved a very long way from those days of being forced into a choice of fps or resolution, or even cost of a ff sensor size, we already have ff 5 series cameras shooting 45mp at 20fps for under $4,000.
 

john1970

EOS R5
CR Pro
Dec 27, 2015
172
189
Northeastern US
And me! I am definitely would purchase a higher MP body with 1-series ergonomics and features. Personally I hope that the R3 is high resolution and 30 fps and the R1 is lower resolution with insane fps. Based on the rumored specifications of the C500S it is anticipated that Canon can move 8K at 60 fps from a 8K BSI stacked FF sensor. If correct, this suggests that Canon can move ~2.1 GP of data in a second. If one wants to move 30 fps that could mean each frame could be 70 MP.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
24,768
2,439
And me! I am definitely would purchase a higher MP body with 1-series ergonomics and features. Personally I hope that the R3 is high resolution and 30 fps and the R1 is lower resolution with insane fps. Based on the rumored specifications of the C500S it is anticipated that Canon can move 8K at 60 fps from a 8K BSI stacked FF sensor. If correct, this suggests that Canon can move ~2.1 GP of data in a second. If one wants to move 30 fps that could mean each frame could be 70 MP.
In theory. If Canon is ok putting the processing pipeline from what will likely be an >$20K camera into a body costing ~1/3 that. I’m not holding my breath on that one.
 

Stuart

Hi, Welcome from an ePhotozine fan, & 6D user.
Jul 22, 2010
378
121
London & Woking
www.ephotozine.com
Does ‘stacked’ imply a Foveon style sensor? Real question; I really don’t know.

I would find that quite interesting. Might prompt me to trade in the R5...
That's what i was thinking too - a “resolution trick”. Is that a clue.

Yet the Foveon was slow - so not the same technology. Has Canon cracked the speed issue with Foveon ?
 

Stuart

Hi, Welcome from an ePhotozine fan, & 6D user.
Jul 22, 2010
378
121
London & Woking
www.ephotozine.com

Chig

Birds in Flight Nutter
Jul 26, 2020
212
169
Orewa , New Zealand
Ever roll out cookie dough into a large circle, then cut out a bunch of round cookies? There’s a lot of dough left over, right?

The 300mm silicon wafers used to make image sensors are an expensive part of the cost of goods, and you can’t just gather the left-over material up and roll it out again to cut out more sensors.

In a mass-produced camera, a round sensor is Never. Going. To. Happen. Just let it go.
Well a 27mmx27mm square has 15% less area than a FF 24mmx36mm rectangle and silicon wafers only cost $30-60 per square inch , also if you cut them in a hexagon shape the size is even less.
Raw material is a very minor part of the cost of a camera sensor
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
24,768
2,439
Well a 27mmx27mm square has 15% less area than a FF 24mmx36mm rectangle and silicon wafers only cost $30-60 per square inch , also if you cut them in a hexagon shape the size is even less.
Raw material is a very minor part of the cost of a camera sensor
it’s not just the raw silicon wafers, it’s also the cost of the lithography. Cost of goods is a very important factor on items with a low profit margin, which is the case for low end ILCs.

You’ll see pigs flying over snowbanks in hell before you see round sensors in ILCs, but hey – live the dream!
 

JohnC

EOS 90D
CR Pro
Sep 22, 2019
158
175
Gainesville,GA
it’s not just the raw silicon wafers, it’s also the cost of the lithography. Cost of goods is a very important factor on items with a low profit margin, which is the case for low end ILCs.

You’ll see pigs flying over snowbanks in hell before you see round sensors in ILCs, but hey – live the dream!
I agree, no way anyone will accept that much loss in processing for little to no gain. Takes far more surface area to yield the frame that is current used for 35mm.
 

Chig

Birds in Flight Nutter
Jul 26, 2020
212
169
Orewa , New Zealand
it’s not just the raw silicon wafers, it’s also the cost of the lithography. Cost of goods is a very important factor on items with a low profit margin, which is the case for low end ILCs.

You’ll see pigs flying over snowbanks in hell before you see round sensors in ILCs, but hey – live the dream!
I never suggested this for a low end ILC (and Canon will never develop any more new budget cameras) . This would be for a high end camera such as the rumoured R7 which I suspect will be priced similarly to the R6.
No need to be sarcastic either just because someone has different ideas to you
 

Chig

Birds in Flight Nutter
Jul 26, 2020
212
169
Orewa , New Zealand
I never suggested this for a low end ILC (and Canon will never develop any more new budget cameras) . This would be for a high end camera such as the rumoured R7 which I suspect will be priced similarly to the R6.
No need to be sarcastic either just because someone has different ideas to you
 

Joules

doom
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2017
1,592
1,910
Hamburg, Germany
I never suggested this for a low end ILC (and Canon will never develop any more new budget cameras) . This would be for a high end camera such as the rumoured R7 which I suspect will be priced similarly to the R6.
No need to be sarcastic either just because someone has different ideas to you
Canon will absolutely produce more budget cameras. The RP was just an initial step to lower the cost of entry to FF, and there's still ample room for things to be crippled on that body to push cost lower. Especially once they upgrade their platform to their current or next generation of technology that can share components with the rest of the R lineup.

I also don't think we'll see round sensors though. With the current situation of chip and wafer costs waste is of course an even more important topic, but even under normal circumstances Canon is a Japanese company. I would not be surprised to learn they follow some of the guidance in avoiding waste from lean management.

And with how many actually useful things (RAW histogram, zebras in stills, focus peaking on DSLR, intervalometer in every body, auto exposure linked to spot AF in every body,...) Canon withholds from bodies just because they aren't useful to especially many people, it seems very unlikely that they would add something so niche when it comes with actual costs for each and every body they make, unlike the many software aspects I listed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pape2

Chig

Birds in Flight Nutter
Jul 26, 2020
212
169
Orewa , New Zealand
Canon will absolutely produce more budget cameras. The RP was just an initial step to lower the cost of entry to FF, and there's still ample room for things to be crippled on that body to push cost lower. Especially once they upgrade their platform to their current or next generation of technology that can share components with the rest of the R lineup.

I also don't think we'll see round sensors though. With the current situation of chip and wafer costs waste is of course an even more important topic, but even under normal circumstances Canon is a Japanese company. I would not be surprised to learn they follow some of the guidance in avoiding waste from lean management.

And with how many actually useful things (RAW histogram, zebras in stills, focus peaking on DSLR, intervalometer in every body, auto exposure linked to spot AF in every body,...) Canon withholds from bodies just because they aren't useful to especially many people, it seems very unlikely that they would add something so niche when it comes with actual costs for each and every body they make, unlike the many software aspects I listed.
The RP is an excellent camera and good value for money but hardly entry level at $1300-1500 with a kit lens .
Entry level is something like the the Rebel SL2 with kit lens at $650 and Canon won't be making any new ones like this .
Cameras like the Monocular Powershot Zoom which pair up with a smartphone have a great future though and I suspect Canon will make a whole range of models like this
 
  • Like
Reactions: pape2
<-- start Taboola -->