The sensor in the upcoming Canon EOS R3 is designed and manufactured by Canon

Cyborx

EOS 90D
Feb 3, 2019
125
111
And PS, it’s gonna cost 6999 euro. As we know from Canon. You’d expect it to be 4999 so Canon will add up a bit to make the price unreal and unfair, as we know Canon policy for years.
R1 will be 11.000 euro’s ... after pricedrop (6m) it will be 9999 euro’s
This is how it’s gonna be, if you like it or not.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Michael Clark

EOS 4 Life

EOS R
Sep 20, 2020
1,005
793
Your are right.
But don't forget the CFexpress card and card slot chip. These two produce the head the camera can't handle for long time. I think the technology is there not ready for such high bitrates.
If you use an external recorder, there are no overheating problems.
I was really hoping that a firmware update would fix the camera overheating when the CF Express and SD cards are inserted and not even being used.
 

EOS 4 Life

EOS R
Sep 20, 2020
1,005
793
The R5 camera outputs video data in HDMI format to the external recorder. I thinkt that reduces the load on the main processor greatly, because it doesn't have to compress that into h.265 format, that is done externally in the recorder. So the problem is the heat off the processor, not off the CFexpress chip or card.
It will overheat even recording externally if I do not remove the cards but it takes longer to overheat than recording directly to the cards.
If your theory were correct then it would not overheat recording 8K RAW.
 

SwissFrank

from EOS 1N to R
Dec 9, 2018
608
343
A lot of people apparently do.
Why they should care is another question.
Why do people care who makes the sensor?

A small-scale snippet from my own life: I worked for Omron's workstation (desk-size Unix computer) department using the Motorola 88000 RISC microprocessor in the early 90s. The key thing about the 88000 was that it wasn't controlled by a competitor. Motorola didn't make workstations. In contrast, IBM controlled the PowerPC, Sun controlled the Sparc, DEC controlled the Alpha, SGI controlled the MIPS, etc. These were all competitors with us.

This mattered because we figured that the latest-greatest CPU in say the PowerPC line would always be available to IBM first, and their workstation team would get better support from their microprocessor team than we would. Finally, the IBM microprocessor department would probably weight the IBM workstation department's needs hopes and wishes a little more strongly than our own.

Motorola decided to partner with IBM and make a single-chip PowerPC that would be pin-compatible with their 88000 line, which they'd then discontinue. (IBM's PowerPC was actually a chip set, not a single chip.) Customers of the 88000 would "simply" recompile their software for PowerPC so they thought it was a good migration path. But we felt a risk, so as long as we had to change CPU's anyway, we changed to Intel x86. Performance was lower but we had probably the best multi-processor Unix kernel, which means our 2- or 4-processor x86 would outperform anyone else's, and the x86s were so cheap we could sell a multiprocessor box cheaper than competition could sell a single-processor box with an expensive, low-production CPU.

So now back to Canon: we're not buying today's camera, or today's lens. We're buying into a system. If Canon were to base all its cameras on Sony (say) sensors, it would be hard to imagine Canon could do as good a job making cameras around those sensors as Sony could. We'd expect the Canon to be a bit more expensive (due to more expensive troubleshooting with a different company's sensor department), and, probably always second to market with a given sensor. Even if got sensors at the same time, it is inconceivable that Canon cameras would actually leapfrog Sony cameras by getting a Sony sensor that Sony cameras couldn't obtain.

The fact that Canon's making its own sensor for THIS camera hints that they'll probably be making a LOT of sensors. (Canon wouldn't just gear up to make one senor.) So, this news hints that potentially, at least, Canon will spend more time getting leading-edge sensors that meet its camera needs well, from a team that supports the camera team efficiently.
 

SwissFrank

from EOS 1N to R
Dec 9, 2018
608
343
The prestige brands of Patek, Jaeger-LeCoultre, Cartier, Rolex and some of IWC produce their own movements. Most lower range mechanical Swiss watches have used ETA or Swiss ebauches for many years, and they do function very well. But, to be frank (not SwissFrank), if all you want is a timepiece that works, get a quartz one.
I may be wrong but my understanding is that the brands you mention all had at least some ETA movements before 2010. Brands that made their own movements for the fancier watches still bought in movements for the cheaper watches. (Sometimes such movements would be slightly modified from the standard model, fair enough, but it was a standard model at its core.) I recall there was a push by Swatch (fun fact: their stock ticker is UHR, German for hour and clock, and in practice time) to migrate makers away from ETA but I haven't followed that story line.
 

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
Aug 9, 2018
1,241
1,315
To me it matters. I've disliked Sony as a company since way before they were in the ILC business. Their attitude towards standards etc. I would never buy anything that has a main component manufactured by them.

It would also not look promising for the future if the Company whos system I'm investing into is dependent on their main competitor. Then they will then always be at a disadvantage. That goes for all companies.
I couldn't agree more !
 

privatebydesign

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
10,439
5,658
Why do people care who makes the sensor?

A small-scale snippet from my own life: I worked for Omron's workstation (desk-size Unix computer) department using the Motorola 88000 RISC microprocessor in the early 90s. The key thing about the 88000 was that it wasn't controlled by a competitor. Motorola didn't make workstations. In contrast, IBM controlled the PowerPC, Sun controlled the Sparc, DEC controlled the Alpha, SGI controlled the MIPS, etc. These were all competitors with us.

This mattered because we figured that the latest-greatest CPU in say the PowerPC line would always be available to IBM first, and their workstation team would get better support from their microprocessor team than we would. Finally, the IBM microprocessor department would probably weight the IBM workstation department's needs hopes and wishes a little more strongly than our own.

Motorola decided to partner with IBM and make a single-chip PowerPC that would be pin-compatible with their 88000 line, which they'd then discontinue. (IBM's PowerPC was actually a chip set, not a single chip.) Customers of the 88000 would "simply" recompile their software for PowerPC so they thought it was a good migration path. But we felt a risk, so as long as we had to change CPU's anyway, we changed to Intel x86. Performance was lower but we had probably the best multi-processor Unix kernel, which means our 2- or 4-processor x86 would outperform anyone else's, and the x86s were so cheap we could sell a multiprocessor box cheaper than competition could sell a single-processor box with an expensive, low-production CPU.

So now back to Canon: we're not buying today's camera, or today's lens. We're buying into a system. If Canon were to base all its cameras on Sony (say) sensors, it would be hard to imagine Canon could do as good a job making cameras around those sensors as Sony could. We'd expect the Canon to be a bit more expensive (due to more expensive troubleshooting with a different company's sensor department), and, probably always second to market with a given sensor. Even if got sensors at the same time, it is inconceivable that Canon cameras would actually leapfrog Sony cameras by getting a Sony sensor that Sony cameras couldn't obtain.

The fact that Canon's making its own sensor for THIS camera hints that they'll probably be making a LOT of sensors. (Canon wouldn't just gear up to make one senor.) So, this news hints that potentially, at least, Canon will spend more time getting leading-edge sensors that meet its camera needs well, from a team that supports the camera team efficiently.
And yet Nikon get better performance out of their Sony FF sensors than Sony do....
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark
Aug 7, 2018
347
294
Is it really good news that it is developed by Canon? In the past Canon was much worse than Sony when it comes to noise in dark areas. I hope that there will be a big improvement when it comes to noise. There has not been a lot of improvement in the last eight years.
 

Czardoom

EOS RP
Jan 27, 2020
299
664
Is it really good news that it is developed by Canon? In the past Canon was much worse than Sony when it comes to noise in dark areas. I hope that there will be a big improvement when it comes to noise. There has not been a lot of improvement in the last eight years.
Yes, in the past, Sony had a definite advantage over Canon when it came to noise. But for today's sensors, you couldn't be more incorrect. Prior to releasing the Canon 5D mark IV, Sony sensors had lower noise than Canon sensors due to their on chip ADC architecture which Canon was slow to move to. Since the change to on-chip ADC, Canon's sensors are essentially equal to Sony's when it comes to noise. So there has been a lot of improvement for Canon in the last 8 years.
 

Czardoom

EOS RP
Jan 27, 2020
299
664
Seriously, do any real photographers care who makes the sensor? I understand why gear-heads, do, but I have never wondered who makes the sensor in any camera that I own. The only question is - does it do a good job?

Now, for other parts of the camera, it might make more of a difference. Sony has recently been sued for shutter failures well before their supposed life expectancy, so I wouldn't want a Sony shutter. Nor would I want Sony's dust removal system, which by almost all accounts, doesn't work well. And it appears that some companies (Canon and Olympus) make superior IBIS. But sensors? Sony has been a leader in sensor technology for many years. these days, Canon has essesntially caught up, so I can't see why it matters to anyone. My main camera is an Olympus E-M1 II. I have never wondered who makes that sensor. It just doesn't matter to me.
 

Czardoom

EOS RP
Jan 27, 2020
299
664
And PS, it’s gonna cost 6999 euro. As we know from Canon. You’d expect it to be 4999 so Canon will add up a bit to make the price unreal and unfair, as we know Canon policy for years.
Canon prices are always competitive, in my opinion, when you understand what quality is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StoicalEtcher

H. Jones

Photojournalist
Aug 1, 2014
731
1,429
that would be a competitive price. Like!

Agreed! $4300 seems too low to me but if they undercut the price of both the A1 and A9 I would be very impressed.

This would definitely be the price point where I would 100% pick up the R3 over a second R5. Would be roughly the same price as an R5 + the R5's battery grip, which would be a sweet deal.