More features and specifications for the Canon EOS R3 have emerged

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
3,657
2,142
You don’t have to be a fool to neccesarly want to recover 8 stops of light. Cameras still today don’t have the same dynamic scene/range of what your eye sees when you are viewing something beautiful with a high dynamic range but wish to capture it as close as possible to the experience.

With film it was expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights, because film was more forgiving of overexposed highlights than for underexposed shadows. But even film couldn't recover details from highlights that were eight stops overexposed.

With digital it is expose for the highlights and develop for the shadows. This is because there's a hard line at a fully saturated sensel. There's no technology that can recover how many photons above full well capacity fell on a sensel.

Anyone who shoots eight stops too bright with a digital camera, or even a film camera, has no idea what they are doing unless a thermonuclear warhead detonates nearby after exposure has been set but just before the image is exposed. In which case there are other considerations far more important to worry about than a photo which will never be seen by anyone.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
3,657
2,142
That to but missing a shot is worse than having to wait with the shot in hand.

In the world of news and sports journalism, the end result is exactly the same. Someone else gets their shot on the wires first and five minutes later no one else in the world cares how much better of a shot you had.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EOS 4 Life

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
3,657
2,142
Agreed. I like the dual-CF in my 1D X, which I have set to write RAW to both cards for redundancy. With an SD slot on the R3, I fully expect that will affect long bursts (if not acquisition, then clearing the buffer). So I'll write RAW to the CFexpress and jpg to the SD as an emergency backup.

But even that scenario (Raw to the fast card, JPEG to the slow card) can dramatically reduce the number of frames one can shoot before the buffer fills, if the performance hit for doing it that way with the 7D Mark II, 5D Mark III, and 5D Mark IV are any indication. When both slots are used simultaneously, the bus speeds of the faster slot is reduced to the slower slot's maximum data rate. Of course, Canon may have figured out how to move data from the buffer to each card slot at different bus speeds, but that seems to be fairly farfetched.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
3,657
2,142
Thats a good thing,. I ike on my R5 when you shut off the camera the shutter covers the sensor makes for easier lens swapping and less dust on the sensor.. Still don't understand why Canon has held back on releasing the mega pixel count on the R3, It seems clear that there are some pre productions units already out in the field... Tokyo Olympics are in 50 days..

To the best of my knowledge, Canon has never officially confirmed a digital camera's resolution prior to the official introduction announcement. Why would they start now?
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
3,657
2,142
Thats a good thing,. I ike on my R5 when you shut off the camera the shutter covers the sensor makes for easier lens swapping and less dust on the sensor.. Still don't understand why Canon has held back on releasing the mega pixel count on the R3, It seems clear that there are some pre productions units already out in the field... Tokyo Olympics are in 50 days..

The Tokyo Olympics are toast. Not going to happen in any recognizable way. No foreign non-competitors allowed into the country.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
3,657
2,142
But the 1DX III has a DIGIC X and 20mp at 20fps, the R3 also has DIGIC X, how do you expect that one processor to process more than twice the resolution 150% faster?

DiG!C X is not a specific processor chip like previous DiG!C chips were. It's a design architecture. That leaves room for increased processing capacity in the same way that newer Intel Core i7 chips or AMD Ryzen chips can be faster than previous i7 or Ryzen chips are.

Expecting a newer version to be able to process twice as much data in 2/3 the same time is probably a bit optimistic, though.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
3,657
2,142
Sorry, I didn't want to offend you personally, really. But 8 stops is more than huge! I sometimes have to recover 2-3 stops, if the DR is high, but that's already the limit.

You're not really recovering anything. You're just extending the white point all the way to 16,383 instead of cutting it off at around 4,095 like the camera's JPEG engine that generates the preview image is doing it.
 

EOS 4 Life

EOS R
Sep 20, 2020
849
673
But even that scenario (Raw to the fast card, JPEG to the slow card) can dramatically reduce the number of frames one can shoot before the buffer fills, if the performance hit for doing it that way with the 7D Mark II, 5D Mark III, and 5D Mark IV are any indication. When both slots are used simultaneously, the bus speeds of the faster slot is reduced to the slower slot's maximum data rate. Of course, Canon may have figured out how to move data from the buffer to each card slot at different bus speeds, but that seems to be fairly farfetched.
If both are 30 FPS then it is still fine.
Even better would be if WIFI is also 30 FPS.
 

Mahk43

EOS R6
CR Pro
Feb 28, 2020
53
61
France
www.clarenc.art
How many pros using this type of body have you ever seen storing such a camera in a bag? If traveling via air they use hard cases. Otherwise, the ones I know tend to carry them on their person or throw them, unbagged, on the passenger seat or in the trunks of their cars.
My comment was not to make any controversy. I know pros photographers (everybody into extreme sports) that carry their bodies only into backpack. Inserts foam thickness is usually between 1 and 2cm. The R3 evf seems to exceed that, and may generate issues to pack body and lenses side by side. Same issue for those who carry on themselves or on the passanger seat, the EVF exceed a lot the body and may cause premature wear of the soft part.
My point of view, and I hope I'm wrong.
Finally, I hope people will use eye control AF a lot, because if not, they will carry this big EVF for nothing.
 
Aug 7, 2018
211
171
then why don't you just downsample your high-MP images for better noise performance, more headroom w.r.t. DLA and better looks on pixel-level if that's what you're after?
That still does not make the RAW files any smaller. Huge files cause a lot of issues. Also if you know that you have more megapixels available, you might try to adjust your photography to those many megaxpixels. For example you might carry a tripod a steadier photo in case you want to crop that photo later. Sometimes having more options restricts your freedom instead of growing it. With 60 megapixels you will always find yourself trying to achieve a very sharp 60 mepapixel photo. Only having to care about "20 megapixel sharpness" releases a lot of pressure.

The optimum for me would be a camera with the same sensor as the R6, a much larger and heavier body and CF Express cards instead of HD cards. The camera should also have a top display like the R5 and a second display on the back like the 1D X III. And all that for around $5000 with the EF adapter and a second battery included. That would make me happy.
 

takesome1

EOS R
Aug 23, 2013
1,499
135
100
None your business Alaska
Also if you know that you have more megapixels available, you might try to adjust your photography to those many megaxpixels. For example you might carry a tripod a steadier photo in case you want to crop that photo later. Sometimes having more options restricts your freedom instead of growing it. With 60 megapixels you will always find yourself trying to achieve a very sharp 60 mepapixel photo. Only having to care about "20 megapixel sharpness" releases a lot of pressure.

With this mindset the megapixel's do not matter, nor does the "sharpness" of your pictures. Imagine how much less stress it would be to use your cell phone as your primary camera.
 

privatebydesign

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
10,228
5,285
I think 'needs' is incorrect. Architecture/real estate photographers capture such images today, and that feature doesn't yet exist.
I think you are 100% correct, and to the specific case use suggesting more DR will 'fix the problem' illustrates a complete misunderstanding by the first poster (who has me blocked so won't see this anyway) of how the eye processes high dynamic range scenes and how increasing camera DR won't actually get the image he thinks.

Essentially the interior has a DR and the exterior has a DR, in HDR the exterior will almost always be several stops over exposed in relation to the interior, this means the shadows outside will be higher than the upper midtones inside. Using curves to 'correct' this so it more accurately represents the scene in a 'natural' way, that is how the brain processes the information from the eye, will always look odd, or HDR. The better way, even with cameras capable of HDR capture, is to take two exposures (though often many more) where you want them to be and blend them in post. This is the only way I have found to make the interior and exterior images look natural and where you have complete control over the respective brightnesses of the interior and exterior.

And to be sure there is no one right way, sometimes blown out exteriors for the mood or because of the view are the right way anyway, whereas sometimes showing the exterior view to full effect is the entire point of the building.

Screen Shot 2021-06-08 at 11.19.50.png

Screen Shot 2021-06-08 at 11.19.20.png
 
Last edited:
Aug 7, 2018
211
171
With this mindset the megapixel's do not matter, nor does the "sharpness" of your pictures. Imagine how much less stress it would be to use your cell phone as your primary camera.
Cell phones can't take sharp photos at all. They are only sharp enough for Instagram. 16 megapixels is the best resolultion for photos. Enough megapixels for even bigger posters and for stock agencies, but still sharp on a pixel level. 20 megapixel or even 24 are still okay to give you some room for cropping to different formats. From there on evey additional megapixel is a downside. The photos of a 150 megapixel camera from Phase One do not really look well on a pixel level. And that camera costs $40,000. Imagine Phase One offered a 20 megapixel version. Those pixels would be huge and the image would look super clean. I would not buy it anyway, as I do not have $40,000 to spare, but a low megapixel medium format camera would be cool.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Michael Clark