That is irrelevant to my point.Because it does mean developing an all new product. That all new product would be the R1. Personally, I doubt the R3 was ever the R1 internally at Canon. Stuff like the eye tracking is not just something you pull off the shelf and dust off to put into a camera a month or so after your competition releases a camera that is better than yours. At a minimum, they had to have known about the A1 specs months before it was announced to pull off a rebadging like that. And to say the planned R1 was going to have that all along? I don’t buy that for a second. Canon has never put eye tracking in a flagship.
what is more likely, is Canon will do something similar to what they’ve done with the R5 and R6. The R1 is a high megapixel beast and the R3 is basically the same thing, but with a lower MP sensor and a few feature tweaks.
i have the R5 and R6 (both with grips) and they’re basically a perfect pairing. the R5 is the main body, the R6 the backup, unless you don‘t want/need high MP on a given shoot, then the R6 is the main body and the R5 is the backup. It’s great. I can totally see the same strategy with the R1 and R3.
I'm surprised that anyone's surprised by this price. Canon just raised the price of some of their RF L series lenses and those were already around $300, give or take a $100, more than their EF counter parts.
He went on to say,"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.
He went on to say,
“While the RF system is a major evolution of the EF system, we believe that in order to bestow an RF camera with the “1” model designation, we must achieve an even greater level of performance, and we continue to work towards reaching those high standards.”
So the 1D X III is the flagship, and there’s a new flagship coming.
But he did give people license think the R3 is a flagship, if they want.
Well, I don't think you can say that hypothetical(although I'd tend to agree) better ergonomics cancels the 50mp versus the rumoured 30megapixels of the R3. There's a lot to be said for a smaller body too. Additionally, the R1 doesn't exist yet, so I think it's a bit premature to make assumptions when nothing is known about it.R3 is a stacked BSI and will be a much better camera ergonomically so that cancells out the 50mp depending on ones use case. The R1 is likely going to be the one camera to rule them all and will be priced accordingly.
I enjoy wildlife photography. My trusty 1DX2 now stays behind. The R5 is my go to camera. The ability to crop and retain detail is a big advantage of high MP files. Canon has to keep pace. A 24 MP sensor in a new $6000.00 camera is a hard sell. JMHODid 20 MP stop you buying a 1dx3? Or were you always going to buy a 5dIV and R5 type body?
24MP and even 6MP hasn’t stopped me making A2 or even A1 sized prints. And even bigger than that you don’t necessarily need more pixels.
Um, absolutely not. Ergonomics do not cancel out MP. I will never shoot Sony, but still. I will never buy a 24MP camera, either.R3 is a stacked BSI and will be a much better camera ergonomically so that cancells out the 50mp depending on ones use case. The R1 is likely going to be the one camera to rule them all and will be priced accordingly.
I enjoy wildlife photography. My trusty 1DX2 now stays behind. The R5 is my go to camera. The ability to crop and retain detail is a big advantage of high MP files. Canon has to keep pace. A 24 MP sensor in a new $6000.00 camera is a hard sell. JMHO
Um, absolutely not. Ergonomics do not cancel out MP. I will never shoot Sony, but still. I will never buy a 24MP camera, either.
I'm not... they're perpetually out of stock. If raising them slightly helps keep them slightly longer on the shelves, it's only profit to canon and the camera stores (since they can't restock them quickly enough).No, I was also surprised they raised the price on lenses. It gives a poor impression even when it's necessary.
Sorry, I speaking to value, not currency exchange. Inflation is affecting almost all currencies. By "dropping like a rock" I meant relative to what you can buy with a dollar. Anyone who has been shopping lately and can't see the change is, to put it politely, not very observant.