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

Joules

doom
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2017
1,718
2,130
Hamburg, Germany
Whatever rocks your boat my friend.
Canon thought they were back on track with camera. Until Sony launched the A1. Then Canon decided to name this camera R3 instead of R1. Let’s hope for the masses that Canon can make an R1 this year. Or they will fall further and further behind.
So you think in such a short time span and so far into development they changed the card configuration from dual CFexpress (which you would expect for the R1, just like the 1DX III) for the CFexpress + SD configuration?

If this was supposed to be the R1, it makes no sense to call it anything else. Suppose the R3 started out as the R1 and Canon only changed the name. How does that benefit them? They would have given the appearance of creating a new line without actually doing so. Meaning people wanting a true R1 are expecting it to be released next year and people happy with the R3 will expect an R3 II in three to four years.

Canon can't rush a camera they hadn't scheduled before the A1 announced to market to compete in time for those that expect said competitor to launch next year. So they would reduce sales of the R3 by giving people the illusion a better camera is around the corner for no benefit.

And for the people who buy the R3, Canon would set them selves up for a rough time when conveying to those people that they'll be treated just like the people hanging on for an update of the 7D series or M5.

For what benefit? To look less embarrassing when compared to a body like the A1 - that sits in a completely different market segment anyway? Canon doesn't care about what YouTube and social media think of them. They care about money. Please explain how simply renaming the R1 to R3 would create a financial benefit for Canon.

Edit: Whoop! 800, here we go boiiis :LOL: Off to infinity and beyond!
 

bernie_king

EOS M6 Mark II
Jun 30, 2014
98
140
Whatever rocks your boat my friend.
Canon thought they were back on track with camera. Until Sony launched the A1. Then Canon decided to name this camera R3 instead of R1. Let’s hope for the masses that Canon can make an R1 this year. Or they will fall further and further behind.
I always chuckle when I see this assertion. Big companies don't work this way. The R3 has likely been in the works for YEARS, as has the R1. They surveyed the pros who work in this space to find out what they wanted. Considering Sony is still a minor player in this space (professional sports), I doubt that the A1 was any consideration at all. Also, anyone who thinks the A9 was a surprise has clearly never worked at a multi-national. They all know what the other one us up to long before the products make it to market. Sure, small features can change, but the overall product is well known. Canon has their targets for each product and build cameras/lenses for each. Besides, if anything was envisioned at Canon as being a competitor for the A1, it was likely the R5. The R5 can do almost everything the A1 can do for $2500 less. That is how Canon has always operated. They market cameras at similar performance levels using different price points. If anyone was surprised, it was likely Sony with the R5 (though I'm sure they weren't). I would expect a dev announcement on the R1 to come before the end of this year if not with the R3.
 
May 27, 2021
5
18
This is an interesting take on the market for the R3. I think there are plenty of legacy Canon DSLR users that haven't made the change to the RF mount because there is not a camera available yet that is right for them. I see the R3 as a camera to convice those users to upgrade to mirrorless.

People doing airshows/motorsport/fast action photography need a fast viewfinder, a responsive camera and 'enough' megapickles (24mp is enough) to capture details.

The R5 is good, but until they can replicate OVF type speed and usability then I and many others will not 'upgrade'...
 

reef58

EOS RP
CR Pro
Apr 16, 2016
421
409
North Carolina
youtu.be
Canon's research doesn't necessarily equate to what "most of us want"; a lot of folks SETTLE with what Canon options they have. Just because people are buying Canon cameras certainly doesn't mean those cameras are what they wanted. Sometimes good enough is...good enough.
If you suggest the competition has "better" cameras then why would people "settle" for inferior cameras?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Southstorm

tron

EOS R5
CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
4,961
1,315
My only complain about Canon (which I like since I have 5DMkIV, 5DsR, 90D and R5) is that they haven't made a high mpixel camera that drives the big whites fast using 11.1 v batteries (for birding purposes).
 

Flamingtree

EOS M6 Mark II
Dec 13, 2015
57
62
I always chuckle when I see this assertion. Big companies don't work this way. The R3 has likely been in the works for YEARS, as has the R1. They surveyed the pros who work in this space to find out what they wanted. Considering Sony is still a minor player in this space (professional sports), I doubt that the A1 was any consideration at all. Also, anyone who thinks the A9 was a surprise has clearly never worked at a multi-national. They all know what the other one us up to long before the products make it to market. Sure, small features can change, but the overall product is well known. Canon has their targets for each product and build cameras/lenses for each. Besides, if anything was envisioned at Canon as being a competitor for the A1, it was likely the R5. The R5 can do almost everything the A1 can do for $2500 less. That is how Canon has always operated. They market cameras at similar performance levels using different price points. If anyone was surprised, it was likely Sony with the R5 (though I'm sure they weren't). I would expect a dev announcement on the R1 to come before the end of this year if not with the R3.
Well said. I’m no pro sports photographer, but I can only imagine the hassle of dealing with high megapixel photos in bulk. I get sulky at my computer response to a measly 300 r5 photos, let alone 1,000s of them day after day.

As to competitor understanding, I work for a multinational too (not in products though) and we have a good understanding of what our competitors will offer and how it will play for us. They all know what the others are up to and how they will respond and try to maintain or grow margin. For canon I think it’s all lure with good bodies that are fit for purpose for the target market ( in this case sports pros / wildlife mainly) and make a killing on those tasty rf lenses.
 

TinTin

EOS M50
Sep 18, 2019
35
55
I'm amused to think that, not so long ago, "R3" was one of the names being used on these forums to mean Canon's much-anticipated high megapixel version of the R5.

The irony of it!

And if, by some strange quirk, the R3 does indeed turn out to be that high-megapixel "R3" (with a 24 Mpx resolution "trick") what a wondrous twist that would be. A real roller-coaster!
 
  • Like
Reactions: FrenchFry and Focus

tron

EOS R5
CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
4,961
1,315
Well said. I’m no pro sports photographer, but I can only imagine the hassle of dealing with high megapixel photos in bulk. I get sulky at my computer response to a measly 300 r5 photos, let alone 1,000s of them day after day.

As to competitor understanding, I work for a multinational too (not in products though) and we have a good understanding of what our competitors will offer and how it will play for us. They all know what the others are up to and how they will respond and try to maintain or grow margin. For canon I think it’s all lure with good bodies that are fit for purpose for the target market ( in this case sports pros / wildlife mainly) and make a killing on those tasty rf lenses.
I mainly shoot with D850 and R5 and my laptop behaves decently. No issues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sanj

TinTin

EOS M50
Sep 18, 2019
35
55
I cry crocodile tears for anyone who has to settle... By choosing between an R5 or R3 :)
Isn't that the very position Jeff Cable put himself into the other day at the Olympics, when visiting the equestrian jumping event:


So, given that he took a 1DXiii, 2 x R5 and an R3 body to the Olympics and the reference to the 100-500mm lens rules out the use of the 1DXiii, which did he choose: an R5 or the R3?
 
Aug 7, 2018
347
294
Will the R3 also restrict the frame rate if a third party lens is attached? I am quite shocked that Sony does that. That is clearly anticompetitive behaviour. I understand that autofocus does not work as smooth with a third party lens, but it could still do the maximum fps, even if the focus lags behind. Sony even resticts FPS in situations were you use wide open lens and the focus does not change at all. So the only reason seems to be forcing people to buy expensive Sony glass. If Canon does the same, the camera should not be marketed with 30 fps.
 

degos

EOS RP
Mar 20, 2015
420
354
Canon sells plenty 1DX mkiii’s at $6499 with 20mp. Why? In sports you don’t gain much from pushing in and a higher quality sensor with less pixels is demanded.

So how do you explain why they bought 1D Mark IV bodies that were equivalent to 27MP full-frame?
 

degos

EOS RP
Mar 20, 2015
420
354
Well said. I’m no pro sports photographer, but I can only imagine the hassle of dealing with high megapixel photos in bulk. I get sulky at my computer response to a measly 300 r5 photos, let alone 1,000s of them day after day.

My technique is to extract the JPEG thumbnail from the raw whilst copying over the RAW. Then you just have to flick through JPEGs until you find the RAW that you want to process.

So whether the RAW is 16 or 24 or 45 MP is irrelevant at the screening stage.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,578
3,913
Will the R3 also restrict the frame rate if a third party lens is attached? I am quite shocked that Sony does that. That is clearly anticompetitive behaviour. I understand that autofocus does not work as smooth with a third party lens, but it could still do the maximum fps, even if the focus lags behind. Sony even resticts FPS in situations were you use wide open lens and the focus does not change at all. So the only reason seems to be forcing people to buy expensive Sony glass. If Canon does the same, the camera should not be marketed with 30 fps.
Everything has caveats. They are indicated by a footnote somewhere in the spec or marketing materials. My 1D X shoots 12 fps* (*with a shutter speed of 1/1000 s or faster, an aperture setting not more than 4 stops narrower than the lens’ maximum aperture, and ISO 12,800 or lower). It’s still a 12 fps camera.

Guess what? Your car’s mileage will be lower than the manufacturer’s estimate, you’ll pay more in electricity costs for your refrigerator than the manufacture estimated, and even though your doctor may have said you’re healthy you could still die this year. Into each life a little rain must fall, learn to deal with it.

More importantly, you’re talking about 3rd party lens compatibility – why should Canon be under any obligation to ensure that?
 

FrenchFry

Wildlife enthusiast!
Jun 14, 2020
441
552
Isn't that the very position Jeff Cable put himself into the other day at the Olympics, when visiting the equestrian jumping event:



So, given that he took a 1DXiii, 2 x R5 and an R3 body to the Olympics and the reference to the 100-500mm lens rules out the use of the 1DXiii, which did he choose: an R5 or the R3?
The EXIF data shows that he brought the R3 for that event.
I stopped checking every image a few days ago, but until then he hadn't posted a single image from the 1DXiii.
The shots of his room and facilities and stuff are from an iPhone. Olympic sporting shots posted are about 90% R3 and 10% R5, with some events being 100% R3.
Seems pretty promising for the R3.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bahrd

SaP34US

EOS 90D
Aug 21, 2018
126
9
I am going to guess $5999 and $7499
What does the 1Dx Mk III cost? I would guess that when it comes the R1 will around what the 1Dx MkIII plus a little extra so my guess is the R3 will be between R1 to come and R5 in cost. It would cost somewhere between $3900 & $6500 US so maybe between around $4500-5400US.
 

bernie_king

EOS M6 Mark II
Jun 30, 2014
98
140
So how do you explain why they bought 1D Mark IV bodies that were equivalent to 27MP full-frame?
To be fair, the 1D Mark IV was a 1.3 crop, so a little less than 21mp. I miss the APS-H. Would've been cool if the R3 was APS-H.
 

Toglife_Anthony

Hit the G.A.S. & pump the brakes at the same time!
Apr 2, 2020
58
75
Just curious, what are people's thoughts on why Canon has stayed quiet on the sensor resolution? For those thinking Canon strategically chose 24MP, why not disclose that with the rest of the marketing? Do you think there's a reason they've kept this bit of information elusive?
 

Toglife_Anthony

Hit the G.A.S. & pump the brakes at the same time!
Apr 2, 2020
58
75
If you suggest the competition has "better" cameras then why would people "settle" for inferior cameras?
Is this a serious question? Because number one I didn't suggest anything, I made a statement that didn't need to be read into. Number two, just because a camera doesn't tick all the boxes doesn't make it inferior. And number three, someone invested in a brand and ecosystem isn't going to sell all their gear and jump ship solely because a competitor's camera has some features their brand camera doesn't. Again I ask, was this a serious question?! ;-)