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

tron

EOS R5
CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
4,990
1,350
I'd imagine the transition would be body only for sports photogs at first. It isn't the $50k-$80k cataclysm you suggest.
Why would they transition to R3 if they have 1DxIII? Isn't the 1DxIII capable of supporting their needs? I believe more than enough especially if R3 is just 24 Mpixel.
 

Cyborx

EOS 90D
Feb 3, 2019
150
147
WTF?? Just 24mpix?
Just make an R5 with an R3 body, that us what we are waiting for! Make it a little faster and everybody happy.
 
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.
What? The list for 20FPS on the R5/R6 is very extensive. Pretty much any lens 2011 or newer supports 20FPS. The 12FPS list is a bit more restrictive but the 20FPS ES list is not restricted at all. With a stacked sensor the R3 will not have limitations anymore for shooting in ES 100% of the time (unless Canon continues on with the blunder of the decade and forces ES to shoot at max FPS like on the R5/6) and therefore a lot of lenses should be able to shoot 30FPS.

Now, the one contrasting data point to that is in the recent Gordan Laing video on the 400RF/600RF. He makes a point that the RF versions differ from the Mk III EF versions in that they have a faster diaphragm that allows 30FPS on the R3. So you could be correct in that the 30FPS is going to be limited to RF glass. Still, 20FPS is not very restricted on the R5/6.

Knowing Canon, I can certainly see them restricting 30FPS to the new RF lenses and driving sales. The higher voltage battery is also said to increase AF speed by utilizing two unused contacts on the RF mount which would also drive RF lens upgrades even for people with Mk III 400/600 superteles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlanF

PerKr

EOS 90D
Jul 11, 2018
139
139
Sverige
Wow... people on photo forums can be so obnoxious. Suddenly they can't shoot with 24MP. Because they need the extra reach cropping gives you but they don't want APS-C or m4/3 and they don't want to buy large and expensive lenses but they absolutely must have that 35mm sensor with ISO performance and dynamic range allowing them to catch all the vibrant colors and nuances of the rainforest in complete darkness while shooting rubble. How on earth did these guys manage just a few years ago? Or maybe they didn't. Maybe they couldn't produce anything worth looking at regardless.
 

CanonFanBoy

Purple
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,685
4,120
Irving, Texas
Why would they transition to R3 if they have 1DxIII? Isn't the 1DxIII capable of supporting their needs? I believe more than enough especially if R3 is just 24 Mpixel.
True, but Goldwing is a special case, and a special guy. :p He won't switch bodies without switching out all the lenses at once also. He's got to do that for 20 photographers. Most businesses replace equipment as needed, but sports photographers are human, and a special breed. /s
 
Last edited:

sanj

EOS R5
Jan 22, 2012
3,977
868
That is my plan (unless the R3 is even better when all details confirmed). Due to this odd year, I have no big trips planned, so can be patient a little longer.
Better is subjective. For me, going by what specs are floating, R5 is better. It is fast enough (fps), focuses fast enough, has a great sensor, and has 45 mpx that gives options for cropping, printing. I will wait for R1. Wait and watch situation.
 

AaronT

EOS RP
CR Pro
Jan 5, 2013
267
591
Wow... people on photo forums can be so obnoxious. Suddenly they can't shoot with 24MP. Because they need the extra reach cropping gives you but they don't want APS-C or m4/3 and they don't want to buy large and expensive lenses but they absolutely must have that 35mm sensor with ISO performance and dynamic range allowing them to catch all the vibrant colors and nuances of the rainforest in complete darkness while shooting rubble. How on earth did these guys manage just a few years ago? Or maybe they didn't. Maybe they couldn't produce anything worth looking at regardless.
Wow.....Relax.....Chill a bit! This is a rumor site, not a documentary site. People are talking about maybe this, maybe that. They're expressing there wishes, their dreams, their wants and dislikes. Many of them are accomplished photographers, some are not. It's a photographic gossip site. Don't worry, be happy!! :)
 

canonmike

EOS R6
CR Pro
Jan 5, 2013
454
392
What photojournalists, action and sports photographers do you know? News photographers have been grossly underpaid for 50 years or more. Newspapers are cash strapped and often require the photographers to buy their own equipment. Those that do supply equipment aren't switching systems or even buying new bodies and lenses until the old ones die.

If I see another photographer at a college sport event they are as likely to be using a Rebel as any other body and are frequently either sports information officers or student photographers. The few actual pro photographers I meet are usually like me -- working for the school either on contract or part time and paying for their own equipment. The only reason I can afford good equipment is because I am retired from a long career and my retirement income covers my GAS and allows me to subsidize my part time work at the college.

The photojournalists covering major news stories are often freelancers or contract photographers also responsible for their own equipment. If they are covering a war or civil unrest, they are often locals who use whatever equipment they can get their hands on and, unfortunately, are treated as expendable by the services they work with.

People have this ridiculous idea that photographers covering DC politics or professional sporting events are typical. They are not. They are a tiny minority. And even among that group, many are just plugging away struggling to stay in the middle class.
Some very good points, unfocused. I imagine there are very few pro photographers that make enough money after just a couple of assignments to pay for thousands of dollars worth of new gear.
 

amorse

EOS R
Jan 26, 2017
823
1,113
www.instagram.com
The camera is not high res because of its processing power. The camera's focus is 'speed' in every aspect. So they chose lower MP to have faster response, FPS, processing etc. As technology progresses, processing power will increase and so will the MP in such cameras. (My thinking.)
To add to that, I'm wondering if the eye controlled focus on the R3 may create some extra processing hurdles. I remember the post from Canon's patent on eye tracking referencing the fact that the camera will identify subjects based on images already taken and the user's past history. From the article/patent:
-------
An image capture apparatus detects a subject in a captured image. The image capture apparatus further recognizes its user based on an eyeball image of the user. The image capture apparatus then selects a main subject area from among the detected subject areas, based on information regarding subjects captured in the past and stored being associated with the recognized user.
-------
If the camera is considering past photos captured by the user in addition to considering where they're looking in order to assign a focus point, I have to assume that may require some additional processing power.
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,916
12,260
To answer those criticisms about the R5 not being able to operate at 20 fps f/22 and on low battery charge, I did a quick burst this morning of some dogs running around as I was out walking looking for birds with the R5+100-500mm at 500mm. Here is a gif of 53 shots in 2.71sec = 19.6 shots/sec, at f/22, 1/1000s and 26% battery charge using electronic shutter. The white dog was tracked and in sharp focus throughout.

f22_53in2.71s_26%Battery.gif
 

Ian K

EOS 90D
Jul 20, 2016
102
69
Just all of the 24MP cameras in the market:ROFLMAO:



I don't think that would be an issue with the CR3 file format. Files are smaller, these days.
If you are using cRaw then you are loosing quality. It’s 12 bit rather that 14.
 
Last edited:

Ian K

EOS 90D
Jul 20, 2016
102
69
I've noticed that the larger the subject is in the frame, the better the tracking works for the R5. Sometimes, this means that shooting in Crop mode yields better tracking results, when getting closer to a skittish subject is not possible.
I’m confused at the suggestion that crop mode makes a difference to AF tracking. As far as the camera goes it’s using the exact same pixels to do the tracking and focus work, cropped it not. Only the viewfinder is zoomed.

Interesting that you think it’s sometimes better. I suppose it could be that you are better at keeping the subject in the frame more accurately if it’s bigger and so the AF doesn’t have to cope with as much movement. If this was the cause you would also see an improvement by using the viewfinder zoom option. Would be worth trying it out.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
26,145
4,761
The camera is not high res because of its processing power. The camera's focus is 'speed' in every aspect. So they chose lower MP to have faster response, FPS, processing etc. As technology progresses, processing power will increase and so will the MP in such cameras. (My thinking.)
Try some simple math with me.

45 (the MP count of the R5) x 20 (the fps of the R5) = 900 MP / s

900 MP / s (the processing power of the R5) / 30 (the fps of the R3) = 30 MP.

I suspect by ‘high res’ you mean something closer to the R5, but processing power isn’t limiting the R3 to 24 MP. It could be 30 MP without considering a year’s worth of technology progression. Or they could use dual Digic processors.
 

David_D

EOS M6 Mark II
Apr 19, 2021
61
61
I’m confused at the suggestion that crop mode makes a difference to AF tracking. As far as the camera goes it’s using the exact same pixels to do the tracking and focus work, cropped it not. Only the viewfinder is zoomed.
Surely the camera would be smart enough to only analyse the <20mp in the cropped area and throw away the rest. Twice as much processing would thus be available, which should give a better result.
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,916
12,260
Ha I am fairly new to the Forum! Did not know there was a whole section dedicated to picture sharing. These are great! We really are spoilt with tech these days. My only annoyance is that you can sort of see Electronic shutter banding with very fast moving subjects. Time for global shutter, high frame rate to become a thing
Great to see you have now started bird posting there!