It's often something with DPR and Canon. A few years back, their reviews came across as though if it didn't have >14 stops of DR (as DxO calculates their downsampled-to-8-MP sensor scores) and you couldn't lift the shadows 5 stops, it was crap.Saw that the other day when they posted. I'm a little underwhelmed, they titled it a Final Review, but it's not a review at all but a quick update to their earlier preview. 'll save y'all some time:
1. "I'd buy it over a 1DX III, but it's meh because 24mp".
2. "It's the only camera that will shoot full raw at 30fps, but it's meh because 24mp"
3. "It's got a great buffer, I like the AF performance, but it's meh because 24mp"
4. "It's expensive for what it is, because 24mp"
I usually find them reasonably on point in most instances. For me, this time around they come across as though if it ain't 50mp, it ain't sh*t.
Jared thinks it beats out the A1...certainly in focus abilities. Nice thing too is that in 2 weeks those same focus abilities will be downloadable to my R5.I, too, found it odd the way Chris had the R6 edging out the R3. Each time, I looked at the comparison and found the R3 to equal or edge out the R6 in the noise comparisons.
FWIW...Jared just released a new video comparing A1 & R3 AF. Watching it now...don't know what he might have to say at the end, just watching the EVF recordings and tbh they are both impressive.
We’ve had this discussion before. The issue is their bias. Here’s an older example, but I’ve seen no evidence of change.On the other hand, I don't get the hate that DPR tends to generate around here. They are reviewers, they are entitled to their opinion and reviews that never point out weaknesses are useless in my opinion.
A repeat of some of my examples from 5 years ago. It’s one reason I appreciate Bryan’s (TDP) review. He may view a camera through rose-colored glasses, but he shoots Canon and knows how to configure and operate their cameras.He didn't seem to understand the AF system or the settings very well.
He seems to criticize it for not having one mode to do it all, and having to actually set up the AF system. Which is normal for all cameras of this type.
So the lack of understanding about the AF system led to him … not getting as good a result as possible.
And then there are bloody amatuers like me. I have shot Canon DSLR since 2004 and despite trying to RTFM I haven't found a discernable difference between the AF "presets" (Case 1-6) on the 5D3 and 1DX cameras. I've kinda given up on trying to mess around with them.A repeat of some of my examples from 5 years ago. It’s one reason I appreciate Bryan’s (TDP) review. He may view a camera through rose-colored glasses, but he shoots Canon and knows how to configure and operate their cameras.
Many of the DPR reviewers clearly do not shoot Canon (the brief handling of a new camera being reviewed notwithstanding), do not understand how to effectively configure it, and in many cases haven’t even bothered to RTFM.
Mix overt bias with marginal competence and you have a recipe for unreliability.
The fact that they compare a camera to one $3500 less expensive means nothing in and of itself. One can compare anything to anything. The fact that they give the edge to the less expensive camera, while the evidence they supply does not support their claim, does say a ton.The fact that they are comparing files and giving an edge to a camera $3500 cheaper says a ton. The R3 appears to be overpriced and underwhelming, especially if the af performance is being pushed to the R5 and R6 through firmware updates