The first noise test results from the Canon EOS R3 are in

Canon Rumors Guy

EOS-1D X Mark III
CR Pro
Jul 20, 2010
9,312
2,079
Canada
www.canonrumors.com

sanj

EOS R5
Jan 22, 2012
3,970
865
Yes, I agree. It looks nice. I compared it at ISO 3200. I do not like to go beyond ISO 3200, but do find myself using 3200 often.
 
  • Like
Reactions: prodorshak

kaihp

EOS R
CR Pro
Mar 19, 2012
1,029
181
The Most Ancient Kingdom of Denmark
Interesting, Bryan has a (pre-production?) R3 camera in his hands:

The Canon EOS R3 is in my hands, and this review is under continuous update.

Edit: when I compare the R3 to the 5D3, I find that the 5D3 looks better at up to ISO 800-1600, and the R3 looks better from around 1600 and clearly at 3200.
However, the difference in image sizes makes it a little hard to judge.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: EricN

amorse

EOS R
Jan 26, 2017
823
1,113
www.instagram.com
I love their comparisons. I've always been more partial to using their images to compare overexposure highlight retention. Impressive how far it's come on Canon's newer sensors, frankly.
 

bbasiaga

Canon Shooter
Nov 15, 2011
468
542
USA
Looks very similar to the R6 until about 25k...then it looks a little nicer. Canon has done a great job with noise in the last couple of generations. Layer on some great noise reduction software (DXO or Topaz) and you can really see in the dark with these things.

Brian
 
Nov 29, 2015
33
30
Interesting, Bryan has a (pre-production?) R3 camera in his hands:



Edit: when I compare the R3 to the 5D3, I find that the 5D3 looks better at up to ISO 800-1600, and the R3 looks better from around 1600 and clearly at 3200.
However, the difference in image sizes makes it a little hard to judge.
The R3 is 24MP, the 5D3 is 22MP. The difference in image size is 5760 X 3840 compared with 6000 X 4000. That's a 4% difference in linear resolution.
 

SV

EOS R5
CR Pro
Aug 24, 2017
77
200
I’m not a pixel peeper type, but I’m quite impressed by the first results. It definitely has a more pleasing noise pattern than the Canon EOS R5 or Canon EOS R6.

You do know that the R3 is a much reduced image vs the R5. You may want to compare the R5 scaled down to the R3 resolution to better compare the noise differences, i.e., when DPReview comes out with their testing. Just saying...
 

David - Sydney

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
1,005
836
www.flickr.com
I wonder if Canon is "cooking the raw" file for noise reduction. This was certainly a criticism of the R5 if I recall but I don't see any issues with it.
Is the R3 dual gain ISO?
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,900
12,213
What will be more interesting to me is seeing how dynamic range reduces as ISO increases.
Above about iso400, the 1DXIII, 5DIV, R5, R6 etc have identical DR. Basically, the modern sensors are so efficient it is the amount of light hitting the sensor that determines the DR, and that is independent of sensor. I doubt if the R3 sensor is any more efficient. Here's a link showing the DRs: https://www.photonstophotos.net/Cha...Mark IV,Canon EOS R,Canon EOS R5,Canon EOS R6
 

Distinctly Average

EOS M6 Mark II
Sep 30, 2021
55
139
Above about iso400, the 1DXIII, 5DIV, R5, R6 etc have identical DR. Basically, the modern sensors are so efficient it is the amount of light hitting the sensor that determines the DR, and that is independent of sensor. I doubt if the R3 sensor is any more efficient. Here's a link showing the DRs: https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS 1D X Mark III,Canon EOS 5D Mark IV,Canon EOS R,Canon EOS R5,Canon EOS R6
Fab stuff. It was always noticeable before and often one of the reasons whyI dumped some high iso images. I could cope with the noise but the drop in DR often left some images looking far from ideal. Not always the case though, there are shots Ihave taken where low or very low DR is what made them work. Tends not to work for most wildlife shots though.
 

Tidy Media

R5 | R6 | C70 | C200
Jul 13, 2020
29
32
Colours seem to shift a lot more magenta in the R5 and R6 compared to the R3 - maybe that's just an incorrect WB on the R3 though.
 

Tremotino

EOS 90D
Jan 23, 2018
130
84
Munich
Above about iso400, the 1DXIII, 5DIV, R5, R6 etc have identical DR. Basically, the modern sensors are so efficient it is the amount of light hitting the sensor that determines the DR, and that is independent of sensor. I doubt if the R3 sensor is any more efficient. Here's a link showing the DRs: https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS 1D X Mark III,Canon EOS 5D Mark IV,Canon EOS R,Canon EOS R5,Canon EOS R6
I always feel like my TSE 24 II has more DR than any other lense ever used on my 5div.
Do also other experienced this phenomenon?

I mean when I changed lense in a landscape situation the light range that this lense can cover is little higher than with other lenses.
Basically the histogram graph is with the same body and same scene a little bit more compressed on the TSE 24 II.
I believe, this is the main reason why photos taken with the TSE 24 II make me smile each time I see them after the shot
 

perplex1

I'm New Here
Sep 25, 2020
14
7
You do know that the R3 is a much reduced image vs the R5. You may want to compare the R5 scaled down to the R3 resolution to better compare the noise differences, i.e., when DPReview comes out with their testing. Just saying...
so you are saying that the r5 doesn't really have more megapixels, its just a r3 sensor that was scaled up?