Multiple mentions put the Canon EOS R3 sensor resolution “around 24mp”

peters

EOS RP
Dec 25, 2017
480
465
R5 will be the first mirrorless camera that I am aware of to record 8K externally and A1 absolutely overheats recording internally.
Sony even says that.
It is just nowhere near as bad as the R5.
The A1 records 8k externaly without overheat, doesnt it?
And its not overheating in 4k60 internaly, or am I mistaken?
These are pretty important things, at least in my workfow :)
 

EOS 4 Life

EOS R
Sep 20, 2020
1,100
862
The A1 records 8k externaly without overheat, doesnt it?
Nope.
And its not overheating in 4k60 internaly, or am I mistaken?
Sony only rates it for 60 minutes but that is pretty conservative.
It is much better than the R5 and R6 but there is a reason that Sony came out with the FX3 with active cooling when they already had the A7SIII.
Sony is better at managing heat than Canon mostly because of larger heatsinks.
However, their cameras still overheat pretty quickly if the heat tolerance is not set to high.
Canon does not let us do that.
Canon also has much better weather sealing.
It would be nice to have more options from Canon, but no, Sony has not overcome the laws of thermodynamics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scyrene

privatebydesign

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
10,522
5,778
Why exactly?
The Sony A1 offers 8k without overheat (externaly) AND 50mp with 30fps. (which is TWICHE the amount of data, compared to the Canon R3 with half the resolution). The A1 got no fan and a super compact body...
I cant see any physical limitation in play here. Can you elaborate what you mean?

The R5 obviously suffers from a design error in the thermal heatsink design (they should have used copper). Kolarivision offers a fix for the faulty heatpipe that canon put inside: https://kolarivision.com/product-category/r5overheating/ (doubles record time, probably unlimited 4k oversampled external recording).
The devil is always in the detail. The A1 does do 30fps, sometimes, but even when it does it uses lossy compression, and the buffer fills in 5 seconds. It also has a measly 10fps mechanical shutter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joules and scyrene

peters

EOS RP
Dec 25, 2017
480
465
Nope.

Sony only rates it for 60 minutes but that is pretty conservative.
It is much better than the R5 and R6 but there is a reason that Sony came out with the FX3 with active cooling when they already had the A7SIII.
Sony is better at managing heat than Canon mostly because of larger heatsinks.
However, their cameras still overheat pretty quickly if the heat tolerance is not set to high.
Canon does not let us do that.
Canon also has much better weather sealing.
It would be nice to have more options from Canon, but no, Sony has not overcome the laws of thermodynamics.

Here he shows that it worked for him limitless externaly :) (your miles may vary?) While the canon only offers about 12 minutes internaly in my experience (externaly may come at the end of the year, but we dont know if it realy comes and what runtime it has).

Sonys 60 minute at 4k60 is very impressive - canon only offers 15-20 minues (in my personal experience in some projects)

Weather sealing is also comparable - thats honestly a thing of the past.

Overall I cant see any physical reasons why this should be any problem. Sony managed to do it. Its not about physics, its an engeneering problem. The Heatsink in the R5 are simply made of the wrong material. The kolarivision mod shows that - simply use copper and it DOUBLES the internal recording time (!) =)
 
Aug 7, 2018
356
306
Could RAW images really have less than the full resolution? Would they still be considered RAW? As I understood RAWs did not go through demosaicing. So if the therory with the lower resolution just for the testers is true, how could Canon make a 24 megapixel RAW file from a higher resolution without demosaicing it first? That could only work if the real resolution was 96 megapixels and the color filter would consists of 2x2 groups with the same colour. I don't see a way to scale down a RAW from a sensor with a conventional Bayer Filter without demosacing the RAW file first.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
26,077
4,648
Could RAW images really have less than the full resolution? Would still be considered RAW? As I understood RAWs did not go through demosaicing. So if the therory with the lower resolution just for the testers is true, how could Canon make a 24 megapixel RAW file from a higher resolution without demosaicing it first? That could only work if the real resolution was 96 megapixels and the color filter would consists of 2x2 groups with the same colour. I don't see a way to scale down a RAW from a sensor with a conventional Bayer Filter without demosacing the RAW file first.
You’re correct, but the cameras in the field right now probably do not output RAW files. Nothing but a pre-release version of DPP could convert them, and somehow I doubt DPP is part of any commercial sports editorial workflow, and even if it was that they’d rely on what would be at best a beta version of the software.

Almost certainly, the R3 cameras in use right now are only writing JPGs to the cards, and in that case the RAW files are irrelevant.
 

Pixel

EOS RP
CR Pro
Sep 6, 2011
233
127
Can we at least agree it's not a flagship and therefore shouldn't be constantly compared to another brands flagship? The glass half full here is we get another body available for those who want and need it. It's pure win.
Canon told us it’s not a flagship so yeah.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EOS 4 Life

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,743
1,307
I guess it is to be expected, but it is really funny to me how spec oriented the people on this forum are. Oh how terrible, 24 MPs instead of 30 Mp. A difference that will probably not be noticeable for any hand held shots and/or peeping at less than 100% (or maybe even 200%) or so - at least based on my experience.

I'm sure those who actually buy the camera will find it does exactly what it is intended to do. As always with Canon.
I've said before that having shot 50mp I don't ever want to go back to less, and even I'm a bit surprised at the concern over 24mp vs. 30mp. That's a far less consequential difference, and in a camera that's purpose built for speed. One could point to the A1. But then again, one could point to countless comments online by professional sports photographers saying they absolutely do not want to deal with large files. If we know anything about Canon, we know they are meticulous about market research. Maybe 24mp was the sweet spot for this market segment regardless of Sony's spec choices.

I absolutely love my 5Ds for sports, despite the fps and buffer limitations. But I shoot as a hobby with occasional paid jobs or print sales. I'm not trying to move thousands of images across a network in an industry where every second literally counts. I'm interested in the best possible RAW IQ because I have time that night or the next day to play around in ACR and PS. Not the best possible out-of-camera JPEG IQ because the image was supposed to be posted to Twitter and Instagram 5 minutes ago.

It's also worth noting that Canon's newer, weaker AA filters mean that 24mp is probably a lot closer to the 30mp of the 5D mark IV and R in overall IQ then some might like to admit, especially to the crowd that is pushing out-of-camera JPEGs to their employers ASAP.

Someone out there will decide that Canon is ill-fated because the R3 is only 24mp or only 30mp, and they will sell everything and move to Sony. But the reports from working professionals at the Olympics are stellar. I don't think Canon will have any problems selling this new body.
 

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,743
1,307
Weather sealing is also comparable - thats honestly a thing of the past.

I heard that for every A7 generation that subsequently had failures. Do we know this? Is someone actively testing camera weather sealing? Imaging Review was going to start doing this in a scientific fashion until they scaled everything back. All I have are anecdotes from friends that the A9s work in harsh conditions, so maybe it's a solved problem with Sony. But I wish someone would test weather sealing as carefully as the industry likes to test DR.

Overall I cant see any physical reasons why this should be any problem. Sony managed to do it. Its not about physics, its an engeneering problem. The Heatsink in the R5 are simply made of the wrong material. The kolarivision mod shows that - simply use copper and it DOUBLES the internal recording time (!) =)

I'll give you that one. Why Canon messed this up in the R5/R6 I'll never know... :rolleyes:
 

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,743
1,307
Can we at least agree it's not a flagship and therefore shouldn't be constantly compared to another brands flagship? The glass half full here is we get another body available for those who want and need it. It's pure win.
As long as they price it accordingly, yes. The R1 might be a 50-60mp sports beast at a higher price. Sony has the A1 and A9, why can't Canon split the market between an R1 and R3 so people have the choice?

I just hope their next high resolution landscape camera is positioned as an R5s and not a much more expensive R1 or R1s. I don't need 30 fps...but I wouldn't mind playing with 100mp.
 

lethiferous

EOS M50
Nov 3, 2020
33
21
The devil is always in the detail. The A1 does do 30fps, sometimes, but even when it does it uses lossy compression, and the buffer fills in 5 seconds. It also has a measly 10fps mechanical shutter.

A1 and R5 owner here. You will never use the mechanical shutter on the A1, there is nearly 0 reason to. The buffer will also clears faster than the R5 if your using CF express A. thanks to SD magic on the R5 and also the R3 ( makes 0 sense for a "speed" based camera). I've never filled either buffer by actually shooting other than intentionally holding down the shutter to do so.
Here he shows that it worked for him limitless externaly :) (your miles may vary?) While the canon only offers about 12 minutes internaly in my experience (externaly may come at the end of the year, but we dont know if it realy comes and what runtime it has).

Sonys 60 minute at 4k60 is very impressive - canon only offers 15-20 minues (in my personal experience in some projects)

Weather sealing is also comparable - thats honestly a thing of the past.

Overall I cant see any physical reasons why this should be any problem. Sony managed to do it. Its not about physics, its an engeneering problem. The Heatsink in the R5 are simply made of the wrong material. The kolarivision mod shows that - simply use copper and it DOUBLES the internal recording time (!) =)

Unless you set the temperature tolerance to high, you may also need to flip out the screen. Out the box settings it will pop the overheat warning shooting 4k 120/8k if the screen isn't out, for prolonged shooting the temperature threshold needs to be adjusted. I haven't tried a dummy battery though.
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
6,416
4,046
68
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
Been working through the seven stages of grief. Not at acceptance yet, but over the shock and denial at least. One thing that I think is bizarre is how Canon, with both the 1DxIII and the R3 (if it is indeed 24mp) makes such an effort to keep the resolution under wraps when the spec is so underwhelming. It sure seems to me that it would be better to let that leak out early or even include it in the pre-announcements and hold back on some blockbuster spec like eye-control autofocus so that when the actual announcement comes people are talking about a positive, instead of focusing on a rather bland specification that is always going to generate controversy no matter what the number is.
 

lethiferous

EOS M50
Nov 3, 2020
33
21
As long as they price it accordingly, yes. The R1 might be a 50-60mp sports beast at a higher price. Sony has the A1 and A9, why can't Canon split the market between an R1 and R3 so people have the choice?

I just hope their next high resolution landscape camera is positioned as an R5s and not a much more expensive R1 or R1s. I don't need 30 fps...but I wouldn't mind playing with 100mp.
Doubt it. It's Canon, do you remember the EOS R launch? The R5 is 3900, 1dxiii 6500. I don't see it coming lower than 5500. On FM used A1s are like 6k. Tack on the RF glass premium and the big whites all being the same price. Tough sell. All canon really has going for it is RF Glass (damn amazing glass) and what appears to me is better AI in AF currently. The whole EYE EYE AF could be amazing and could be a gimmick, loads of questions there about if glasses folks can use it etc.
 

privatebydesign

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
10,522
5,778
A1 and R5 owner here. You will never use the mechanical shutter on the A1, there is nearly 0 reason to. The buffer will also clears faster than the R5 if your using CF express A. thanks to SD magic on the R5 and also the R3 ( makes 0 sense for a "speed" based camera). I've never filled either buffer by actually shooting other than intentionally holding down the shutter to do so.


Unless you set the temperature tolerance to high, you may also need to flip out the screen. Out the box settings it will pop the overheat warning shooting 4k 120/8k if the screen isn't out, for prolonged shooting the temperature threshold needs to be adjusted. I haven't tried a dummy battery though.
I wasn’t implying the A1 isn’t a good camera, nor that there were things it does better than the R5, there are. But then there should be considering you can get two R5’s for the price of an A1 in some places but even everywhere else there is a big price difference.

I was simply saying that the headline features come with caveats, so pissing on one with another without pointing out those caveats is pointless. Kind of like I just did with the price.
 

lethiferous

EOS M50
Nov 3, 2020
33
21
I wasn’t implying the A1 isn’t a good camera, nor that there were things it does better than the R5, there are. But then there should be considering you can get two R5’s for the price of an A1 in some places but even everywhere else there is a big price difference.

I was simply saying that the headline features come with caveats, so pissing on one with another without pointing out those caveats is pointless. Kind of like I just did with the price.
Not sure about other places but in the US, one or two RF Ls vs something like a Sigma dg dn. Lets just say 200-600 vs 100-500 difference and 24-70 DG DN vs 24-70 RF price difference. These 2 lens cost differences alone land you in the same price for both kits at retail just about.
 

Juangrande

EOS 90D
Mar 6, 2017
182
236
With the up-front caveat that I am not in the market for this camera, and I am not even a frequent amateur photographer (I'm more into astro-imaging at the moment), I did a quick check on the difference between a 24MP image and a 30MP image blown up to a 1:1 ratio. Here is the difference below. The sensors shown are representations of the the 24MP Nikon D3200 and the 30MP Canon 5D MarkIV, with identical pixel scales. For a pro or semi-pro photographer, is this difference really enough to say that you will or won't purchase this camera? I would think that the other aspects of the camera would be much more important than the slight gain in overall image resolution, but again, I am a weekend warrior at best, still happy with my aging 5DIII.

View attachment 199209
If you were to align those sensor (rectangles) sizes say with the bottom left corner the difference is more noticeable.
 

EOS 4 Life

EOS R
Sep 20, 2020
1,100
862
  • Like
Reactions: scyrene