Canon R3 Review: My Perfect Camera

Hi mostly I am taking bird pictures. The R 3 and the RF 400 2,8 with 2x extender is amazing even for small birds... Have a nice coming week!

Summerjoy wrote:

xtam667 wrote:

I used the 1DX series and have been a Canon shooter since forever. The R3 is the best Canon body I have ever tried and among the best of anything, really. There is only one use case I find it inferior to the Z9, focal length limited bird photography. Too bad this is 90% of all the reasons why I want a top of the line camera. There is nothing like the Z9 + 800mm f6.3 PF lens in the Canon camp, unfortunately. Even if the R1 came along a lightweight and compact super tele below $7000 was still missing and it is not even rumoured. Z9 with 45mpix behind a 800mm f6.3 makes a big difference compared to R3 with 24mpix behind a 700mm f5.6 (the EF 500mm f4 + 1.4x that I have) and it is lighter and cheaper at the same time. I could go with the RF 600mm f4 but did you see the price of that one? And still only 24 mpix with the R3. The R5+RF 600mm+1.4x gets a similar pixels/duck ratio but then there are usability issues in the field.

I totally get that for the OP's purposes the R3 is ideal and I really wish that it was for me too. Anyone else of you bird shooters whose primary targets are not close-by ostriches feel the same? Do you see the Z9 + 800mm f6.3 PF a better enough combo to make the switch?

First of all, it is correct in terms of content that there is no such combination at Canon, or not yet.
First of all, it is a very special field of application, and secondly, the combination unfortunately also has weaknesses.
As far as I know, the 800mm lens is not as fast in terms of focus as Nikon's lenses with shorter focal length and higher speed. This leads to focus hunting when there is not enough light available.
Possibly the Z9 is the cause here!
It would be interesting to know if the VCM motor was not installed here.
For me, a 400 2.8 would be the better choice in any case, even with Nikon. These lenses are faster and quieter.

Therefore I see, especially with the mentioned lens, a very limited working range and would clearly not be a feature to opt for this combination if I had to choose.

As someone who has used a Z9 and 800 PF, I laugh whenever I hear people infer its slow. That was definitely a fast focusing combo. I've used combos including the 1DX III and EF 600 III, A1 and Sony 600 GM, and various other expensive combos, and the 800 and Z9 did not feel substantially slower, if at all. In all honesty, it felt faster than my R5 and 500L II, and I rate that combo as very fast. I shot it on an overcast day tracking very fast weasels and thought it worked very well (but that is far from "low light"). Its possible the newer VC motors are faster, but calling the 800 PF a slower focusing lens just shows that someone hasn't used the product. A slow focusing lens IMO, is the Nikon 200-500, but that's a $1,500 fixed aperture f/5.6 500mm zoom.

Where the Z9 falls short is the AF consistency. It is very good, just not Canon/Sony good (note, this is from early firmware). Didn't notice hunting when I used it, but it did drop subjects quicker than I expected.

On the topic of the 400 f/2.8 & 600 f/4 TCs, I wish Canon had listened to its customers years ago when we asked for a TC integrated prime. I've been asking for it since the chunky but excellent 200-400 f/4 was released. The only barrier for me would be if Canon tried to milk its customers like they did with the RF 800 f/5.6 and RF 1200 f/8. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening for us for another 6-10 years.

To be honest, I have to smile tiredly when I read comments like this.

I wrote "as far as I know", which of course excludes a personal test, since I'm not in the Nikon camp. 😉
Nevertheless, I also work with professionals who just told me about this combination. Which is why I wrote a feedback to the previous speaker (xtam667) about the Z9 and the 800mm, he was talked about.

If you compare the lenses, you will notice that the lens is slower in low light situations and the motor/motors are simply louder compared to the lenses I mentioned.
Especially compared to the 400mm 2.8, which should be indisputable. In poor lighting conditions, there is also focus hunting - you have certainly noticed that.

This can be determined easily and objectively.

I am also not one of the "Canon customers" for me it is performance and not the brand that counts, regardless of whether it is a lens or a camera.

So it's not just a question of personal preferences, as is so often the case here, but also of objectively measurable and thus ascertainable performance of the respective camera or lens.

Certainly we are arguing here on a very high performance level of camera and lens. Regardless, it would of course be nice if Canon could also offer something in this class at a similar price. I wouldn't call it "milking" what Canon does, at least not in the USA. Personally, I see value for money throughout in order. In Europe it looks different again - and no, it's certainly not due to the sales tax - Ultimately, however, it is a question of the size of the wallet and Canon's willingness to continue to fill its pockets.

Ergo, a subjective decision, similar to the assessment of whether a combination is judged to be fast or not quite as fast from a personal perspective.

xtam667 wrote:

Summerjoy wrote:

xtam667 wrote:

I used the 1DX series and have been a Canon shooter since forever. The R3 is the best Canon body I have ever tried and among the best of anything, really. There is only one use case I find it inferior to the Z9, focal length limited bird photography. Too bad this is 90% of all the reasons why I want a top of the line camera. There is nothing like the Z9 + 800mm f6.3 PF lens in the Canon camp, unfortunately. Even if the R1 came along a lightweight and compact super tele below $7000 was still missing and it is not even rumoured. Z9 with 45mpix behind a 800mm f6.3 makes a big difference compared to R3 with 24mpix behind a 700mm f5.6 (the EF 500mm f4 + 1.4x that I have) and it is lighter and cheaper at the same time. I could go with the RF 600mm f4 but did you see the price of that one? And still only 24 mpix with the R3. The R5+RF 600mm+1.4x gets a similar pixels/duck ratio but then there are usability issues in the field.

I totally get that for the OP's purposes the R3 is ideal and I really wish that it was for me too. Anyone else of you bird shooters whose primary targets are not close-by ostriches feel the same? Do you see the Z9 + 800mm f6.3 PF a better enough combo to make the switch?

First of all, it is correct in terms of content that there is no such combination at Canon, or not yet.
First of all, it is a very special field of application, and secondly, the combination unfortunately also has weaknesses.
As far as I know, the 800mm lens is not as fast in terms of focus as Nikon's lenses with shorter focal length and higher speed. This leads to focus hunting when there is not enough light available.
Possibly the Z9 is the cause here!
It would be interesting to know if the VCM motor was not installed here.
For me, a 400 2.8 would be the better choice in any case, even with Nikon. These lenses are faster and quieter.

Therefore I see, especially with the mentioned lens, a very limited working range and would clearly not be a feature to opt for this combination if I had to choose.

It has a stepping motor, said to focus quite fast but not as fast as the really expensive lenses. Something to consider.

Sometimes I spend days in the jungle to find a rare bird and then I am lucky if I can get a clear shot from afar. I cannot use a tripod. 400 2.8 with a 2x would be nice but I am afraid in those conditions I would not want to carry and aim it all day, for days. The 500 f4 is bad enough already.

Camera noise do not bother birds. They could not care less about my very loud 1DX2, for example.

This is the picture that got me thinking. I shot it with the R5 but it cost me a broken adapter and a damaged camera. The R3 would have not been damaged but the resolution would have not been there either.

Harpy Eagle

Hi, nice shoot👍. I was talking about the sound of the lens, not of the camera - sorry for confusion.

Nevertheless maybe you’re right and there is no need to think about noise by shooting birds, or the noise is not really noticeable for them to care about. Which is o.k.

It was a general statement from my side regarding this combination (Z9 & Z 800mm 6.3) and Yes, you are right regarding the resolution (R3 / Z9)

But we all shoot normally not one kind of object in one specific Szene. Which brings me back to your question „Do you see the Z9 + 800mm f6.3 PF a better enough combo to make the switch“

If I would be focused in bird photography and shoot on special locations like Jungle, maybe I would think about to switch. Unfortunately I am not a bird photographer.😉

xtam667 wrote:

I used the 1DX series and have been a Canon shooter since forever. The R3 is the best Canon body I have ever tried and among the best of anything, really. There is only one use case I find it inferior to the Z9, focal length limited bird photography. Too bad this is 90% of all the reasons why I want a top of the line camera. There is nothing like the Z9 + 800mm f6.3 PF lens in the Canon camp, unfortunately. Even if the R1 came along a lightweight and compact super tele below $7000 was still missing and it is not even rumoured. Z9 with 45mpix behind a 800mm f6.3 makes a big difference compared to R3 with 24mpix behind a 700mm f5.6 (the EF 500mm f4 + 1.4x that I have) and it is lighter and cheaper at the same time. I could go with the RF 600mm f4 but did you see the price of that one? And still only 24 mpix with the R3. The R5+RF 600mm+1.4x gets a similar pixels/duck ratio but then there are usability issues in the field.

If you're usually focal length limited, and cropping even from a FF + 800mm image, the R7 with a 600 will give you pretty much the same pixels per duck (slightly more, in fact) as a Z9 or R5 with 800. The high ISO noise performance will also be very close, depending on which 600 you mount on the R7.

I totally get that for the OP's purposes the R3 is ideal and I really wish that it was for me too. Anyone else of you bird shooters whose primary targets are not close-by ostriches feel the same? Do you see the Z9 + 800mm f6.3 PF a better enough combo to make the switch?

Summerjoy wrote:

To be honest, I have to smile tiredly when I read comments like this.

I wrote "as far as I know", which of course excludes a personal test, since I'm not in the Nikon camp. 😉

This is why I felt compelled to interject. I don't have a massive amount of time or conditions in which I used the lens, but inferring it was "slow" or "not fast" aren't words that come to mind after using the combo. In all honesty, its the exact opposite. Granted, I didn't test it from the minimum distance to infinity, however in its normal range, I thought it was downright fast.