R3 press release?

[RogerZoul]

6K/60 RAW, 4K/120 RAW and oversampled 4K options? This is some fierce stuff. No disrespect to the R5, but I don't see a recording limit, either. Figures as that grip is a heat sink in disguise.

Lack of rolling shutter due to Stacked CMOS on top of it is icing on the cake.

-7.5EV Low light is very impressive. This thing can shoot in the dark pretty much.

Personally, I think the r3 is going to be a very fine camera that anybody could appreciate owning and shooting with. However, after springing for an r5 just over a year ago, I'm of no mind to buy an R3, assuming I wanted to step back down to a 24 MP sensor. The fact that there is NO rolling shutter is a big deal to me, though, as that means I can blast away and never worry about distorted images that I could get on my r5 (not all of them show distortion). And to never worry about overheating in those high res video modes? Yes, that's a big deal to me, as I do take video with my r5 (but I use 4k crop which is downsampled from 5.1k and it never overheats, so I'm good there). I would like to do some 4k60 or 4k120, but even though I can still take short clips on those modes. Anyone taking long-form video in these high res modes are going to be dumping out gigs and gigs of video files and will have a back up nightmare.

Just yesterday I was shooting this little hooded warbler under a tree...it was dark in there, so the better lowlight focusing and better ISO at 12,800 and above would be a big deal. But, not for 6KUSD. Maybe the r6 would be an attractive option at 2.5KUSD.

I don't need to have every thing...and frankly, I still think I'd rather have more MP if I'm spending a lot of cash on a top body. At this point, I'd like to see what the r1 will be and if Canon will release an r7 (I think the tea leaves are saying NO to a crop sensor R body, however).

But the r3 is going to be a sweet machine to shoot with. No question.

 

[RogerZoul]

It only does 12 fps with the mechanical shutter. $5999 USD!

But it does 30 fps with NO rolling shutter in electronic shutter mode! This is a different beast than we've seen before, so I'd withhold judgment until it streets and has been thoroughly run through the paces.

 

[RogerZoul]

6k seems kind of steep vs the competitors. But I’m sure it will be a pretty great performer. Wonder how well the eye af works.

Really? 6k is an excellent price compared to the Sony A1. What other competitors are there? The photo journalist crown probably don't want 50 MP images flying out at 30 FPS. You can't do fast delivery of images if you have to piece through a ton of nearly identical high MP shots. The 80D had a 24 MP sensor too but it is no competitor for this beast. Same for the Sony A9II.

Frankly, I think Canon has another winner on its hand amongst through who can afford this and can actually benefit from it's features.

 

[Mark B.]

6K/60 RAW, 4K/120 RAW and oversampled 4K options? This is some fierce stuff. No disrespect to the R5, but I don't see a recording limit, either. Figures as that grip is a heat sink in disguise.

Lack of rolling shutter due to Stacked CMOS on top of it is icing on the cake.

-7.5EV Low light is very impressive. This thing can shoot in the dark pretty much.

What disrespect. The R3 is almost twice the price of the R5. I like most R5 users are excited to see a new R series camera and who would not expect it to be better than the R5.

Why? When did Canon say the R5 series would be the be-all end-all of their mirrorless FF?

 

[Bestpix Photography]

Loading…

www.teds.com.au

 

[cjb]

That's not too far off the US price. AUS$8600 = US$6303. US price is US$5999

Is that without taxes?

 

[RLight]

Yeah no GPS… guess I’m sticking with the 1DX mk2…

 

[Royd63uk]

That's not too far off the US price. AUS$8600 = US$6303. US price is US$5999

Is that without taxes?

UK rip off price

£5,879.00 = 8143.59 US Dollars or 11111.90 Australian Dollars

 

[UZI2D30]

It only does 12 fps with the mechanical shutter. $5999 USD!

But it does 30 fps with NO rolling shutter in electronic shutter mode! This is a different beast than we've seen before, so I'd withhold judgment until it streets and has been thoroughly run through the paces.

If they've eliminated rolling shutter completely, then why include a mechanical shutter at all?

From the DPReview samples, I'd be interested in knowing whether this was shot with the electronic shutter or mechanical. My guess is electronic.

 

[Mark B.]

Only 24MP....SMH!! :-(

Wasn't the 1DX III "only" 20mp?

 

[Hoka Hey]

It only does 12 fps with the mechanical shutter. $5999 USD!

The point to this camera is that you won't be using MS because with ES you get 30 fps of 14 bit uncompromised raw with minimal rolling shutter.

 

[Sittatunga]

The whole point is the R3 is A LOT more then the R5 and it better be better. Even if it was only 1K more I would expect the R3 to be the flagship R series camera and have features to match.

No, the R3 is A LOT more than the R6. Comparing it with the R5, I see very little that would entice me, given that the R3 resolution is substantially lower.

Most of us aren't photographers for news outlets. Those that are will find the focus speed, AF intelligence, eyeball targeting, electronic readout speed across the sensor so similar to mechanical focal plane shutters and vertical handgrip well worth the extra cost, size and weight. I wouldn't, but I don't need the speed.

I realize the R3 will be attractive to those shooting high-end video, but what makes it attractive enough for stills shooters? 30fps vs 20 surely isn't big enough a deal for me and almost every other photographer I know.

Most of us aren't photographers for news outlets.

(And, err, what do videographers need a vertical grip for ???)

An awful lot of phone owners haven't realised you can video with your phone in landscape format. You would think there were far too many portrait format videos going around these days if you didn't realise that most people will be viewing them on their phones... That's why Canon added portrait format video to the M50II.

 

[Kokopelli_Rocks]

The whole point is the R3 is A LOT more then the R5 and it better be better. Even if it was only 1K more I would expect the R3 to be the flagship R series camera and have features to match.

No, the R3 is A LOT more than the R6. Comparing it with the R5, I see very little that would entice me, given that the R3 resolution is substantially lower.

I realize the R3 will be attractive to those shooting high-end video, but what makes it attractive enough for stills shooters? 30fps vs 20 surely isn't big enough a deal for me and almost every other photographer I know.

(And, err, what do videographers need a vertical grip for ???)

I fully agree. I have no interest in an R3. Love the eye control AF. Had a primitive version in my EOS 3 and found it very useful. For me I love the size and weight of the R5 and would not want a bigger and heavier camera. The R3 is a better size compared to the 1 series but still way too big for my type of shooting. I also don't ever shoot at 20 fps so I have no need for 30 fps.

The faster EVF would be nice and the resolution on the back scree are great upgrades. I am very happy Canon has added the R3 to the R series.

 

[pollup]

It only does 12 fps with the mechanical shutter. $5999 USD!

But it does 30 fps with NO rolling shutter in electronic shutter mode! This is a different beast than we've seen before, so I'd withhold judgment until it streets and has been thoroughly run through the paces.

If they've eliminated rolling shutter completely, then why include a mechanical shutter at all?

From the DPReview samples, I'd be interested in knowing whether this was shot with the electronic shutter or mechanical. My guess is electronic.

Many people don't understand that both electronic shutter and mechanical shutter have rolling shutters.

It will only be eliminated once all pixels can be read at the same time, that is, with a global shutter.

With the R5 electronic shutter, you get a ~1/51s rolling shutter, with the R3 electronic shutter, you get ~1/200s rolling shutter. It's directly linked to the readout speed.

So in this case, it's 4x better, but it still exists.

With the mechanical shutter, you get about 1/320s rolling shutter, so it's even better but still exists.

 

[UZI2D30]

It only does 12 fps with the mechanical shutter. $5999 USD!

But it does 30 fps with NO rolling shutter in electronic shutter mode! This is a different beast than we've seen before, so I'd withhold judgment until it streets and has been thoroughly run through the paces.

If they've eliminated rolling shutter completely, then why include a mechanical shutter at all?

From the DPReview samples, I'd be interested in knowing whether this was shot with the electronic shutter or mechanical. My guess is electronic.

Many people don't understand that both electronic shutter and mechanical shutter have rolling shutters.

It will only be eliminated once all pixels can be read at the same time, that is, with a global shutter.

With the R5 electronic shutter, you get a ~1/51s rolling shutter, with the R3 electronic shutter, you get ~1/200s rolling shutter. It's directly linked to the readout speed.

So in this case, it's 4x better, but it still exists.

With the mechanical shutter, you get about 1/320s rolling shutter, so it's even better but still exists.

I followed the a discussion in the Sony forum a while ago (I think when the A1 was released) so excellent from someone with experience with the A9.

1DMIII 1/60s
R5 1/60s (R6 too?)
R3 1/200s (Approximately)
A1 1/260s
A9 1/160s
A7R 1/10s
Mechanical 1/320s

At least for me it would be interesting to know what A1 shooters are using predominantly with ball sports. Since the R3 is kind of in the middle of the A9 and A1.

I know with the mechanical on the R6 and 1DX I get a pretty round ball in the scenario of the kicked ball moving laterally across the frame.

Not that it would change my interest level with the R3. I haven't seen the manual or any documentation that shows the compatibility level of high-speed shooting with older EF lenses... nor documentation that shows whether 30FPS is customizable to something manageable when dealing with human movement.

Thanks for the reply.

 

[DocGee2]

Think we all Amy be still processing the new info presented by Canon this AM.

I want one!

 

[DocGee2]

B&H is showing a US$5999 price.

 

[Kokopelli_Rocks]

B&H is showing a US$5999 price.

Yes, depending on the market the R3 is around (~) $2,500 more than the R5.

Sorry, I don't like two pages of reply with quotes.

 

[MoonMadness]

B&H is showing a US$5999 price.

Oh...that is a LOT less than $7,798. Someone was WAY off, by $1,799!

 

[Kokopelli_Rocks]

B&H is showing a US$5999 price.

Oh...that is a LOT less than $7,798. Someone was WAY off, by $1,799!

So what, I did bad math early in morning. The whole point of my post is the R3 is quite a bit more expensive than than the R5 and it should be a much better camera. I have zero problems with the price of the R5 or R3. I don't see why R5 users would have any reason not to expect the R3 to be better. I also find it funny when Sony A1 users crow how their camera which is ~$2,600 more than an R5 is is better than an R5. I hope it is for $6,498.

I won't be buying an R3, not because of the price, I just don't need the features and the camera for ME is too big. Although the eye control AF would be nice to have again. Loved the first version on my old EOS 3.

I am sure Canon will sell tons of R3s and continue to sell tons of R5s and R6s.