The Canon EOS R3 will be $5999 USD

tiggy@mac.com

R5
CR Pro
Jan 20, 2014
711
605
Thetford, VT
www.camnostic.com
"We still consider the EOS-1D X Mark III to be our flagship professional camera due to its extreme reliability and confidence it delivers in the hands of professionals. However, it is true that the EOS R3 exceeds the EOS-1D X Mark III in some specifications, to the extent which, by the conventional definition, you could consider it a flagship camera."

- Go Tokura, Chief Executive, Image Communication Business Operations at Canon (interview on DPR website.)

So it is, and isn't a flagship camera. :)

There is a small subset of people who care if their body is a "flagship." It would be illogical for Canon to tell people for whom the R3 is inappropriate that their 1D III isn't the flagship still. That subset of people tend to be the more macho crowd, which includes a higher percent of sports and PJ togs. The word/status issue isn't a fruitful discussion except where it suggests some insight into future body development. On that front, I find it confusing, as this non-1-series body is occupying the sports/pj, low-res slot. The only way I can make sense of this hierarchy in relation to future body developments is to assume that the R3 is actually supposed to be the wedding body (for which this is perfect), and that there will be a 1 series sports/pj update in a couple years, which will frustrate the bejeazus out of people with another low-ish resolution sensor.

Meanwhile the 5 series will continue to be the 5 series, all-rounder and studio shooter, with a higher-res update on roughly a 4 year refresh schedule. It turns out that the 5DSR was a one-off. I think we can safely call that one. This means that it is less likely we'll see a mirrorless equivalent of it. The 80-120 mp range gives significantly less incremental value versus the 5DSR's jump from the 20's to the 50s. This is a prediction I hope is incorrect, as I'm among the minority who could use 80 mp (reach limited wildlife and macro).

If you step back, you may recall that the flagship or best body in a lineup is going to be different to different people and use cases. The studio/all-rounder user base of the R5 aren't overly-exercised about their camera attaining this flagship status. Which is exactly why it makes sense for a brand give that flagship label to the camera used by the group most insecure about their masculinity.

Notably, I believe the R3 was actually designed ergonomically for women. I believe this gender thing is going to play out in an interesting way, and the R3 becoming known as a feminine product is undesirable to Canon; thus the sports emphasis in messaging.

The R3 is going to (functionally) be the flagship for a couple years until the R1 comes out. Neuro, unfortunately, is right on the inexorable schedule of Canon. The company comes out with some tech innovations on occasion, but much more rarely moves up a schedule.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,588
3,930
It was only with the 1DX series that the 'explanation' that 'pros don't need resolution' arose.
Yet somehow, after the 1D X at 18 MP came the 1D X II at 20 MP and then the 1D X III at 20 MP. Were those pros duped? I think it’s far more likely that the target market —sports photographers and photojournalists— wants more moderate resolution. For those pros needing more, there is the 5-series.
 

JohnC

EOS RP
CR Pro
Sep 22, 2019
204
217
Gainesville,GA
Canon is accelerating it ,
Higher price , heavier lens/ smaller aperture, close mount algorithm ( much fewer 3rd lens than Sony) , etc.....................
actually, both AP and PA switch to sony ............
Sure. Let's revisit the topic in 12-24 months and see how much further they have deteriorated in the industry. Canon has been watching the forest a lot longer than any of us have been caught up with a specific tree.
 
  • Like
Reactions: unfocused

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,588
3,930
I wonder how it is with Switzerland. They "only" have 7.7% VAT and it is not very hard to "smuggle" things to Germany. You can just walk across the border. And if that does npt work, you can walk to France and from there to Germany. That is very easy in Basel, Switzeland, as those three countries meet there. However Switzerland is very rich and everything usually is more expensive there. I am not sure about cameras.
I can’t speak for cameras specifically, but many people I know in Basel frequently shop in Germany for the lower prices. When I was in Basel, on weekends the #8 tram coming back from Weil am Rhein (just over the border) was full of people carrying bags and parcels. There is (was?) a small camera shop just off the Marktplatz in Basel, carried a lot of Leica gear and some Canon, their prices were pretty high.

Here's a shot of the Dreiländerbrücke, the Three Country Bridge - Basel, Switzerland is the left shore; Huningue, France is at the end of the bridge; I took the picture from Weil am Rhein, Germany.
Dreiländerbrücke.jpg

EOS 1D X, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM @ 28mm, 30 s, f/11, ISO 200
 
Aug 7, 2018
347
294
I can’t speak for cameras specifically, but many people I know in Basel frequently shop in Germany for the lower prices. When I was in Basel, on weekends the #8 tram coming back from Weil am Rhein (just over the border) was full of people carrying bags and parcels. There is (was?) a small camera shop just off the Marktplatz in Basel, carried a lot of Leica gear and some Canon, their prices were pretty high.

Here's a shot of the Dreiländerbrücke, the Three Country Bridge - Basel, Switzerland is the left shore; Huningue, France is at the end of the bridge; I took the picture from Weil am Rhein, Germany.
View attachment 200150
EOS 1D X, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM @ 28mm, 30 s, f/11, ISO 200
Nice to see that I am not the only one who still uses a 1D X. I think this camera would still be great in twenty years. The only thing I will is the IBIS. Imagine how great it would be to take such a photo handheld and still use ISO 100 or 200 with eight stops of IBIS! Of course that would not work at f/11, but anyway.

Even burgers at McDonald's are more expensive in Switzerland.

I never walked across thazt bridge, but took the long "Elsässerstraße" from Switzerland to France. There were some buildings at the border, but nobody was in there. So I could have smuggeled anything across the border.

I will take a close look at the prices in Singapore. There tourists do not have to pay any VAT. They have to pay it at the sore, but they will get it back at the airport and they told me they will NOT report that to the local authorities of the home country.

I remember that in China Sony cameras were much cheaper than in Europe. They offered the A9 for 35,000 Yuan in the Sony Store. That was below €4,600, while in Europe the camera was €5,300. That's already a €700 difference. For an R3 it would make a €800 difference, if same 13.2% price difference is true. Those €800 are enough for a flight to Shanghai. I can't thiink of a better place to test a new camera.

Just out of curiosity I checked how much the A9 costs today, four and a half years after its release. The price has fallen to €3,000. That's 43% price drop. Of course waiting four years is not possible for everybody, but I suspect that the R3 price will already drop below €5,000 within the first year. Waiting might pay off.
 

MiJax

EOS M6 Mark II
Mar 30, 2016
55
57
California
www.flickr.com
Yet somehow, after the 1D X at 18 MP came the 1D X II at 20 MP and then the 1D X III at 20 MP. Were those pros duped? I think it’s far more likely that the target market —sports photographers and photojournalists— wants more moderate resolution. For those pros needing more, there is the 5-series.
The 1DX was actually one of the highest resolution cameras of its time. However the Mark II and III bodies were a little bit lagging, especially the III. I say the III is especially compromised because it is effective the same gen as the R5/R6. Being the same gen, using the same processing, we know higher resolution was easily attainable with the same speeds. Also, I'd argue Canon sells more of these bodies to non-sports and PJs, meaning even though the sports and Pj crew is the intended audience, they are leaving money on the table.

Incidentally, I'd bet the sports and Pjs folks wouldn't mind a 12MP body, so that tells you how where their needs put them. Not to mention, the low MP counts are normally further manipulated by the intended audience almost exclusively shooting jpeg. So they get a 20MP file and shrink it down to 6-8MP immediately, to make the files easier and quicker to deal with in post (in which they aren't allowed to play with the DR anyway, so jpeg does make sense). However, its clear that their desires are not even close to what the market wants.

Long story story, the flagship body has made massive resolution compromises for nothing, for nearly 10 years. I do understand there is a slight difference in say... a 20 MP body's noise handling and a 40MP body downsized to 20MP, but its not massive. Sony and Nikon have effectively moved on from this thinking, I'm curious to see how long Canon will hold on to it.
 

FrenchFry

Wildlife enthusiast!
Jun 14, 2020
442
553
Nice to see that I am not the only one who still uses a 1D X. I think this camera would still be great in twenty years. The only thing I will is the IBIS. Imagine how great it would be to take such a photo handheld and still use ISO 100 or 200 with eight stops of IBIS! Of course that would not work at f/11, but anyway.

Even burgers at McDonald's are more expensive in Switzerland.

I never walked across thazt bridge, but took the long "Elsässerstraße" from Switzerland to France. There were some buildings at the border, but nobody was in there. So I could have smuggeled anything across the border.

I will take a close look at the prices in Singapore. There tourists do not have to pay any VAT. They have to pay it at the sore, but they will get it back at the airport and they told me they will NOT report that to the local authorities of the home country.

I remember that in China Sony cameras were much cheaper than in Europe. They offered the A9 for 35,000 Yuan in the Sony Store. That was below €4,600, while in Europe the camera was €5,300. That's already a €700 difference. For an R3 it would make a €800 difference, if same 13.2% price difference is true. Those €800 are enough for a flight to Shanghai. I can't thiink of a better place to test a new camera.

Just out of curiosity I checked how much the A9 costs today, four and a half years after its release. The price has fallen to €3,000. That's 43% price drop. Of course waiting four years is not possible for everybody, but I suspect that the R3 price will already drop below €5,000 within the first year. Waiting might pay off.
Sure, with electronics waiting almost always reduces the amount that you will spend.
But if you need the R3 too take photos now, the opportunity cost of waiting may outweigh any savings.
Anyone who is fine with waiting a few years before getting the R3 will definitely spend more money but they probably also don't really need the R3 right now if they can wait that long.
 
Aug 7, 2018
347
294
I still prefer a lower resolution, because I need some kind of sharpness target I can always achieve. With a lower resolution image defects become visible much later. I can handhold the camera longer, shake the camera more, miss the focus more, I can use a higher f-stop before diffraction is visible and my depth of field looks longer, if my resolution is lower. Of course with a higher resolution I can get much sharper photos, but if the circumstances are not optimal, that higher resolution shows all the flaws in my image much clearer and I hate that. It is the same reason why you probably should not use a very high resolution for a portrait of a woman, because she will hate that every wrinkle is visible and then you have to soften that image in Photoshop anyway.

Getting 20 megapixels or even 24 sharp without a tripod at night can already be enough of a challenge. A high resolution body would be a nice second body to have for certain situations. If money and weight were not as issue, I would probably use a low resolution camera as my main body and have a Fuji GFX 100S as a second body for certain situations that would benefit from a high resolution.

By the way, didn't Canon mention some magic trick about the resolution for the R3? It might have a pixel shift that REALLY works and gives people a 96 megapixel photo even without a tripod. The IBIS could be a key to that. That kind of trick would satisfy all of us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FrenchFry
Can't wait to see the reviews of this new camera. Canon's first stacked sensor camera in a big bulky body that a lot of people seem to like. I have a feeling that this will be just as much an upgrade from the 1DX for most photographers as the R5 was for many to the 5D IV (and to me from the 5DS). Electronic shutter with fast memory to pull the shot without much rolling shutter is one of the few things I would like to see come to the smaller bodies soon. The Sony A1 currently can do everything I would want but is much too expensive for me to justify at the moment, the R3 is also and I wouldn't go back to the massive body or back in resolution as even with 500-1000mm I still need to crop significantly on many wildlife and bird shots. The technology will come down to the $3500-4000 cameras in a few years just like the higher resolution with 10 fps and amazing autofocus have now made it to the cameras I now use (R5 and A7RIV).

Eye autofocus is going to be an interesting feature to see in these new generation cameras. I still have my ELAN 7NE and it would be fun to compare to it.

In any case I have a feeling that anyone that is looking to get a new 1D "like" camera (and isn't dead against mirrorless) is going to be pretty happy with the R3.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FrenchFry

FrenchFry

Wildlife enthusiast!
Jun 14, 2020
442
553
I still prefer a lower resolution, because I need some kind of sharpness target I can always achieve. With a lower resolution image defects become visible much later. I can handhold the camera longer, shake the camera more, miss the focus more, I can use a higher f-stop before diffraction is visible and my depth of field looks longer, if my resolution is lower. Of course with a higher resolution I can get much sharper photos, but if the circumstances are not optimal, that higher resolution shows all the flaws in my image much clearer and I hate that. It is the same reason why you probably should not use a very high resolution for a portrait of a woman, because she will hate that every wrinkle is visible and then you have to soften that image in Photoshop anyway.

Getting 20 megapixels or even 24 sharp without a tripod at night can already be enough of a challenge. A high resolution body would be a nice second body to have for certain situations. If money and weight were not as issue, I would probably use a low resolution camera as my main body and have a Fuji GFX 100S as a second body for certain situations that would benefit from a high resolution.

By the way, didn't Canon mention some magic trick about the resolution for the R3? It might have a pixel shift that REALLY works and gives people a 96 megapixel photo even without a tripod. The IBIS could be a key to that. That kind of trick would satisfy all of us.
Pixel shift only works when the subject is completely still. Since this body is marketed as a high-speed sports and action body, none of the subjects that this body is targeted for (racing cars, flying balls, hummingbirds) would be viable candidates for pixel shift shots.

Yes, pixel shift would be a great addition to the camera for landscapes, but unfortunately it's unlikely to add any benefit to sports shooting, and so it would not satisfy the sports shooters that purchased the camera for fast action. Unless Canon has figured out a way to do pixel shift that overcomes the limitations of pixel shift as implemented by other brands. This would be a great surprise!
 
Aug 7, 2018
347
294
Pixel shift only works when the subject is completely still. Since this body is marketed as a high-speed sports and action body, none of the subjects that this body is targeted for (racing cars, flying balls, hummingbirds) would be viable candidates for pixel shift shots.

Yes, pixel shift would be a great addition to the camera for landscapes, but unfortunately it's unlikely to add any benefit to sports shooting, and so it would not satisfy the sports shooters that purchased the camera for fast action. Unless Canon has figured out a way to do pixel shift that overcomes the limitations of pixel shift as implemented by other brands. This would be a great surprise!
A high frame rate though in combination with IBIS can make pixel shift possible at least with (almost) still subjects and that would be a dream for portrait or product shooters.

I wonder if Canon will also use that high frame rate for a great handheld HDR. At my DSLR I only have exposure bracketing that takes the same image three (or five or seven) times with different shutter speeds. That is quite a waste though. If you have already caught the light for the shortest exposure, you could reuse that light and add some more to get a longer exposure and so on, That works even better if IBIS and a fast frame rate make sure that the framing does not change between the shots.

What I would really like to see in future is the ability to program a few different camera settings and then I press the shutter once and the camera uses its high frame rate to take all those shots in a fraction of a second without even making any sound, because it uses electronic shutter. For example take the same photo at ISO 100, 200, 400, 800 and 1600 (of course with the right shutter speed for every ISO value) with a single click on a shutter. So instead of using your burst mode to find the right frame, you use it to find the right ISO, f-stop or whatever. That would save me a lot of time. With my skyscraper shots, I often do the same shots it ISO 400 and ISO 100 for example. The ISO 400 is the safe bet and the ISO 100 shot may look blurry sometimes, but sometimes it is perfectly sharp. How great would it be to take those shots with a single press on the button? There are often situations when you don't have the time to try different settings. A helicopter flight for example. The firmware could easily make my wish possible even with existing cameras.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FrenchFry

FrenchFry

Wildlife enthusiast!
Jun 14, 2020
442
553
The firmware could easily make my wish possible even with existing cameras.

Indeed! One of the most exciting parts of the announcement tomorrow for R5/R6 owners could be that new improvements from the R3 are arriving via firmware! (Just making these up, but adjustable FPS in silent shutter, adding a shutter sound to silent shutter, and updated AF algorithms could all be options for this.)
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,419
2,282
Laws of gravity would mean that all types of rock will drop at the same rate. Terminal velocity will be affected by air resistance and of course Eistein's relativity of space/time distorts gravity as well.

General relativity does indeed alter our understanding of gravity but as it turns out it actually explains why everything drops at the same rate (air resistance aside). So it's not going to modify that.
 

degos

EOS RP
Mar 20, 2015
420
355
All the improvements in processing and transfer speeds apply to all the photographers so if your camera has bigger files you're just slowing yourself down for zero benefit.

If speed-to-publishing is critical then you'll be outputting medium-JPEG and not even saving the RAW. So a high resolution sensor really doesn't have any downside.
 

degos

EOS RP
Mar 20, 2015
420
355
Yet somehow, after the 1D X at 18 MP came the 1D X II at 20 MP and then the 1D X III at 20 MP. Were those pros duped? I think it’s far more likely that the target market —sports photographers and photojournalists— wants more moderate resolution. For those pros needing more, there is the 5-series.

Not duped, no. Just disappointed.

My point was that the 1D line was distinguished by comparitively high pixel density, which contradicts the subsequent retrospective fora narrative that pros didn't need that. Notably Canon themselves never said that...
 

Nemorino

EOS R5
Aug 29, 2020
220
395
Eye autofocus is going to be an interesting feature to see in these new generation cameras. I still have my ELAN 7NE and it would be fun to compare to it.
With high number of focus points and the tracking features, I expect it to be very useful.
I am interested if Canon can keep it's promise I quoted earlier in this thread.
"...makes you feel like the camera is reading your mind".
 
Feb 15, 2019
5
1
Traveling
While I'm a Canon user for many years and I would love to move up this camera its price is out of my range, I own two Canons cameras now I will stick to them for now, It sure looks to be a beauty and I suppose it will meet the needs of many folks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FrenchFry
With high number of focus points and the tracking features, I expect it to be very useful.
I am interested if Canon can keep it's promise I quoted earlier in this thread.
"...makes you feel like the camera is reading your mind".
With about 20 years between these technologies I think anyone who used the original is going to be impressed with the difference. The question is will it be something that we find we use regularly or is it just a cool thing that you play with when you get the camera and rarely use afterwards. I'm hopeful, but tracking a pupil that tends to move around as you are composing the shot, checking settings and histograms as well as looking at the main subject may be a difficult thing to make work well for anything but static subjects. I definitely want to see it in action.