More features and specifications for the Canon EOS R3 have emerged

Aussie shooter

www.facebook.com/BrettGuyPhotography/
Dec 6, 2016
1,039
1,448
WHAT IS CANON DOING?? Why releasing a camera that cannot meet the specs of the R5 that is on the market for a year already? Basically what they have built is an R6 with a battery grip and some fancy knobs. I don’t get it. Really... Canon, you’ve lost me here....
Because there is soooo much more to an image than its megapickles
 

canonmike

EOS RP
CR Pro
Jan 5, 2013
313
268
If the Sony A1 can do 50, the R3 can be at least very close. 40 (or anything over) is fine. I crop the shit out of some NHL frames on the R5, for that alone I do not want to go back to my 20mp 1d X mk 2 bodies.
Boy, would I like to see you get your wish of 40MP or more, Kiton.......
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kiton and Focus

EOS 4 Life

EOS R
Sep 20, 2020
824
654
If the Sony A1 can do 50, the R3 can be at least very close. 40 (or anything over) is fine. I crop the shit out of some NHL frames on the R5, for that alone I do not want to go back to my 20mp 1d X mk 2 bodies.
39 MP is all that is required for UHD 8K.
Since Canon is only claiming downsampled 4K and RAW I assume it will be significantly less than that.
I do not see the point in going 35 MP instead of 39.
So somewhere between 20 and 30 makes sense and I am guessing it will be closer to 30.
 

canonmike

EOS RP
CR Pro
Jan 5, 2013
313
268
39 MP is all that is required for UHD 8K.
Since Canon is only claiming downsampled 4K and RAW I assume it will be significantly less than that.
I do not see the point in going 35 MP instead of 39.
So somewhere between 20 and 30 makes sense and I am guessing it will be closer to 30.
Perhaps, 40 is unrealistic but it's ok for him to wish and dream. Personally, I'll be very happy with 30MP.....
 

rick1

I'm New Here
Sep 8, 2016
18
17
I had planned to ditch the last of my sony gear for canon once the R3 was released(right now I am part sony(a9ii), and part canon - (R5)). If this camera is less than 36mp, there's no point in upgrading, and especially paying $6000 to upgrade to a camera that is less of a camera than the R5. Who really needs 30fps. The R5's speed is plenty. If the R3 doesn't come near the R5's resolution, canon really dropped the ball. I will be extremely disappointed.
 

padam

EOS R
Aug 26, 2015
1,233
893
I had planned to ditch the last of my sony gear for canon once the R3 was released(right now I am part sony(a9ii), and part canon - (R5)). If this camera is less than 36mp, there's no point in upgrading, and especially paying $6000 to upgrade to a camera that is less of a camera than the R5. Who really needs 30fps. The R5's speed is plenty. If the R3 doesn't come near the R5's resolution, canon really dropped the ball. I will be extremely disappointed.
Literally no one cares. Honestly, the megapixel count is the reason to have one camera over another and you are using an A9II with 24 megapixels? There are far, far bigger differences regarding handling, lenses, etc. and the R5 is a perfectly fine option until there is something better with more megapixels.
For every person complaining about low megapixels, there is another who finds the low-light, AF. video benefits useful and simply does not need more.

The overwhelming majority of the press photos right now are still taken on 1DX Mark II bodies. They simply don't replace them as they just keep working forever. But it's not just for stills, that camera with its 4k60p high bitrate recording (despite the codec) with AF was really ahead of its time (it stills blows away an A9II for video, for instance).
This camera looks like a perfectly fine replacement, slightly smaller body, it has all the video annoyances fixed, should be a big step up in stills, too.
 

rick1

I'm New Here
Sep 8, 2016
18
17
Literally no one cares. Honestly, the megapixel count is the reason to have one camera over another and you are using an A9II with 24 megapixels? There are far, far bigger differences regarding handling, lenses, etc. and the R5 is a perfectly fine option until there is something better with more megapixels.
For every person complaining about low megapixels, there is another who finds the low-light, AF. video benefits useful and simply does not need more.

The overwhelming majority of the press photos right now are still taken on 1DX Mark II bodies. They simply don't replace them as they just keep working forever. But it's not just for stills, that camera with its 4k60p high bitrate recording (despite the codec) with AF was really ahead of its time (it stills blows away an A9II for video, for instance).
This camera looks like a perfectly fine replacement, slightly smaller body, it has all the video annoyances fixed, should be a big step up in stills, too.
a "perfectly fine replacement" is right. Canon blew my mind with the R5. I guess I just had greater expectations of them with the R3. I expected it to directly compete with the A1. If this comes in at less than 36ish megapixels, it definitely is a "perfectly fine replacement" but far from anything exceptional, and once again sony will maintain their mirrorless crown with the A1. I had thought canon was going to overtake sony.
 

dak3

I'm New Here
Oct 9, 2018
20
33
I'll refrain from purchasing any new gear until Canon releases their SPAD sensor in a "1" series body with at least 30 megapixels and a third generation lens mount. By then RF will be discontinued, just like the EF mount. Oh, and I also expect Canon to add 20K video at 4:2:0 internal 8-bit compressed video (in memory of their notorious history with low bit rates). I should be in my 50s by then! Until that time, I'll continue developing photo plates in my darkroom, exposing shots using flash powder, and measuring DOF with a tape measure.
d676b9a5c6ea32bf1f5877b188757869.gif
 

padam

EOS R
Aug 26, 2015
1,233
893
a "perfectly fine replacement" is right. Canon blew my mind with the R5. I guess I just had greater expectations of them with the R3. I expected it to directly compete with the A1. If this comes in at less than 36ish megapixels, it definitely is a "perfectly fine replacement" but far from anything exceptional, and once again sony will maintain their mirrorless crown with the A1. I had thought canon was going to overtake sony.
The A1 has several issues regarding video (but even in photo, they've decided to equip it with a crap LCD screen that does not flip, weaker IBIS, etc.).
If the R3 has all the features that I am hoping, it is a much better photo/video camera for less money.

The R1 may have a more advanced sensor with less limitations compared to the A1, it comes later, that's just mean it will be a newer, better camera.
But it may cost 8000$, who knows.
Then comes the A1 II for even more money than the A1. It never ends, basically.
But it is really not the megapixel count in the R3 that will make or fail Canon's plans to overtake Sony (models like the R6 and R5 are far more important).

Maybe some people think Canon is loosing the plot. Except that the opposite is true.
 

rick1

I'm New Here
Sep 8, 2016
18
17
The A1 has several issues regarding video (but even in photo, they've decided to equip it with a crap LCD screen that does not flip, weaker IBIS, etc.).
If the R3 has all the features that I am hoping, it is a much better photo/video camera for less money.

The R1 may have a more advanced sensor with less limitations compared to the A1, it comes later, that's just mean it will be a newer, better camera.
But it may cost 8000$, who knows.
Then comes the A1 II for even more money than the A1. It never ends, basically.
But it is really not the megapixel count in the R3 that will make or fail Canon's plans to overtake Sony (models like the R6 and R5 are far more important).

Maybe some people think Canon is loosing the plot. Except that the opposite is true.
If the sony A1 costs $6500 and does 30fps and 50mp, it would be crazy to buy the R3 at $6000 if it has less than 36mp. If canon is going to charge almost as much as the A1 it needs to directly compete with it. Anything less is subpar. The LCD screen difference is an insignificant difference, the IBIS in the R5 is plenty.
 

john1970

EOS R5
CR Pro
Dec 27, 2015
233
271
Northeastern US
For me the R5 basically matches the MP count on the A1 so maybe having a R3 with fewer MP (~30) makes some sense as a second camera. More of a competitor when using MP as a metric with A9 series than A1. Personally, if Canon stay with lower MP I want to see this sensor have some serious low noise at high ISO which should be possible given that it is a BSI sensor.
 
Aug 7, 2018
203
166
If the camera has oversampled 4K, I hope it also has cropped 4K as an option in case we want a higher reach or even cropped HD which would come handy for a video of a far away animal that only uses a small part of the frame anyway. Oversampling is a waste of pixels in some situations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bahrd

canonmike

EOS RP
CR Pro
Jan 5, 2013
313
268
As we sit here reading commentary and different viewpoints on the upcoming R3 release and finally seem to be breaking out of the Covid pandemic, I want to acknowledge the fact that many of my fellow Canon Rumor members and a few personal friends that use their camera gear professionally, have struggled to make a living over the last year. Weddings, commercial events, concerts, sports and other gigs have been difficult for them to come by and many were forced to find employment outside of their chosen photographic professions until and if things get back to normal for them. As a retired person that no longer needs to seek income using my camera gear, I take my hat off and salute all of you, as you struggled to maintain your chosen photographic livelihood, while you endeavored to maintain your enthusiasm for your chosen profession. This past Memorial Day weekend saw record numbers of people breaking out of the pandemic and traveling once again. New Covid infections are drastically down, according to news reports and many restaurants, theatres and other retail establishments that have been closed because of social distancing rules are reopening. I so hope this means that those of you needing events to photograph to renew your income are finding them, once again. Thank you to all of you for sharing your commentary, your challenges, your passion and your photos and videos on Canon Rumors, You Tube and other social media sites. I wish all of you the best of luck and so look forward to hearing about some of your break out stories and inspiring commentary, wherever you choose to share it.
 

EOS 4 Life

EOS R
Sep 20, 2020
824
654
This camera looks like a perfectly fine replacement, slightly smaller body, it has all the video annoyances fixed, should be a big step up in stills, too.
There is no way the camera would be able to reliably shoot 30 FPS still photos if it overheats shooting video at 30 FPS.
Downsample 4K 60 FPS might be a problem but Canon could probably get away with not downsampling to limit the data rate and I am sure there will also be a crop mode.
 

EOS 4 Life

EOS R
Sep 20, 2020
824
654
Oversampling is a waste of pixels in some situations.
The amount of pixels is the same.
4K is 4K.
It is the amount of data that varies.
People seem to be confused by this but the 4K is only the size of the canvas.
The amount of data varies based on the scene being captured, the mode of capture, and the level and methods of compression.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: sanj
Aug 7, 2018
203
166
Of course there can be different methods of compression, but would there be a difference between oversampled 4K and cropped 4K, if you use the same compression? Of course oversampled 4K uses the full sensor and therefore should look cleaner.