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

[Joules]

Show me what you're referring to.

Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review

Expert news, reviews and videos of the latest digital cameras, lenses, accessories, and phones. Get answers to your questions in our photography forums.

www.dpreview.com

Can you tell what resolution those images are based on how the noise looks? I can't. It is only if you compare images at different viewing sizes (e.g. 100 %) that higher resolutions appear more noisy - but that is comparing apples to elefants. Noise in modern sensors is almost entirely due to natural photon shot noise in the light itself, so if you want to compare how well a given sensor does relative to another one, the image sections being compared must have the same amount of light, or in other words, the same area.

 

[tron]

At least for that lower res they had better keep it at 14bit irrespective of fps set.

 

[Ian K]

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?

Nobody noticed the picture attached to this thread then?

 

[Deleted member 381342]

Confirmed 24 MP makes this push a wee bit ahead of the 45MP+ Z9 in my opinion. But it is still going to depend on what the big boy lenses look like on both. Nikon seem to have all new 400 f/2.8 and 600 f/4.0 instead of 'old' lenses with built in adaptors.

 

[Fbimages]

20 Mpx are more than good enough for bird photography if you don't have to crop. The problem facing me is that just about always I have to crop and am very happy if the bird occupies an area of 4 Mpx on the sensor. We all have different requirements and I am pleased that the R3 suits those who find 24 Mpx enough as they deserve a camera that fits their requirements.

Have you tried the R5 at all? It's not as quick in terms of focus acquisition VS a 1DX iii but the focus is really sticky and you have plenty of pixels to play with. I was photographing puffins darting around the place and it was really good at latching their eyes, even at high speed. The only achilles' heel is low light, where my DSLR still outperforms the rest.

 

[David_D]

Some people on this forum appear to be surprised or even upset that others are disappointed the R3 looks like a 24mp camera. However, it is basic psychology, which manufacturers try to exploit. Everyone who is in the market for a new camera has an ideal product in mind. When Canon made the development announcement and dropped in their teasers, people latched onto the vague specs that fitted their ideal. Unfortunately, as vague specs harden up they will no longer match the ideal for some people, so they will be disappointed. (And, I am very happy for the people whose ideal these specs match.)

I am currently in the market for a new camera and am disappointed at the rumour. I stuck with film until DSLR technology offered a compelling advantage. For me, that was the 40D (at the time good resolution, AF, speed and price). I kept that for 8 years until I upgraded to the 7D MkII (another compelling advantage). I think moving to mirrorless will now be another compelling upgrade, so I am looking around. The grips never came off the 40D or 7D and having briefly borrowed (and loved – apart from the weight) a 1D camera, I hoped that might be my future. But lack of pixel density would be a problem for me, which weighed against it. I loved the 600mm/F4 I borrowed, but I could not justify the cost, as it would be frequently left at home as it is too heavy, so I’ll stick with a 100-400mm (or 100-500mm or 800/f11). Then the R3 announcement turned up with the potential to be ideal, which made me very excited Integrated grip, superb ergonomics, improved AF, improved (BSI) sensor, better battery=faster focussing etc. I shall wait for the confirmation and then start dreaming of the next ideal, an R7 (same body style as R3, but with crop 30mp+ sensor) or R1 (same body style as R3, but with FF 60mp+ sensor) and hope I can afford them if they appear. Meanwhile, I can still (and probably will this holiday season) buy an R5. (I know, I could switch to Nikon or Sony or ..., but in the 40 years I have owned [D]SLR cameras, Canon has consistently offered the best overall system even if they have not always offered the best camera. My purchases have a very long term outlook.)

 

[Chris.Chapterten]

I don’t think the difference between 24mp and 30mp really matters does it? I could understand the disappointment if the rumour was saying 50mp at first… but 6mp is nothing to worry about. No doubt the R3 will have better image quality than a 5DIV

 

[john1970]

Have you tried the R5 at all? It's not as quick in terms of focus acquisition VS a 1DX iii but the focus is really sticky and you have plenty of pixels to play with. I was photographing puffins darting around the place and it was really good at latching their eyes, even at high speed. The only achilles' heel is low light, where my DSLR still outperforms the rest.

You mention a good point. I really hope the R3 acquires focus more quickly than a R5 and outperforms the R5 in low-light scenarios.

 

[notsure]

The electronic shutter doesn’t drop below 20 fps with battery charge. I’ve used the 100-400mm II and 400mm DO II at 20 fps with the adapter. The RF 1.4x and 2x work on the RF 800mm f/11 and 600mm f/11 as well as the new RF 400/2.8 and 600/4 that are currently available and not only the 100-500mm.

The 400 2.8 and 600 4.0 are both just the EF III versions of those lenses with a built in aluminum EF-RF adapter, they didnt update focus motors.
If the lens FPS issues are a result of output voltage - great, the R3 will actually give people more shooting flexibility with both EF and RF glass, if it's a limitation imposed by older or slower focusing motors like it is in some cases, then the battery will not solve it. Lenses like 50 1.2's and 85 1.2's will still not be able to reach the 30fps.
This isn't even criticism of canon, i'm just saying that the advertised feature will not be available in many scenarios due to technical limitations

 

[AlanF]

Have you tried the R5 at all? It's not as quick in terms of focus acquisition VS a 1DX iii but the focus is really sticky and you have plenty of pixels to play with. I was photographing puffins darting around the place and it was really good at latching their eyes, even at high speed. The only achilles' heel is low light, where my DSLR still outperforms the rest.

Have I tried! I've posted hundreds from the R5 + 100-500mm etc in the Bird Portraits, BIF and Dragonflies threads etc. It's a fantastic camera. Look at this: https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/t...rf-100-500mm-for-dragonflies-in-flight.40622/

 

[Tremotino]

And with "resolution trick" we get clean lightweight 6MP images

 

[[email protected]]

Roma locuta, causa finita...

Seems good specs to me

 

[AlanF]

The 400 2.8 and 600 4.0 are both just the EF III versions of those lenses with a built in aluminum EF-RF adapter, they didnt update focus motors

That's beside the point. You wrote the only RF telephoto was the RF 100-500, and that was the only telephoto the RF extenders fitted - you missed out the RF 600mm f/11, 800mm f/11, as well as the the new RF 400mm f/2.8 and 600mm f/4. Canon have stated they haven't changed the optical construction of those big whites but we don't know what they have with done with the AF with the new mount, and we don't know that they can't keep up with 30 fps even they didn't change the AF system.

EDIT: you added more to your post after I had posted my reply.

 

[Fbimages]

Have I tried! I've posted hundreds from the R5 + 100-500mm etc in the Bird Portraits, BIF and Dragonflies threads etc. It's a fantastic camera. Look at this: https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/t...rf-100-500mm-for-dragonflies-in-flight.40622/

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

 

[scyrene]

No lens can handle 30 fps at f/22. Probably every lens can handle it wide open. How far you can stop down without impacting frame rate will depend on the specific lens.

A 600 or 800 f/11 + 2x TC is f/22 and wide open

 

[scyrene]

After my second "flagship" camera was broken at still quite a small shutter count, I lost my trust in the durability of those flagship cameras. My 1D Mark II had a broken shutter after less than 9000 photos. Fortunately it was still under warranty and I did not have to pay for the repair. However the 1D X broke after about 60,000 photos. The PCB had to be replaced and I had to pay more than 600 Euros for the repair. That may not be a lot compared to the price of the camera, but I did not expect that the PCB will brake before that shutter will brake. It is just electronics. I hardly ever used burst mode, as I did not want to waste too many of the expected 400,000 shutter releases. Having a broken camera after 60,000 shots was quite shocking for me. I googled the problem and found out that many people had to replace the PCB of the 1D X after a while. That is not something you should expect from such an expensive camera. Will those problems get even worse with mirrorless cameras, which contain even more electronics and even need electronics just to compose the photo?

As an enthusiast I want to collect my cameras for eternity. They still should work in decades from now, as today decades old cameras still work. Is that no longer the case for modern cameras? Can we expect an R3 to break after five or ten years? That would very much discourage me from paying thousands of Euros for a camera again.

How long are you expecting to live??

 

[mdcmdcmdc]

Canon is selling about as many ILCs as Sony and Nikon combined, and Fuji is barely a blip in the global market (but they sell tons of Instax cameras). You don’t seem to grasp who’s lunch is being eaten by whom.

It’s ok if you don’t like the R3, Canon doesn’t care, and it’s not likely you were going to buy one anyway.

The point is that Canon is letting Sony and Fuji walk away with a market that Canon created and once dominated. And it's not because the others outmaneuvered them, Canon simply gave up on it.

I don't believe I said anything about the R3 specifically in this thread, but you're right, at this point it's not a package that appeals to me. What is interesting is that 24MP, if true, indicates that Canon isn't being drawn into another pitched megapixel war.

 

[sanj]

Some people on this forum appear to be surprised or even upset that others are disappointed the R3 looks like a 24mp camera. However, it is basic psychology, which manufacturers try to exploit. Everyone who is in the market for a new camera has an ideal product in mind. When Canon made the development announcement and dropped in their teasers, people latched onto the vague specs that fitted their ideal. Unfortunately, as vague specs harden up they will no longer match the ideal for some people, so they will be disappointed. (And, I am very happy for the people whose ideal these specs match.)

I am currently in the market for a new camera and am disappointed at the rumour. I stuck with film until DSLR technology offered a compelling advantage. For me, that was the 40D (at the time good resolution, AF, speed and price). I kept that for 8 years until I upgraded to the 7D MkII (another compelling advantage). I think moving to mirrorless will now be another compelling upgrade, so I am looking around. The grips never came off the 40D or 7D and having briefly borrowed (and loved – apart from the weight) a 1D camera, I hoped that might be my future. But lack of pixel density would be a problem for me, which weighed against it. I loved the 600mm/F4 I borrowed, but I could not justify the cost, as it would be frequently left at home as it is too heavy, so I’ll stick with a 100-400mm (or 100-500mm or 800/f11). Then the R3 announcement turned up with the potential to be ideal, which made me very excited Integrated grip, superb ergonomics, improved AF, improved (BSI) sensor, better battery=faster focussing etc. I shall wait for the confirmation and then start dreaming of the next ideal, an R7 (same body style as R3, but with crop 30mp+ sensor) or R1 (same body style as R3, but with FF 60mp+ sensor) and hope I can afford them if they appear. Meanwhile, I can still (and probably will this holiday season) buy an R5. (I know, I could switch to Nikon or Sony or ..., but in the 40 years I have owned [D]SLR cameras, Canon has consistently offered the best overall system even if they have not always offered the best camera. My purchases have a very long term outlook.)

Sir, I urge you to get the R5. It will be a leap beyond imagination from 7D. You would be doing yourself a massive favour.

 

[David_D]

Sir, I urge you to get the R5. It will be a leap beyond imagination from 7D. You would be doing yourself a massive favour.

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.

 

[Ozarker]

In my opinion this camera is not for someone currently shooting with a 1DX 1DXMKII or 1DXMKIII as a professional to transition your kit from EF to RF at a $50K to $80K+ investment.

1. The loss of OVF
2. Two Different Format Cards
3. No significant jump in resolution
4. Transition to RF Glass

These four factors will make us wait until the R1 is released. Also 30fps is no inducement we know all that is required is 15fps RAW for stills for any sport.

This does leave one to wonder if Canon will double the resolution of the 1DXMKIII for the R1. We are seeing people shoot sports with the Fuji GFX100s and the work is amazing, stunning, beautiful, sharp, crisp with exceptional detail and resolution.

I'd imagine the transition would be body only for sports photogs at first. It isn't the $50k-$80k cataclysm you suggest. Lenses will be replaced just as they would have if the mount had stayed EF. So, in my opinion, things didn't get exponentially more expensive. EF lenses work on the RF bodies.