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

[landon]

The R3 has a flip out screen, enthusiasts want to buy it too, but not at 24mp, is that the issue?
If it is priced right, I can see many pro-am trying it out at their local sporting events, without the price tag of the R1. $5200?

 

[unfocused]

...This dialog is important because a lot of people do seem dissatisfied with the specs...

There are three active threads on this site currently that discuss (using the word generously) the 24mp count of the R3 sensor. As of a few minutes ago, the posts total about 1,250. Let's estimate that 2/3 of those posts are negative (a high estimate) and lets also estimate an average of four posts per user (a very conservative estimate). That would put your "a lot of people" at about 209 people. Let's further estimate that 1/4 of those complainers were never truly in the market for the R3. So, that puts us at about 150 customers dissatisfied with the specs, which is a very generous number. Finally, let's very generously estimate that 2/3 of those dissatisfied customers are going to jump ship to Sony. Suddenly your "a lot of people" doesn't seem like so many and your "dialog" doesn't seem so important.

The lesson here: internet buzz on geek forums means nothing.

 

[CanonOregon]

R5 is a very nice camera to stick with! I have it too and I have not regretted it (I sold my R though). I would like a R5 with R3's body and battery though...

And I'd add in 'Eye Control' focus having had the EOS 3 years ago, it worked great for me and I've always missed that feature.

 

[degos]

A lot of people here on the Internet seem dissatisfied. What has been the feedback from the people actually using the R3 to cover the Olympics? You know...the people who actually matter.

But again we return to the point that they'll use what they're issued, it's just a tool. The part of the market that Canon needs to attract is that which actively chooses, since that's where the volume is.

Consider that the biggest agency might take 100 bodies to a major global event. Then consider that there might be 10,000 amateur photographers at a big annual airshow like RIAT ( attendance 120,000 ) and you'll start to see where the market is.

 

[Sporgon]

you still on that a7siii knowing that most people went to sony for video when they got into the mirrorless game and the A7SIII is primarily for video shooters.Find me some sports shooters or portrait shooters that use the camera exclusively or for a majority of the time for photos. Also as an event and portrait shooter I def would not be comfortable with 12MP. sometimes i do have to crop to remove distractions or for framing purposes.

I know a few professional wedding photographers that are more video orientated and use the A7S for the still photography as well when doing both at a venue. In fact it’s a remarkably popular camera for this.

 

[jam05]

That’s a very good point but the R6 came out at the same time so those who didn’t want 45mp were also given an option.

Had Canon also made a high mp body capable of shooting 30fps to compete with the A1 and Z9 there wouldn’t be any problems at all.

The A1 doesnt shoot 30fps RAW (jpeg and compressed modes) research it. And only nears 30fps in select lenses. The R3 is faster shooting RAW

 

[Loswr]

But again we return to the point that they'll use what they're issued, it's just a tool. The part of the market that Canon needs to attract is that which actively chooses, since that's where the volume is.

Consider that the biggest agency might take 100 bodies to a major global event. Then consider that there might be 10,000 amateur photographers at a big annual airshow like RIAT ( attendance 120,000 ) and you'll start to see where the market is.

But again we return to the question of what fraction of that market would be happy with 24 MP? With 30 MP? With 45 MP? With 60 MP?

Consider that neither you nor I have conducted market research on that issue, but that Canon certainly has, and you’ll start to see where reality is.

 

[Bahrd]

Consider that neither you nor I have conducted market research on that issue, but that Canon certainly has, and you’ll start to see where reality is.

I too wonder why it is so difficult to accept that a company present on a market for longer than majority of its customers walks (and leading it for a while too) makes decisions based on its experience, market analysis and R&D capabilities.

That approach used to work, have been (and is still) working for Canon. And is in accordance with the recent (yet not really earthshaking) findings that: "provide evidence that participants who are able to learn the task use a strategy that maps previously learned policies to novel scenarios."

 

[sanj]

We have to work with what technology provides us with at any given time. I trust Canon is doing the best it can. For a 'speed demon' camera they are launching in R3, 24 mpx seems to be the best compromise between speed and mpx. With time, engines will take more torque and the mpx will increase.

 

[sanj]

Having said the above, R3 does not appeal to me because R5 is fast enough for me. R5 has 8k video. R5 has 45 mpx. I have never used eye focus and since I do not know what I will be missing in that, I can safely wait for R1. R1 may not have higher mpx than R3 and may not have 8k but it will be an awesome still camera that I will relish owning.

 

[reef58]

But again we return to the point that they'll use what they're issued, it's just a tool. The part of the market that Canon needs to attract is that which actively chooses, since that's where the volume is.

Consider that the biggest agency might take 100 bodies to a major global event. Then consider that there might be 10,000 amateur photographers at a big annual airshow like RIAT ( attendance 120,000 ) and you'll start to see where the market is.

In that case the M50 reigns supreme.

 

[Skux]

But again we return to the point that they'll use what they're issued, it's just a tool. The part of the market that Canon needs to attract is that which actively chooses, since that's where the volume is.

Consider that the biggest agency might take 100 bodies to a major global event. Then consider that there might be 10,000 amateur photographers at a big annual airshow like RIAT ( attendance 120,000 ) and you'll start to see where the market is.

Amateur photographers are not for the most part buying R3s and 600mm lenses.

 

[Loswr]

We have to work with what technology provides us with at any given time. I trust Canon is doing the best it can. For a 'speed demon' camera they are launching in R3, 24 mpx seems to be the best compromise between speed and mpx. With time, engines will take more torque and the mpx will increase.

The data throughput of the R5 (45 MP, 20 fps) means the R3 could be 30 MP at 30 fps. If the R3 is 24 MP, that’s a decision not a technological limit.

Why is it so hard for people to grasp that their personal wants don’t necessarily represent the majority of the market, and that Canon has a better understanding of the wants of the market as a whole?

 

[Emyr Evans]

The data throughput of the R5 (45 MP, 20 fps) means the R3 could be 30 MP at 30 fps. If the R3 is 24 MP, that’s a decision not a technological limit.

Why is it so hard for people to grasp that their personal wants don’t necessarily represent the majority of the market, and that Canon has a better understanding of the wants of the market as a whole?

True, assuming everything else stays the same.

The extra processor headroom might be taken up by a new AF system, the new Eye AF or any number of other things.

Moreover, that's also assuming that the R5 processor is running at full beans - DIGIC X may be up to more workload than we are not aware of.

 

[SereneSpeed]

The data throughput of the R5 (45 MP, 20 fps) means the R3 could be 30 MP at 30 fps. If the R3 is 24 MP, that’s a decision not a technological limit.

Is data throughput an entirely separate processor? I just assumed that running eye controlled AF and perhaps improved AF (happening faster - less time between frames, so even quicker processing required), plus the higher demand on power consumption (driving lens AF and aperture), as well as added heat reducing efficiency, all played a role in the 45x20=30x30 not quite adding up...

Doesn’t 45x20=30x30 assume that every single other detail is the same? Surely, with all the improvements Canon has added to the R3, it’s got to be doing a bit more behind the scenes, no?

 

[Loswr]

True, assuming everything else stays the same.

The extra processor headroom might be taken up by a new AF system, the new Eye AF or any number of other things.

Moreover, that's also assuming that the R5 processor is running at full beans - DIGIC X may be up to more workload than we are not aware of.

They could also use dual Digic processors if needed (or more, the 1D X has three of them), if needed. As I said, 24 MP is a choice.

 

[SereneSpeed]

[...]

You beat me to it...

 

[SereneSpeed]

They could also use dual Digic processors if needed (or more, the 1D X has three of them), if needed. As I said, 24 MP is a choice.

You’ve changed your context a bit... But, okay.

 

[Loswr]

Is data throughput an entirely separate processor? I just assumed that running eye controlled AF and perhaps improved AF (happening faster - less time between frames, so even quicker processing required), plus the higher demand on power consumption (driving lens AF and aperture), as well as added heat reducing efficiency, all played a role in the 45x20=30x30 not quite adding up...

Doesn’t 45x20=30x30 assume that every single other detail is the same? Surely, with all the improvements Canon has added to the R3, it’s got to be doing a bit more behind the scenes, no?

The 1D X has two Digic 5+ processors for the imaging pipeline, and a Digic 4 to handle the AE algorithms. No reason the R3 would have to have only one.

 

[Loswr]

You’ve changed your context a bit... But, okay.

No, I haven’t. I was responding to the the claim that 24 MP was a technological limit, and it’s not.