Review: Canon EOS R3 final review by DPReviewTV

Saw that the other day when they posted. I'm a little underwhelmed, they titled it a Final Review, but it's not a review at all but a quick update to their earlier preview. 'll save y'all some time:

1. "I'd buy it over a 1DX III, but it's meh because 24mp".
2. "It's the only camera that will shoot full raw at 30fps, but it's meh because 24mp"
3. "It's got a great buffer, I like the AF performance, but it's meh because 24mp"
4. "It's expensive for what it is, because 24mp"

I usually find them reasonably on point in most instances. For me, this time around they come across as though if it ain't 50mp, it ain't sh*t.

Jordan seemed to like it much better than Chris, which speaks to its appeal to hybrid shooters. I was a little surprised they gave the edge in image quality to the R6 because based on the tests I have seen for far, to my eye the R3 has the slight edge.

I, too, found it odd the way Chris had the R6 edging out the R3. Each time, I looked at the comparison and found the R3 to equal or edge out the R6 in the noise comparisons.

FWIW...Jared just released a new video comparing A1 & R3 AF. Watching it now...don't know what he might have to say at the end, just watching the EVF recordings and tbh they are both impressive.

HenryL said:

Saw that the other day when they posted. I'm a little underwhelmed, they titled it a Final Review, but it's not a review at all but a quick update to their earlier preview. 'll save y'all some time:

1. "I'd buy it over a 1DX III, but it's meh because 24mp".
2. "It's the only camera that will shoot full raw at 30fps, but it's meh because 24mp"
3. "It's got a great buffer, I like the AF performance, but it's meh because 24mp"
4. "It's expensive for what it is, because 24mp"

I usually find them reasonably on point in most instances. For me, this time around they come across as though if it ain't 50mp, it ain't sh*t.

Click to expand...

It's often something with DPR and Canon. A few years back, their reviews came across as though if it didn't have >14 stops of DR (as DxO calculates their downsampled-to-8-MP sensor scores) and you couldn't lift the shadows 5 stops, it was crap.

I really enjoy Chris and Jordan and am very pleased that they have gained more popularity by their employment with DPReview. However, we’re still watching journalists and individuals express their opinions and those may not even remotely represent you or your needs. If there’s one thing Canon knows extremely well, it’s the professional camera market - it’s how and why they are the undesputed king in sideline/Olympic representations for roughly 30 years.

With that said, I watched the video and didn’t feel it was a very well put together conclusion for such an important, professional camera. When you look at all the impressive coverage the A1 received, the R3 appears to be something they had to report on and get out of the way. It’s times like this back in the TCS TV days where Jordan and Chris would ask professionals to assist them in conducting a more detailed review of a product. Give this camera to a professional rodeo photographer and have them shoot some local Alberta weekend rodeos. Maybe go to a Flames game and shoot hockey? I don’t know…don’t go to a zoo and take photos of a statuesque Penguin and your kid - what an absolute joke.

Honestly, they mailed it in here. This was very lazy.

P.S. Video overheating…hmmmmm….ProAV TV did some minimal testing with the R3 for overheating and didn’t get any issues at all. One of the primary factors that influenced me picking this up was because I was consider a cinema camera as an A cam for my video work - but I would still get better use out of a hybrid. I am a little worried now how it will perform in my use cases, the R5 has only been an issue twice in over a year.

I found it neither objectionable nor particularly informative. Mainly click bait while everyone waits for delivery of the R3. So much has already been covered that there doesn't seem to be a lot to say in a brief video that is new. On the other hand, I don't get the hate that DPR tends to generate around here. They are reviewers, they are entitled to their opinion and reviews that never point out weaknesses are useless in my opinion.

HenryL said:

I, too, found it odd the way Chris had the R6 edging out the R3. Each time, I looked at the comparison and found the R3 to equal or edge out the R6 in the noise comparisons.

FWIW...Jared just released a new video comparing A1 & R3 AF. Watching it now...don't know what he might have to say at the end, just watching the EVF recordings and tbh they are both impressive.

Click to expand...

Jared thinks it beats out the A1...certainly in focus abilities. Nice thing too is that in 2 weeks those same focus abilities will be downloadable to my R5.

In all honesty I prefer the video from the R3 more than that of the Sony A1, Canon R5 or Nikon Z9. The colors look good. Resolution looks detailed, without looking over-sharpened. The stills also look great… they edge out the Sony and Nikon… it’s hard to say why… but they seem more aesthetically pleasing to my eyes.

I preordered this camera the moment it went live. Saw the Z9 and started to second guess myself. The Z9 has some really good reviews. And lots of footage shot by pros with real budgets… Then I saw some casual footage from the Z9. Shot outside of controlled environments; It’s then I knew I was on track with the Canon. I’m convinced that for most shooters the R3 will produce better imagery more of the time. The other will require more work to get them there.

unfocused said:

On the other hand, I don't get the hate that DPR tends to generate around here. They are reviewers, they are entitled to their opinion and reviews that never point out weaknesses are useless in my opinion.

Click to expand...

We’ve had this discussion before. The issue is their bias. Here’s an older example, but I’ve seen no evidence of change.

[quote author=rishi on DPR]
The metering sensor on the 1D X II has experienced a significant increase in resolution. With 360,000 RGB+IR pixels, it's the highest resolution metering sensor we've ever seen. This should lead to accurate metering...
[/quote]

[quote author=rishi on DPR]
[The D5's] all-new AF system is coupled with a new 180K pixel RGB metering system and Advanced Scene Recognition System, helping to achieve optimally balanced exposures and accurate white balance in even the most challenging light.
[/quote]

There are lots of other examples, such as docking Canon’s Servo AF tracking when they had the camera set to Spot AF (the manual recommends against that), complaining that when set to full auto AF the Canon camera just selects the closest subject (which is exactly what the camera is supposed to do), or bashing the ‘poor DR’ of the 1D X II, then claiming the similar DR of the D5 was not a problem since ‘DR isn’t as high a priority for the intended audience’ (because, you know, those cameras were aimed at completely different markets).

Overall, their attitude remains, “Nikon/Sony make stellar cameras capable of producing outstanding images. Canon makes cameras that take good pictures.”

I found the section where Chris comments on the AF system to be a bit odd too. He didn't seem to understand the AF system or the settings very well.

He seems to criticize it for not having one mode to do it all, and having to actually set up the AF system. Which is normal for all cameras of this type.

But his lack of understanding led to him not realizing that actually, in fact, one can set it to use Case 1 and the camera will get great results in one mode for most types of situations. Also he doesn't realize that the settings are not that complicated, if one knows them. In fact, those AF cases are kind of like presets for the AF settings of sensitivity and accel/decel. They actually make life easier, but he seemed to think they make it harder and more complicated.

So the lack of understanding about the AF system led to him both underestimating how easy it can be, how easy it can be to set up, and probably also not getting as good a result as possible.

It's like someone else mentioned: it's as if they mailed in this review. That maybe because they discount the camera due to having "only" 24 MP, and so it may reflect that bias.

The fact that they are comparing files and giving an edge to a camera $3500 cheaper says a ton. The R3 appears to be overpriced and underwhelming, especially if the af performance is being pushed to the R5 and R6 through firmware updates.

HotPixels said:

He didn't seem to understand the AF system or the settings very well.

He seems to criticize it for not having one mode to do it all, and having to actually set up the AF system. Which is normal for all cameras of this type.

So the lack of understanding about the AF system led to him … not getting as good a result as possible.

Click to expand...

A repeat of some of my examples from 5 years ago. It’s one reason I appreciate Bryan’s (TDP) review. He may view a camera through rose-colored glasses, but he shoots Canon and knows how to configure and operate their cameras.

Many of the DPR reviewers clearly do not shoot Canon (the brief handling of a new camera being reviewed notwithstanding), do not understand how to effectively configure it, and in many cases haven’t even bothered to RTFM.

Mix overt bias with marginal competence and you have a recipe for unreliability.

We all have biases, but the behaviour indicates whether the bias is positive or negative towards a particular system. Jordan wants histograms/waveforms during record and he will keep complaining until he gets it etc. The issue is whether the negative (and positive) comments are balanced in general and against the market. One small irritation for one person shouldn't have a prominence in an overall review. That becomes petulance.

The average level becomes a hygiene factor for our decision process.
People are disproportionately interested in differences vs similarities between things.
Ultimately, each review becomes a data point to consider or reject for an individual user.

All cameras have their quirks. Hard to imagine that R3 owners are going to be disappointed in its performance.

Chris always from his past reviews about Canon cameras find something to complain. Ppl should not take him seriously about his objectivity!

The ‘review’ is not very thorough or scientific… there are many ways to get some more objective data from a camera by taking actual measurements. Statements like ‘oh it kinda looks a bit noisier to our eyes’ aren’t very meaningful.


This is much more a subjective ‘impression’ of the camera.

neuroanatomist said:

A repeat of some of my examples from 5 years ago. It’s one reason I appreciate Bryan’s (TDP) review. He may view a camera through rose-colored glasses, but he shoots Canon and knows how to configure and operate their cameras.

Many of the DPR reviewers clearly do not shoot Canon (the brief handling of a new camera being reviewed notwithstanding), do not understand how to effectively configure it, and in many cases haven’t even bothered to RTFM.

Mix overt bias with marginal competence and you have a recipe for unreliability.

Click to expand...

And then there are bloody amatuers like me. I have shot Canon DSLR since 2004 and despite trying to RTFM I haven't found a discernable difference between the AF "presets" (Case 1-6) on the 5D3 and 1DX cameras. I've kinda given up on trying to mess around with them.

The interview with Jeff Cable where he mentioned tha he just left the R3 in a specific AF mode/preset gives me hopes.

USMarineCorpsVet said:

The fact that they are comparing files and giving an edge to a camera $3500 cheaper says a ton. The R3 appears to be overpriced and underwhelming, especially if the af performance is being pushed to the R5 and R6 through firmware updates

Click to expand...

The fact that they compare a camera to one $3500 less expensive means nothing in and of itself. One can compare anything to anything. The fact that they give the edge to the less expensive camera, while the evidence they supply does not support their claim, does say a ton.

Maybe I should rewatch the video, but I watched it before seeing this post. My reaction at the time, "meh, they actually are not trashing the R3 as much as other Canons, even saying some positive things.... they must really like it."

It's all relative.

A very, very nice review, indeed!