Canon R3 official details

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

Member's gallery
Steve said:
Keep in mind that cameras like this are often more the sum of their spec sheets. As compared to the a9ii, it's a heck of an upgrade for sure and it's probably close to the a1. Keep in mind the maximum frame rate for the a9ii is 20FPS and you have to go to 12 bit lossy compressed to pull it off. The R3 can do 30 lossless at 14 bit (according to Jeff Cable, a friend of mine who was testing it at the olympics). That in and of itself significant. Even the a1 can't do 30FPS with dropping to 12 bit lossy RAW.
Click to expand...

There seems to be a fair amount of confusion about what bit the a1 shoots in, as all previous Sony cameras without the new XR processor, including the a9 ii, drop to 12 bit with raw set to compressed and continuous shooting. The a1 however, according to Sony, always records raw images at 14 bit regardless of setting or shooting mode and exif data shows this. The a7S iii also records raw images at 14 bit regardless of setting or shooting mode. Seems the new XR processor is responsible for this change.

E83A7398-1AF0-46D6-A2C4-B38548219A49.jpeg


Of course outside of base ISO, raw bit and compression level really doesn’t matter and even then, unless you’re dramatically boosting exposure and shadows (4+ stops), the difference is all but imperceptible.

In fact, I’d be surprised if the R3 beats the a9 ii in dynamic range with the R3 shooting 14 bit lossless raw vs the a9 ii shooting 12 bit compressed raw. The R5 using its electronic shutter is a half a stop or so worse than the a9 ii using it’s electronic shutter, with the 1DX III and R6 being even worse than that (about 1 whole stop).

That all said, I believe the R3 will be a great camera and has some compelling new features. The question that remains is, will it be a great value relative to its competition?
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
bleirer said:
It is truly an amazing camera, but check this out from the review linked below:

Of course, there are some caveats to the Alpha 1's eye-catching burst specs. In order to achieve the full 30fps burst rate, you first must use the electronic or silent shutter. The camera's mechanical shutter is still limited to just 10fps, much like the A7R IV. Also, you can't capture images at 30fps using uncompressed RAW or the new lossless compressed RAW image formats. Instead, you'll have to use JPEGs or lossy compressed RAW. Otherwise, with these other image quality settings, like uncompressed RAW+JPEG, the Alpha 1 will "only" shoot up to 20fps -- which, to be honest, is plenty fast for almost any sports or action subject.

www.imaging-resource.com

Sony A1 Review

The new Sony A1, the ultimate Sony full-frame camera? 50MP, 30fps shooting, 8K video & more See our Sony Alpha A1 preview for all the details!
www.imaging-resource.com
Click to expand...
Not correct. For 30fps you use compressed raw or jpeg. Also, I’ve never used the mechanical shutter so I could care less what FPS it operates. The a1 is the first camera that actually doesn’t need a mechanical shutter unless you want to do the 1/400 flash sync.
If we are comparing the a1 to the R3 please note that the R3 can only shoot in 30 or 15 FPS. You can’t shoot at 20FPS. Oh and as mentioned the a1 is doing this at 50MP! That’s more then double that of the R3 and the a1 is using a slower CFE-A card.
 
Member's gallery
Rodamu said:
Many magazines and other publications want vertical shots to fill their pages.
Click to expand...

Maybe this is a stupid comparison, but given that a lot if not most media is consumed on smartphones held in portrait orientation, I think that modulo aspect ratio, this is better even for social media.
 
Hut said:
20 fps lossless raw is killer
Click to expand...

I totally agree. I was just saying the 24mpix was part of the reason the r3 can have 30 fps lossless raw. We'll see if the next one can do better, but physics is limiting at some point.
 
Darwin said:
Since you have used both, I am curious on your thoughts on this comparison review of the A1 vs R5
Click to expand...
I have no experience with the R5 100-500. I jumped from Nikon D500/850s to Sony A1 200-600.
*I will watch video and make notes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
dtibbals said:
Not correct. For 30fps you use compressed raw or jpeg. Also, I’ve never used the mechanical shutter so I could care less what FPS it operates. The a1 is the first camera that actually doesn’t need a mechanical shutter unless you want to do the 1/400 flash sync.
If we are comparing the a1 to the R3 please note that the R3 can only shoot in 30 or 15 FPS. You can’t shoot at 20FPS. Oh and as mentioned the a1 is doing this at 50MP! That’s more then double that of the R3 and the a1 is using a slower CFE-A card.
Click to expand...

I believe the quote I cited said the 30 fps was using the lossy raw, nor lossless. I don't know except what I read. Either way pretty good.
 
Member's gallery
bleirer said:
I totally agree. I was just saying the 24mpix was part of the reason the r3 can have 30 fps lossless raw. We'll see if the next one can do better, but physics is limiting at some point.
Click to expand...

Again, I wouldn’t expect the R3 to be any better than the a9 ii in dynamic range, let alone the a1. Compared to the a9 ii, the R5 with its electronic shutter is approx a 1/2 stop less in dynamic range and the 1DX III/R6 are approx 1 stop worse.

Outside of base iso and heavy exposure and shadow pushes (4+ stops), the differences between uncompressed/lossless compressed vs compressed and 12 bit vs 14 bit are all but imperceptible. Great option to have, but for action shooting I’ll take the smaller file size/larger buffer with essentially no loss in image quality.

Sony a7RIV visual examples with 12 and 14 bit precision - the last word

This is one in a series of posts on the Sony alpha 7 R Mark IV (aka a7RIV). You should be able to find all the posts about that camera in the Category List on the right sidebar, below the Articles widget. There’s a drop-down menu there that you can use to get to all
blog.kasson.com blog.kasson.com

Nikon 12-bit raw mode - the last word

A couple of weeks ago, I looked at the dynamic range effects of Sony's 12-bit shutter modes. Then someone asked about the visual effects of Nikon's 12-bit raw mode. I did a visual test. For some, that's enough. If you're one of those, move along; nothing to see here. Still around? I'm a numbers guy,
blog.kasson.com blog.kasson.com
 
Darwin said:
Since you have used both, I am curious on your thoughts on this comparison review of the A1 vs R5
Click to expand...
I think he explains it pretty good at the end. It depends on what you are after. He is like everyone else and just a bit biased imo....lol
I was hoping to see a comparison in low light situations but I felt most of his still shots showed better detail with Sony, even on the youtube video even in bright light. He played it down a bit imo.
A couple notes,
I prefer the internal zoom due to very fine dust in my location.
The Sony zoom ring is great. Less than 1/4 turn from 200-600.
Canon 100-500 would be much more convenient to carry and travel with.
The minimum focus distance is significant if you are doing macro shots, no doubt.
Hejnar foot on the 200-600 is perfect. I use it as a handle mostly
Lens hood on my 200-600 has fallen off once without me knowing. I had to go back and find it. Tape will fix it.
I like the lens function buttons, perfect location for me.
I like more reach for this size zoom as I do not own a big prime lens. The short end will see much less use but his examples of the geese are valid considerations. Depending on location.
I do not shoot video so I am not effected by the lack of bird eye AF on video, I honestly didn't even know about it.
I could not be happier with my choice. The A1 with 200-600 is just what I wanted. I think Canon users will enjoy theirs also.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Member's gallery
dtibbals said:
Just released. Looks good but for the price it should have a higher MP sensor.

few things from reading the specs. It basically is their take of a Sony a9II. They should have put dual matching card slots, the EVF refresh rate is equal to a9 but half the speed of the a1. Shooting speed is equivalent to a1 however at less than half the MP. Price is $5999 which isn’t crazy but that’s $1,501 more than the a9II. This sets up the R1 or whatever they call it flagship to be a higher MP body but at what price? I’m thinking that might end up being a $8k body! Starting to make the a1 look like a deal.
https://www.canonrumors.com/here-is...34XBLxgdLmpteCm1E0OKp3-Sca6dW46UFHGPj4cWcuU50
Click to expand...
There is a lot more to a camera beyond specs...
 
Member's gallery
Hut said:
I think he explains it pretty good at the end. It depends on what you are after. He is like everyone else and just a bit biased imo....lol
I was hoping to see a comparison in low light situations but I felt most of his still shots showed better detail with Sony, even on the youtube video even in bright light. He played it down a bit imo.
A couple notes,
I prefer the internal zoom due to very fine dust in my location.
The Sony zoom ring is great. Less than 1/4 turn from 200-600.
Canon 100-500 would be much more convenient to carry and travel with.
The minimum focus distance is significant if you are doing macro shots, no doubt.
Hejnar foot on the 200-600 is perfect. I use it as a handle mostly
Lens hood on my 200-600 has fallen off once without me knowing. I had to go back and find it. Tape will fix it.
I like the lens function buttons, perfect location for me.
I like more reach for this size zoom as I do not own a big prime lens. The short end will see much less use but his examples of the geese are valid considerations. Depending on location.
I do not shoot video so I am not effected by the lack of bird eye AF on video, I honestly didn't even know about it.
I could not be happier with my choice. The A1 with 200-600 is just what I wanted. I think Canon users will enjoy theirs also.
Click to expand...
I saw just this about R3s 30 FPS .
It does make quite a racket which may disturb the birds.
How does A1 compare with this ?
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
Venkatesh VT said:
It also seems to be having some heat issue like R5
See https://www.canon-europe.com/cameras/eos-r3/specifications/
Quoting from it
"
If the cameras internal temperature becomes too high the maximum recording time will be reduced
"
Click to expand...

It's all about expectations. You can shoot 4k for 6 hours non-stop, 6K for 1 hour non stop. The most limited mode being 4k 120 - which is a 5x slowdown on a 24ips timeline so over 40mn of playback time and it got rid of the 30mn per clip limit. For a camera that's not video specific that's quite impressive and only bested by... the Sony A1 (I think that's going to be a recurring theme, at least spec-wise)
 
Member's gallery
Found it. It's in DPreview first look - there is "Silent shutter on/off"


It's also in Fro's video with far more details. The full silent mode also holds the shutter open when turning off the camera to avoid that noise. And you can plug in earphones (but no bluetooth unfortunately) to get the fake shutter sound without annoying anyone.
Then he shows all 4 categories of sound you can individually set from zero (no sound) to 5 including e-shutter noise, focusing, tech sounds and self timer.


So I think you can put this one to rest. The R3 will be as silent as you want it to be :)
 
Member's gallery
Tiago Cardoso said:
It's nice for some users to have the option to have sound.
Click to expand...
It can be for sure. I have mine fully silent and it drives the people I'm with nuts - they never know if I'm shooting or not! It's especially hard on guides trying to help you find / get a shot. They get you into position and wonder why you aren't shooting! So, sometimes I turn it on :)
 
There are some places in the world where sound is required. I remember watch a golf tournament I think Japan where the players were annoyed but the commentators said it was required for the cameras to click. I dont remember the details.
 
Member's gallery
bleirer said:
There are some places in the world where sound is required. I remember watch a golf tournament I think Japan where the players were annoyed but the commentators said it was required for the cameras to click. I dont remember the details.
Click to expand...
IIRC, it's because there was an issue with shooting up the skirts of young women using silent shutter cameras (P&S at the time - it'll take some guts to try it with a DSLR or Mirrorless).
 
Member's gallery
Steve said:
IIRC, it's because there was an issue with shooting up the skirts of young women using silent shutter cameras (P&S at the time - it'll take some guts to try it with a DSLR or Mirrorless).
Click to expand...

Wow... I'm so bummed out that is such a problem... I had no idea
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top