Place your bets! What do you think the R3 will cost?
- Thread starter FrenchFry
- Start date
That's only if you have control over the subjects you are photographing.
Higher MP bodies allow me to crop far away elements and still get a usable photo, or sometimes you can make multiple photos from the same base photo. Like, I have a photo where I took a 35mm street photography landscape-style pic using 5DsR+16-35 f/4L but I can then crop the RAW to get full quality photos of little scenes of people within the scene. Same thing happens with nature photos, sometimes I take a pic which looked pretty good when I framed it at the time and then realize if I cropped it by 50% it would look much cooler.
Now it's not worth sacrificing everything for this ability, but it certainly is a super useful tool now that I have access to it.
Upvote
0
unfocused
Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
Since this seems to have become a thread about resolution, noise and cropping, I can't resist added a few comments regarding Canon's two most recent top of the line bodies, the 1Dx III and the R5.
In shooting the 1Dx III for almost a year now I have been impressed with the "secret sauce" Canon added to the sensor. The 20mp files of the 1Dx III seem to me to tolerate cropping much better than the 20mp files from the 1Dx II. I don't know why. Some say it is the weaker anti-aliasing filter and I am not knowledgeable enough to argue either way, but I do see a significant improvement between the two generations. I shoot a lot of sports under less than ideal conditions and I have yet to have to reject a photo because it is too noisy or too soft after cropping.
I've only been shooting the R5 for about six weeks but I have been impressed with the files that 45mp sensor delivers at high ISOs. Very little and easily managed noise.
Point being, I'm seeing a convergence in the new sensors, where many of the old arguments about lower resolution=less cropping room and higher resolution=more noise seem to be less and less relevant in my day-to-day experience. YMMV, but I feel as though too many people are stuck in arguments that were valid six or seven years ago, but aren't today. We may have to relegate these arguments to the same dustbin where the lens cap shadow noise arguments have been tossed.
In shooting the 1Dx III for almost a year now I have been impressed with the "secret sauce" Canon added to the sensor. The 20mp files of the 1Dx III seem to me to tolerate cropping much better than the 20mp files from the 1Dx II. I don't know why. Some say it is the weaker anti-aliasing filter and I am not knowledgeable enough to argue either way, but I do see a significant improvement between the two generations. I shoot a lot of sports under less than ideal conditions and I have yet to have to reject a photo because it is too noisy or too soft after cropping.
I've only been shooting the R5 for about six weeks but I have been impressed with the files that 45mp sensor delivers at high ISOs. Very little and easily managed noise.
Point being, I'm seeing a convergence in the new sensors, where many of the old arguments about lower resolution=less cropping room and higher resolution=more noise seem to be less and less relevant in my day-to-day experience. YMMV, but I feel as though too many people are stuck in arguments that were valid six or seven years ago, but aren't today. We may have to relegate these arguments to the same dustbin where the lens cap shadow noise arguments have been tossed.
Upvote
0
I noticed the same when shooting the 1DxII and RP side by side, even with 6MP less, the 1DxIII pictures had more detail. This was with stationionary dragonflies with the 180L mounted on a tripod.
Upvote
0
The 1DX III introduced a new type of low pass (or AA) filter which blurs the image more gracefully. If you want to dive into the technical aspects, this site goes into even more detail than Canon's whitepaper:
Canon’s High-Res Optical Low Pass Filter
Canon recently introduced its EOS-1D X Mark III Digital Single-Lens Reflex [Edit: and now also possibly the R5 Mirrorless ILC] touting a new and improved Anti-Aliasing filter, which they call a Hig…
www.strollswithmydog.com
I don't quite follow your point about old arguments though. I think you are finding that the higher effective resolution of the 1DX III over the 1DX II is beneficial. That to me would suggest that you are not saying higher resolutions are bad, so I don't follow you when you suggest discarding the notion of lower resolution=less cropping room.
As for higher resolutions being associated with more noise, that is mostly a consequence of people not knowing how to make valid comparisons. For any half recent cameras, higher resolutions don't lead to a noteworthy disadvantage in terms of low light performance.
Lens cap DR arguments are still relevant to the cameras that suffer from fixed pattern noise. It is only the very recent generations of Canon cameras (90D, M6 II, R, 1DX III, R6 and R5) have have managed to get rid of it. Even the 5D IV didn't get the firmware update that fixed it in the R as far as I'm aware. Not every Canon camera out in the wild today is as recent as those, so for the people who use older gear (like my 80D) knowing the limitations of how much shadows can be pushed is still useful.
Upvote
0
unfocused
Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
I'm saying that the improved performance of the newest 20mp sensor in the 1DxIII allows cropped images to stand up better than they once did. Of course there are limits and the 45mp sensor of the R5 is certainly going to allow for more cropping, but people who dismiss the lower resolution sensors out of hand, as many on this forum do, fail to acknowledge the improvements that have occurred in recent years.
Upvote
0
I'm guessing $5499. Hoping for $4899, but that's probably unlikely. Either way, I'm a buyer. I don't mind the 24mp so long as there are significant improvements in AF over the R5, although I wish it were 30. I don't think it can be too much more than the A9 II (or the A9 III that is certainly coming) as that is the main competition in this segment.
Upvote
0
Two possibilities
1) R1 they are targeting to be just shy of $10k USD. R3, in this case and nodding to the press Canon gives it as 'not a flagship' would then be priced in to to the $6500 price slot, just below the 1DK III. This could still be possible if Canon intends the R1 to be only 20% more than the 1D series at $8kUSD. Canon does not seem to be worried about being 20% more than competitive models.
2) Canon wants to hold a more reasonable increase in the R1 cost to only $7k-7.5k USD, which could put the R1 Closer to $5500 USD.
One dream case - R3 costs $4000 and I can convince myself to save up for it over an R5, which I have been trying to convince myself to save up for over an R6 which is then nearing half the cost and is probably more than adequate for my needs.
Brian
1) R1 they are targeting to be just shy of $10k USD. R3, in this case and nodding to the press Canon gives it as 'not a flagship' would then be priced in to to the $6500 price slot, just below the 1DK III. This could still be possible if Canon intends the R1 to be only 20% more than the 1D series at $8kUSD. Canon does not seem to be worried about being 20% more than competitive models.
2) Canon wants to hold a more reasonable increase in the R1 cost to only $7k-7.5k USD, which could put the R1 Closer to $5500 USD.
One dream case - R3 costs $4000 and I can convince myself to save up for it over an R5, which I have been trying to convince myself to save up for over an R6 which is then nearing half the cost and is probably more than adequate for my needs.
Brian
Upvote
0
I'm curious to see whether the recent lens price increases mean anything at all for the R3 release price.
a) Are Canon planning to price the camera a bit on the lower end of the predicted price spectrum to encourage more adoption of R bodies among DSLR users and drive more sales of profitable RF lenses?
b) Are Canon planning to release the R3 at the higher end of the price spectrum (the lens price increases and body price increases being a result of increased part, manufacturing, and shipping costs?)
c) Are the lens price increases completely unrelated to pricing of the R3?
a) Are Canon planning to price the camera a bit on the lower end of the predicted price spectrum to encourage more adoption of R bodies among DSLR users and drive more sales of profitable RF lenses?
b) Are Canon planning to release the R3 at the higher end of the price spectrum (the lens price increases and body price increases being a result of increased part, manufacturing, and shipping costs?)
c) Are the lens price increases completely unrelated to pricing of the R3?
Upvote
0