The Canon EOS R3 will be 24mp, confirmed by EXIF data

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
6,418
4,074
68
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
Wow, this is a disappointment that I have to process for a couple of days. After waiting for a few years I thought this could be the mirrorless pro for me. But with 24mpix after using the R5 for a day. Sorry but I cannot understand why a camera company would make a 24mpix PRO BODY camera after they made a 45mpix SEMI PRO BODY camera a year earlier... Am I crazy?
Not crazy. But no one here has access to Canon's market research. Whether we understand it or not, you can be sure they base their decisions on solid research and know what the market is that they are targeting. Cameras are like every other product, you have to pick the one that checks off most of the boxes for you. Seldom will something check off all the boxes. Process your disappointment, wait for the actual announcement and then decide what you want.
 

notsure

EOS R. R5
May 10, 2021
4
5
For those who feel they really benefit from high speed shooting, 30 fps is a big jump assuming there's no rolling shutter. And if the EVF solves continuous shooting lag (which it should at 30 fps capture), then that solves a significant mirrorless issue for those who shoot long bursts. It's definitely an evolution of technology and an impressive camera. It also potentially solves some issues that would make 1DX shooters more comfortable adding mirrorless and gaining the mirrorless advantage of AI subject tracking AF.

That said: at times I feel the same way you do about things. I'm not limited in any way by my equipment right now. I need time to travel and inspiration. So while I appreciate what the R3 (and R5/R6) bring to the table, I cringe when people post stuff to Twitter like OMG I just burned all my old equipment if you're not shooting this awesome new mirrorless you can't compete, you're not even a photographer! There's certainly nothing wrong with taking advantage of the new tech Canon is brining to the table. But their DSLRs were so highly evolved by the end of the 2010's that there's nothing wrong with sitting tight for a while either. Same thing is true on the Nikon side. Perhaps even more so because the transition is not necessarily as seamless as it is with Canon's EF-to-RF adapter.

Tbh i have a feeling that the 30fps will be much more of a marketing gimmick than a practical tool for a while, mainly because of the lenses, or the focusing motors in lenses to be more precise.
If you look at the R5/R6 manual you'll see several lists, one for EF and one for RF glass, listing their support of high frame rates. given that most relevant EF glass peaks out at 12 fps, only several RF lenses currently support 20 fps, and even that, only wide open and only above certain battery charge levels (i'm assuming this is related to output voltage). On top of that - given that you cant really use teleconverters on RF 70-200's, or lack any telephotos except the 100-500 zoom, and have no 300, 400, 500, 600, 800 L primes coming anytime soon professional sports/wildlife/action photographers will have quite a useless 30fps spec on their 7k$ cameras.
 

rick1

EOS M6 Mark II
Sep 8, 2016
65
36
Do you have some kind of vanity with your camera choice? I have to keep repeating this, but I own both an R5 and a 1dx3. I prefer the 1dx3, so no the dslr is not "dead". Maybe to you, but not for me or a lot of others. Why does your choice have to be the only one? Do you speak for all camera owners?
When did I say my choice was the only one? You were the one that said the entire market was people that want a 1dxiii. I am saying there is a large chunk of the market like myself that they are losing.
 

tron

EOS R5
CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
4,987
1,345
Tbh i have a feeling that the 30fps will be much more of a marketing gimmick than a practical tool for a while, mainly because of the lenses, or the focusing motors in lenses to be more precise.
If you look at the R5/R6 manual you'll see several lists, one for EF and one for RF glass, listing their support of high frame rates. given that most relevant EF glass peaks out at 12 fps, only several RF lenses currently support 20 fps, and even that, only wide open and only above certain battery charge levels (i'm assuming this is related to output voltage). On top of that - given that you cant really use teleconverters on RF 70-200's, or lack any telephotos except the 100-500 zoom, and have no 300, 400, 500, 600, 800 L primes coming anytime soon professional sports/wildlife/action photographers will have quite a useless 30fps spec on their 7k$ cameras.
Why are they useless? What stops all lenses to work at 30fps fully open? Also aren't EF lenses supposed to work OK with 1DxIII? So 16fps must be doable with many modern big white EF lenses.
 

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,743
1,307
Tbh i have a feeling that the 30fps will be much more of a marketing gimmick than a practical tool for a while, mainly because of the lenses, or the focusing motors in lenses to be more precise.
If you look at the R5/R6 manual you'll see several lists, one for EF and one for RF glass, listing their support of high frame rates. given that most relevant EF glass peaks out at 12 fps, only several RF lenses currently support 20 fps, and even that, only wide open and only above certain battery charge levels (i'm assuming this is related to output voltage). On top of that - given that you cant really use teleconverters on RF 70-200's, or lack any telephotos except the 100-500 zoom, and have no 300, 400, 500, 600, 800 L primes coming anytime soon professional sports/wildlife/action photographers will have quite a useless 30fps spec on their 7k$ cameras.
30 fps will not be possible on all lenses. But I'm guessing some of the limits for the R5/R6 will be higher or non-existent on the R3. There are EF lenses that can't shoot as fast on an R6 as they can on 1D bodies. This clearly isn't a fault of the lens and is likely due to voltage. Since the R3 carries a bigger battery...
 

reef58

EOS RP
CR Pro
Apr 16, 2016
423
409
North Carolina
youtu.be
When did I say my choice was the only one? You were the one that said the entire market was people that want a 1dxiii. I am saying there is a large chunk of the market like myself that they are losing.
You said DSLR's are dead maybe we have different definitions of "dead". And I didn't say the entire market is people who want a 1dxiii. There are no absolutes here, and that is my point.
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,899
12,213
Tbh i have a feeling that the 30fps will be much more of a marketing gimmick than a practical tool for a while, mainly because of the lenses, or the focusing motors in lenses to be more precise.
If you look at the R5/R6 manual you'll see several lists, one for EF and one for RF glass, listing their support of high frame rates. given that most relevant EF glass peaks out at 12 fps, only several RF lenses currently support 20 fps, and even that, only wide open and only above certain battery charge levels (i'm assuming this is related to output voltage). On top of that - given that you cant really use teleconverters on RF 70-200's, or lack any telephotos except the 100-500 zoom, and have no 300, 400, 500, 600, 800 L primes coming anytime soon professional sports/wildlife/action photographers will have quite a useless 30fps spec on their 7k$ cameras.
The electronic shutter doesn’t drop below 20 fps with battery charge. I’ve used the 100-400mm II and 400mm DO II at 20 fps with the adapter. The RF 1.4x and 2x work on the RF 800mm f/11 and 600mm f/11 as well as the new RF 400/2.8 and 600/4 that are currently available and not only the 100-500mm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

Mr Majestyk

EOS RP
Feb 20, 2016
419
276
Australia
Personally gutted, Canon still incapable of offering decent resolution in a pro camera. I'm sure it will be fantastic camera, and if priced aggressively might be of interest but no doubt Canon will ask for more like A1 money than A9II money.

Oh well, looks like I'll sell my A9 and A7RIII for the A1 now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Billybob

Skux

EOS 90D
Feb 21, 2020
129
165
That's cool, I just hope it's priced accordingly.

Knowing Canon they'll think they can get away with flagship prices on release (and they can, with early adopters and worldwide supply disruptions).
 

miketcool

EOS 90D
Jun 29, 2017
190
381
Why? Largely because there's no option, if you're in the Canon system and need a truly rugged camera then the 1DX line is your option.
When you're a professional photo journalist, action, or sports photographer; switching to a rival camera system is the option. The gear is paid for on your first or second assignment. The semi-pro and enthusiast crowd own pro bodies as a luxury item.

This is a new generation. Using that logic you could say "they sell plenty of 5d Mark4s at 30mp). Previous generation cameras should not be the benchmark. The industry competition should be the benchmark. 24mp for a $6000 camera is pathetic
There is nothing "previous" about a current pro-body DSLR. 24mp on a camera coming out with supply chain issues, a slowdown in events, that is stacked BSI, shoots with less shutter distortion, and sends the correct resolution and files sizes wirelessly to clients for events is what is demanded by the industry. Canon spends a lot of time working with photographers in the field to come up with solutions that are both reliable and won't financially impact their strategic growth. I would rather know that my rugged pro body will be supported for years to come as it makes me money, then worry about whether or not the spec-sheet stacks up against expensive competitors with their own downsides.

The higher density the sensor, the poorer the low light condition, and the less advanced your AI can be for things like Eye Control AF and machine learning for recognizing fast moving subjects. This is a very exciting step in the future of AF systems which has been Canon's focus (pun intended) for decades.
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,899
12,213
The higher density the sensor, the poorer the low light condition, and the less advanced your AI can be for things like Eye Control AF and machine learning for recognizing fast moving subjects. This is a very exciting step in the future of AF systems which has been Canon's focus (pun intended) for decades.
The higher the density, the more pixel information for machine learning to recognise subjects and the better the AF. The more pixels you put on your subject the better the AF, not the worse.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
26,127
4,728
I know I am the exception, but I've never found the ergonomics of the 1 series to be that much superior to the five or seven series, especially if you choose to add a grip. In fact, the older I get the more I like not having to lug around the extra weight of a 1 series body. Part of it, I know, is just the way I shoot. After decades of using film cameras, my muscle memory is so accustomed to leaving my hands in the same place when I switch to vertical, so I find the vertical controls on the 1 series and grips to be useless for me.

I don't stand around in the rain using my camera without any protection. Weathersealing is poorly defined and from what I've seen of field tests, even the lowly R does quite well in that regard, so that's not a big factor for me. If they actually built a camera and lenses that could be submerged, it might be a different case, but until they do that, I'll just keep using rain covers when I have to shoot in bad weather.

I looked up the shutter life or the R5 and it is rated the same as the 1DxIII, so that doesn't seem like a major differentiation either.

Now, if I owned a big white, I might want the bigger battery and I do admit that the short battery life of the R5 is annoying at times. But, if I'm going to be shooting for an extended period of time I can add a grip.

Point being that individual preferences vary and for me, the body style won't be a major reason to buy the R3 if I go that route.
Agree on individual preferences varying. With a non-gripped body, my hand is a bit sore after a day of shooting, partly it’s the pinky not fitting in the grip, and mostly it’s that a lighter body doesn’t balance heavier lenses like f/2.8 zooms (balance is more important than weight, IMO).

Not sure if you’ve used a 1-series much, the vertical controls are much better placed than on a grip. I used a gripper 7D and 5DII, and the integrated grip is also more comfortable (for me, of course, and it’s because the 1-series bulges only forward like the main grip, whereas the add-ons bulge in front and in back to accommodate the transverse batteries).

I alternate between handheld and tripod pretty frequently, and there’s always flex between the body and an add-on grip. Flex means vibration. Removing the grip (then attaching an Arca-Swiss plate to the body) to mount on a tripod, and then reversing it to return to handheld, is a PITA.

So for many reasons, I far prefer the integrated grip.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WJF and john1970

David - Sydney

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
1,005
836
www.flickr.com
I'm curious, and I hope some folks will reply. On all of these R3 threads of late, I see many users comment on how they already have an R5, but were hoping to get the R3. In some case, perhaps, to replace the R5, a camera that they bought only in the past year and costs almost $4000. I guess I don't understand why an R5 owner would want an R3. Is there something about the R5 that doesn't suit your needs that an R3 would? Is it the integrated grip? The more rugged build? Just the fact that you want the latest and greatest? Curious minds don't quite get it, especially for those looking for an MP count closer to the R5. Wouldn't the R3 just be a more expensive version of the camera you already own, with little or difference in actual functionality or results?
Because you can't remap the Rate button on the R5 :)
 

styoda

I'm New Here
Dec 15, 2017
13
7
UK
Canon Cameras with 4000x6000 resolution sensors

77D
80D
SL2
SL3
T6i
T6s
T7
T7i
T8i
M3
M5
M6
M100
M200
M50
M50ii

Granted these are all crop sensor cameras, but clearly there's no reason that a sensor can't be a nice round number for the resolution.
Check again, the 77D and 80D are not 4000x6000, they're 24.2 MP.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
26,127
4,728
Personally gutted, Canon still incapable of offering decent resolution in a pro camera.
They’re certainly capable of it. When the 1DsIII came out, it had double the resolution of any other then-current FF DSLR. The fact that they’re choosing not to make one indicates they don’t believe that’s the best choice for the current market.

I’m equally certain their knowledge of the market exceeds that of anyone on this forum.
 

juststeve

EOS M6 Mark II
Nov 29, 2018
73
108
They’re certainly capable of it. When the 1DsIII came out, it had double the resolution of any other then-current FF DSLR. The fact that they’re choosing not to make one indicates they don’t believe that’s the best choice for the current market.

I’m equally certain their knowledge of the market exceeds that of anyone on this forum.


When the 1Ds iii came out the 1Ds ii had been available for since 2005. It was full frame and 16.7 MP.
 

dboris

EOS M50
May 11, 2015
41
38
I wish to buy a R3 for 75% video 25% photo.
C70 clearly don't tick the boxes I want.
Limiting the sensor resolution means sharper 4K, less rolling shutter, and possible 4K 60p raw, with awesome AF capabilities.
What else?
If canon made this choice it's not for no reason.
If resolution is an issue for you, stop whining and grab a R5.
 

David - Sydney

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
1,005
836
www.flickr.com
I was considering buying an R5, just prior to the development announcement of the R3. I used a 1D X extensively before buying an EOS R, and I far prefer the form factor of the integrated grip, which is why I avoided the R5 for so long. Not a lot of difference between 24 and 30 MP, and as someone pointed out the weaker AA filter of the new sensors (although we really don't know about the AA filter in the R3) means even less of a difference between the R3's presumptive 24 MP and the 30 MP of my EOS R.
Would you now consider upgrading from your R to R5 again if the R3 is 24mp?