Close Menu

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

    By Updated:38 Comments1 Min Read Canon EOS R
    Canon EOS R3

    The-Digital-Picture has posted the first bit of image quality testing for the brand new Canon EOS R3. The first test deals with noise from the EOS R3, and you can compare it to pretty much every other camera out there.

    You can check out the methodology of the image quality testing here.

    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.

    Check out the noise test results

    Some of our articles may include affiliate links. If you purchase through these links, we may earn an affiliate commission at no extra cost to you.

    Go to discussion...

    Share.

    Related Posts

    38 comments

    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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
    8. 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.
    11. 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...
    15. 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
    16. 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.
    18. 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
    19. 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?

    Leave a comment

    Please log in to your forum account to comment