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

DBounce

EOS RP
May 3, 2016
361
387
Well this camera just fell into the "wait and see" category for me. I'm not saying that I would not buy it. But with what is know as of this writing, it is about 30% less desirable to me. I really wish this was a high megapixel monster. I guess this sort of confirms that the R1 will be that beast. No more will the 1 series be a low MP sports shooter, it is destined to be a high megapixel flagship. Expect north of 45MP on the R1.
 

Czardoom

EOS RP
Jan 27, 2020
320
702
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
The number of MPs can vary greatly depending on what the camera's target market is. For sports, that number is low MPs because that is works best for that market. The Sony A9 is not cheap either and is 24 MP. So, apparently, the "industry competition" is indeed the benchmark, just as you state.
 
Aug 7, 2018
354
305
Just found a few more R3 images with full Exif data included. I'm shocked, he's using Aperture Priority. :oops:
I always use aperture priority. I think the photographer should choose the aperture, as it has a huge influence on the look of an image. Usually I set it to f/8 or f/11 if there is enough light and to the largest aperture, if light is limited.
 

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
504
494
I'm not buying it.

I'm not buying those numbers.
Hey, 6,000 by 4,000 makes 24,000,000 pixels, 24.000000 MP.
Anybody ever seen a camera with resolutions this "round"?

In a decimal world, 6000 and 4000 might make sense, but we're living in a digital world where those numbers are not good. In a digital world 6144 by 4096 would make sense, but not those decimally-round numbers.

No, I'm not buying it. This has got to be firmware-modified numbers.
80D, M5, M50, and a bunch of rebels are all 6000x40000, but based on the scaling in the R5, 6kx4k is also a likely resolution for an MJPEG from a 48 MP sensor and from a competitive perspective, that would be a good number, so waiting a bit longer before drawing conclusions from inconclusive data is probably wise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FrenchFry

Czardoom

EOS RP
Jan 27, 2020
320
702
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?
 

Daan Stam

EOS M6 Mark II
Apr 17, 2015
97
15
20
Netherlands
I would have expected a litle more to be honest. At the very least like 30. But i guess they could market this with extreme low light and high DR performance
 

Steve BXL

I'm New Here
Apr 14, 2021
9
0
Nobody asks himself how comes exifviewsers.com has already updated its software to include an unreleased camera avatar picture even before the camera official release?
 

rbr

EOS 90D
Sep 11, 2010
101
26
This will be a great camera for those who need it. For people wanting to crop heavily into shots taken with the 100-500 this probably isn't the best camera choice. Hopefully an R7 will come along before too long. For all around nature and wildlife photography that included landscapes and birds and everything in between. I could be an R5/R7 combination being a better choice if that ever happens.
 

frjmacias

EOS R5 and EOS M50
May 14, 2020
62
60
29
Monterey, California
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?
I cannot speak for anybody else, but for me personally, it is a combination of GAS and the ruggedness and ergonomics. I have larger hands, so I am always looking for ways to mitigate any discomfort with a tool I will have in my hands for a large part of a day. I was not expecting it to match the resolution, but 30 would have been nice. That said, I was not planning on replacing my R5. I was simply going to expand my camera body use. The R5 is an amazing camera as you mentioned.

Also, side note: Badass nametag. I just bought the new Record Store Day Czarface album/comic, but have not had a chance to play it yet.
 

Czardoom

EOS RP
Jan 27, 2020
320
702
Canon shouldn’t be messing by not disclosing the MP. I think it leads to disappointment in the end. They announced almost everything so must be concerned at the MP count. I could under stand if it were 50MP because it would be like a cherry on top. 24MP feels like a damp squid. The minimum possible was always going to be 20MP so it’s barely above that. It still feels like a 30MP camera to me. If it’s 24MP it’s putting a big “but” in every review. Sony would be delighted.
Yes Sony will be delighted because Sony is all about specs. Personally, I give Canon credit. They seem to be far more concerned about making cameras that work for photographers. With photographer input. No doubt, in today's world of internet forums and YouTube influencers, they will be ridiculed and mocked. But, luckily for photographers, they are not going to go Sony's route and care more about internet popularity than making quality cameras that are geared toward their target markets. Just my 2 cents having owned Sony, Nikon, and Canon cameras.

Keep in mind that Canon doesn't usually (or perhaps ever) announce the MPs until the official announcement. This only "messes" with rumor site participants and YouTube idiots who are too impatient to wait for a camera's actual release. Pretty sad they they are running the narrative.
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
6,327
3,877
68
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
So much denial here. Just let go and move through to acceptance. All this talk about manipulating the data or limiting the resolution strikes me as silly. The Olympics (even the disaster that the 2020/21 Olympics are) remains in the President's words, a big f'n deal.

Canon is not going to hand out crippled cameras to photographers and Getty is not going to agree to use crippled cameras. No one is violating an NDA by posting photos of this uber major sporting event.

If you are disappointed (I am too, but I'm working through it) that's okay. But let's stop with conspiracy theories. There are enough of those going around these days anyway.