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.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
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.Just found a few more R3 images with full Exif data included. I'm shocked, he's using Aperture Priority.
It is not that people can't wait...it is that the vast majority of forum users take rumors to be fact. That is the problem.How in the world can adult people not simply wait for the official announcement by Canon? Those shown EXIF data are kind of 'Kaffeesatz lesen'. and of not much or no use at all.
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.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.
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.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?
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.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.