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

emailfortom

Full time sports shooter
CR Pro
Mar 17, 2014
30
15
East Coast US
Good question. A quick internet search seems (I could be wrong) to show that he is not an Explorer of Light, but that he shoots for Team USA and has a sponsorship agreement with Canon. Looks like Getty Images also picks up his photos. Perhaps he was tasked by Canon to blog about his Olympic experience and promote the R3. I think it is highly unlikely that he would have violated any non-disclosure agreement and that Canon either knew or didn't care that people would be able to discern the resolution from his photos. I would expect that many of his photos will be showing up in promotional materials when Canon announces the R3.

As to why other photographers EXIF data is not showing up, I have no idea. Maybe everyone else was using 1Dx IIIs? :)
I can not believe that Jeff was the only shooter at the Olympics using the R3. AND... if we are to believe that the R3 will be released in September... then many of the EOL's had to have the camera in their hands for at least two to three weeks before the games in order to prepare to shoot with it. I just think all of the "resolution hoopla", which is generated from a single source, smells fishy. Of course Canon's marketing is mute on the subject and will not support or refute claims about Jeff's EXIF data prior to the proposed September announcement. Lastly, regarding other shooters using their 1Dx lll's - I would bet that many kept their 1Dx's close by... in their bags.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

unfocused

Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
Jul 20, 2010
7,184
5,483
70
Springfield, IL
www.thecuriouseye.com
I can not believe that Jeff was the only shooter at the Olympics using the R3. AND... if we are to believe that the R3 will be released in September... then many of the EOL's had to have the camera in their hands for at least two to three weeks before the games in order to prepare to shoot with it. I just think all of the "resolution hoopla", which is generated from a single source, smells fishy. Of course Canon's marketing is mute on the subject and will not support or refute claims about Jeff's EXIF data prior to the proposed September announcement. Lastly, regarding other shooters using their 1Dx lll's - I would bet that many kept their 1Dx's close by... in their bags.
All good questions. I am not computer literate enough to know if EXIF data is readily available from any random photo on the internet and how much work is involved in extracting that data from published photos. On the other hand, it would seem likely that just through random conversations with people shooting the Olympics, that there would be more confirmation of the resolution. There were tons of R3s available from the photos, so presumable lots and lots of photographers tried them out and know what the resolution of the pictures they took were. Maybe no one has bothered to ask anyone else? Maybe as a condition of borrowing an R3 you agreed not to talk to anyone about it. I don't know. I'm not a believer in conspiracy theories though, so I'm inclined to think that what has been leaked is accurate. In a few weeks, everyone will know.
 
Upvote 0

Hector1970

CR Pro
Mar 22, 2012
1,554
1,162
So of course, Canon must make a camera for those sub-niches. They simply must. A professional-type body. The R5 need not apply.
Canon will make a professional type body 45-50MP camera and its likely (but unconfirmed) to be the R1. That category is not that niche. Sony and Nikon are not treating it a sub niche group. The birder is often the landscape and portrait photographer too. They are Flagship models showing the best they can do and there is a good market for that and it helps sell their other models. The 1 series has always been important to Canon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

emailfortom

Full time sports shooter
CR Pro
Mar 17, 2014
30
15
East Coast US
All good questions. I am not computer literate enough to know if EXIF data is readily available from any random photo on the internet and how much work is involved in extracting that data from published photos. On the other hand, it would seem likely that just through random conversations with people shooting the Olympics, that there would be more confirmation of the resolution. There were tons of R3s available from the photos, so presumable lots and lots of photographers tried them out and know what the resolution of the pictures they took were. Maybe no one has bothered to ask anyone else? Maybe as a condition of borrowing an R3 you agreed not to talk to anyone about it. I don't know. I'm not a believer in conspiracy theories though, so I'm inclined to think that what has been leaked is accurate. In a few weeks, everyone will know.
I promise to make this my last reply... and like you I too am not a believer in conspiracy theories... yet I am also inclined to disregard "single source" statements especially when given the volume of attention Jeff's image has garnered. And as you say, " In a few weeks, everyone will know"
 
Upvote 0

tapanit

.
CR Pro
Jul 17, 2012
141
75
All good questions. I am not computer literate enough to know if EXIF data is readily available from any random photo on the internet and how much work is involved in extracting that data from published photos. On the other hand, it would seem likely that just through random conversations with people shooting the Olympics, that there would be more confirmation of the resolution. There were tons of R3s available from the photos, so presumable lots and lots of photographers tried them out and know what the resolution of the pictures they took were. Maybe no one has bothered to ask anyone else? Maybe as a condition of borrowing an R3 you agreed not to talk to anyone about it. I don't know. I'm not a believer in conspiracy theories though, so I'm inclined to think that what has been leaked is accurate. In a few weeks, everyone will know.
Extracting exif data from a downloaded photo is very easy, if it hasn't been scrubbed away. Some photos may, however, be published in such a way that downloading will remove the exif data, and it appears to be the case with the images in question: only some bug in the process allows a Chrome plugin see it anyway. Unfortunately it only shows a limited subset of exif data, and it's not impossible that the data it shows is inaccurate or incorrect in some cases. So there's still some room for speculation that it's not 24Mp after all. Not exactly likely IMHO, but likelier than Qanything things some people believe in so... :cool:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0

FrenchFry

Wildlife enthusiast!
Jun 14, 2020
484
603
Looks like Glenn and Jan aren't too enticed by 24MP for birds, but awaiting full specs to be released, just like the rest of us! I'd love to see them get R3s to test out, as their content is a lot more relevant to me than Peter McKinnon's as someone interested in nature and wildlife photography.

This was probably posted already, but if it was, I missed it, and others may have too.
 
Upvote 0

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
1,998
2,438
UK
How many sports shooters shot RAW?

Not many I'd guess.

So if almost everyone is shooting JPEGs, the buffer at maximum burst speed would be limitless, even with a 45MP sensor.

Canon's decision to limit the sensor to 24MP (if true) can only be a product differentiation tactic designed to make people crave for the R1.

I can see no major reason why Canon couldn't have fitted a 45MP sensor, and allowed users to select a lower resolution for the occasions when they shoot RAW and need a massive buffer. It would have made the R3 a more versatile camera. If it truly is limited to a maximum of 24MP, it will be far less appealing to bird and animal photographers who need to crop.
 
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,099
12,863
Canon's decision to limit the sensor to 24MP (if true) can only be a product differentiation tactic designed to make people crave for the R1.

I can see no major reason why Canon couldn't have fitted a 45MP sensor, and allowed users to select a lower resolution for the occasions when they shoot RAW and need a massive buffer. It would have made the R3 a more versatile camera. If it truly is limited to a maximum of 24MP, it will be far less appealing to bird and animal photographers who need to crop.
By your logic, there’s no reason Canon couldn’t have fitted a 50 MP sensor (the 5Ds/R launched just before the 1D X II) into the 1D X III.

When they limited the 1D X III to 20 MP, that must only have been done as a product differentiation tactic to make people crave the _________. (Since this is your logic, you should have no trouble filling in that blank for us.)
 
Upvote 0

unfocused

Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
Jul 20, 2010
7,184
5,483
70
Springfield, IL
www.thecuriouseye.com
How many sports shooters shot RAW?

Not many I'd guess.
At least one. I can process an image faster and better in Adobe Camera Raw than I can in Photoshop and I never have to worry about color balance when shooting indoor sports, as I can adjust it easily in raw.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

unfocused

Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
Jul 20, 2010
7,184
5,483
70
Springfield, IL
www.thecuriouseye.com
If it truly is limited to a maximum of 24MP, it will be far less appealing to bird and animal photographers who need to crop.
I'm not sure Canon cares. Canon may figure they already have that group covered with the R5, which many reviewers have said is the best bird and wildlife camera ever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
4,722
2,655
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.

Do they, though?

Unofficial reports have been that the 1D X III sold far fewer copies than the 1D Mark II did in the year following each's respective introduction, and by many accounts the 1D X Mark II also had lower sales numbers than the 1D X.

As most high profile sports shooters have transitioned from staff positions with company provided equipment to freelancers being paid less to provide their own equipment, the replacement cycle among pro sports shooters has slowed decidedly. Even the staffers don't always get the most up-to-date gear. My friend who is the entire photography staff at the Tuscaloosa News (a Gannett owned publication), where his main sports activity is covering University of Alabama sports, particularly Alabama football not only for the local paper but also for all other Gannett publications, is still shooting with a 1D X (2012) and an EF 400mm f/2.8 IS the T-town News bought shortly after it was introduced in 1999.
 
Upvote 0

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
4,722
2,655
There's lens serial number. If the lens was provided by Canon or registered with Canon...

However there's another interesting detail - it looks like the R3 may have a GPS.

Every Canon body also puts the body serial number in the maker notes section of the EXIF. Adobe products just ignore most of the maker note section, and strip it when one uses the Adobe DNG convertor or exports an image from any Adobe product.
 
Upvote 0

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
4,722
2,655
The EOS-1D X Mark II has two card slots, one each for CF and for CFast 2.0.

Most digital 1-Series bodies that have/had two card slots had dissimilar card slots.

Only the 1D X Mark III (CFExpress) and the 1D X (CF) had two matching card slots.

The 1D Mark II, 1D Mark III, 1D Mark IV, 1Ds Mark II, and 1Ds Mark III all had one faster CF card slot and one slower SD card slot.

The 1D and 1Ds only had single CF card slots.
 
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,099
12,863
Most digital 1-Series bodies that have/had two card slots had dissimilar card slots.

Only the 1D X Mark III (CFExpress) and the 1D X (CF) had two matching card slots.

The 1D Mark II, 1D Mark III, 1D Mark IV, 1Ds Mark II, and 1Ds Mark III all had one faster CF card slot and one slower SD card slot.

The 1D and 1Ds only had single CF card slots.
Yes, and water is wet. Thanks.
 
Upvote 0

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
4,722
2,655
what a pity for birders. I´ll stay with my R5...

But what is following? R1 with 20MPix, as professionals do not need more?
I hope for an high MPix R5 or R3 for birders.

I've been saying for a while that most folks got it backwards.

The R3 is the lower resolution sports camera ala the original 1D series.
The R1 will be the higher resolution studio/landscape camera ala the original 1Ds series.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
4,722
2,655
I have three bodies. For most of my work, I carried the 5D and R. When shooting sports, it was the 1d and the 5D. With three bodies I need two bags since some days I'll be shooting with the 5D and R during the day and then switching to the 1D and 5D for sports in the afternoon or evening. There are features of the R that I prefer for shooting events (mostly the thumb control focus). But the R sucks for sports.

It's a pain in the butt to lug everything around and switch lens systems back and forth. I now have the R5 and could get by with that and the R for non-sports shooting, but I still need the 1D for sports. So, for me, the idea of an R3 that would allow me to dump both the 1D and the R and get back to only carrying two bodies and one set of lenses is very appealing. I've gotten spoiled by the 45mp of the R5 and the 30mp of the R, so I was hoping for a little higher resolution in the R3. Still, as I said I'm coming to grips with the lower resolution which will still be higher than the 1D. I realize I'm a unique case, but you asked.

I'm in a similar place even though I'm still using only EF bodies and lenses. For outdoor events/whatever in daylight and sports even under lights or in gyms I tend to use a 7D Mark II with the 70-200/2.8 and the 5D Mark IV with a 24-105/4 or 24-70/2.8. Indoors or at night for anything other than sports I switch to using the 5D Mark IV as my "long" body and a 5D Mark III as my "wide" body. Depending upon just how dark, the long lens will be the 70-200/2.8 or a 135/2. Wider lenses will be the 24-70/2.8 or 35/2, 50/1.4, 851.8 primes.

So if I shoot an outdoor event in the afternoon and then shoot an indoor concert in the evening I have to take the 5D Mark III out of my second bag and put either the 24-70/2.8 (possibly from the 5D Mark IV) or a prime out of my main bag on it (and another prime in a cargo pocket) and then put the 70-200/2.8 or 135/2 on the 5D Mark IV and move the 7D Mark II body along with the 24-105/4 if that was on the 5D Mark IV, to the second bag.

All of this is usually done while stooping over and leaning into my car's trunk while praying no potential thieves see what I'm doing and want what I leave behind.
 
Upvote 0

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
4,722
2,655
Is it possible that Canon has sent out R3 bodies with different MP's in them!. So the "testers" at the Olympics to try out and report back ?

Hence why they haven't disclosed what it is yet!!

Remember that is an exif data from just 1 camera out of xxxx!

I've been wondering whether or not it's possible that Canon is testing 2 different sensors. That would also explain why they've been so secretive about the sensor resolution.

They have field tested pre-production bodies with different resolutions before, but that was much earlier in the development stages of those cameras and not used at high profile events like the Olympics. If they were still deciding sensor resolution then it will be late next year at the earliest before it would be available, not this fall as expected.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0