Canon talks EOS R3, and confirms that it is not the flagship mirrorless

[Emyr Evans]

In this order of professional - and price:

1. R1
2. R3
3. R5
4. R6

This really isn't that difficult to understand. Perhaps the fact that neither 1. nor 2. are out yet is causing the confusion.

 

[Kit Chan]

Canon should open the RF mount to me.

 

[AEWest]

In this order of professional - and price:

1. R1
2. R3
3. R5
4. R6

This really isn't that difficult to understand. Perhaps the fact that neither 1. nor 2. are out yet is causing the confusion.

Yes, of course from a pricing point of view. But what about camera features? It appears to me that the R3 will be an Alpha1 with a pro build, built in grip and Canon ergonomics and at least 45mp. Therefore a worthy sucessor to the 1Dx3 as an action camera.

So what could an R1 bring? If the above is true, I can't imagine that the R1 will be sports oriented. Too much overlap in features with the R3. Instead I expect it will be a high MP (100+) studio camera with global shutter.

 

[Ozarker]

Whatever the R1 vs R3 happens to be, these are exciting times. They'd be even more exciting if I had any got dang money!!!

 

[privatebydesign]

Yes, of course from a pricing point of view. But what about camera features? It appears to me that the R3 will be an Alpha1 with a pro build, built in grip and Canon ergonomics and at least 45mp. Therefore a worthy sucessor to the 1Dx3 as an action camera.

So what could an R1 bring? If the above is true, I can't imagine that the R1 will be sports oriented. Too much overlap in features with the R3. Instead I expect it will be a high MP (100+) studio camera with global shutter.

Global shutter! AF point linked spot metering. Lower MP, amateurs might ‘need’ them but many pros know they don’t only not need them but they don’t actually want them (until 5G actually works). Higher built quality, weather resistance and durability (shutter cycles etc).

Most amateurs (certainly forum dwellers) are feature driven, most pros are reliability and familiarity driven, if exactly the same camera was available with less features but was considerably more reliable and durable, and more expensive, some pros would buy it.

 

[Emyr Evans]

Yes, of course from a pricing point of view. But what about camera features? It appears to me that the R3 will be an Alpha1 with a pro build, built in grip and Canon ergonomics and at least 45mp. Therefore a worthy sucessor to the 1Dx3 as an action camera.

So what could an R1 bring? If the above is true, I can't imagine that the R1 will be sports oriented. Too much overlap in features with the R3. Instead I expect it will be a high MP (100+) studio camera with global shutter.

Since you ask - these are just my thoughts; just for fun:

R1 will have (main differentiators from R3):

• Bigger body (slightly) than R3
• 8K video at 60 fps
• 4K video at 240 fps
• Digix X1 processor, probably dual (next generation to the one in the R5 and R3)
• pre-record function (like Olympus has for example)
• 84MP sensor for high resolution stuff, but with a 'trick' to 1/4 down to 21Mp for insane fps (60 fps anyone?)
• £/$ 8,000 (R3 = £/$ 6,000)

Possibly a global shutter also.

Waw, that was fun!

 

[MiJax]

Global shutter! AF point linked spot metering. Lower MP, amateurs might ‘need’ them but many pros know they don’t only not need them but they don’t actually want them (until 5G actually works). Higher built quality, weather resistance and durability (shutter cycles etc).

Most amateurs (certainly forum dwellers) are feature driven, most pros are reliability and familiarity driven, if exactly the same camera was available with less features but was considerably more reliable and durable, and more expensive, some pros would buy it.

All the pros I shoot with have a slightly different mindset. The only thing that matters is, NOT missing the shot. That's it. Sure, reliability plays a part, but I can't remember the last Canon body that failed on me (even going back to a Rebel XT in the solid rain with no cover or weather sealed mount). The bodies are pretty well built. Quite simply, the pros I shoot with, want a body that doesn't get in the way and offers them the best opportunity to make the shot. Also, all the pros I shoot with buy their own gear, so it has to be a good value as well. Meaning features matter to them. Its different as an agency photog that checks gear out, but these guys buy their gear and its got to make sense for the use case and well for their personal needs.

I guess what I'm saying isn't too different from you, but is more focused on what matters to the larger audience of buyers in this range (working pros and advanced enthusiasts). And to the larger audience that uses their $7,000 purchase for business and play (or just play), certain features matter.

 

[tiggy@mac.com]

The "pro" or "flagship" level of a camera tier system primarily serves to divide the market into pricing categories to maximize revenue, as a company should do. The best camera for a product photographer is unlikely to be the same best camera for a PJ and for a wedding shooter, so we can eliminate the idea that there is a "best" at the upper end of the body market.

Canon can and does nerf some of its better bodies by preventing them from having spot-focus-tracked-metering and a couple other goodies, with an eye for creating a higher, "best" tier roughly along the lines of what a lot of pros need (but not all). Not only is it able to charge more for this camera series, but it is also able to create a branding with it that mines money from dentists who wish to borrow some camera masculinity.

If Canon called the R3 the R1 and charged $7k for it, it would be the new flagship by dint of its price and positioning. The male-dominated profession of photography is as prone to fashion trends as any other. Canon might continue its price stratification with the 1 series for some time more if it doesn't succumb to the temptation of keeping it in the 20 megapixel range.

My wife runs a wildlife magazine, and the percentage of shots purchased by them that come from a 1 series has been steadily going down since the 5DsR and then the high-res Sony bodies came out. As a wildlife shooter myself, I'm mildly annoyed that Canon nerfs some of those features. When shooting Sony it was great to be able to enjoy those same features on both the A9 and A7 series, which I - as appropriate - used for different purposes.

 

[Del Paso]

In Germany, a well known website (Idealo) has published 2 different "offers" by retailers for the R3:
- Euro 7299
- Or, even worse, Euro 9999 !!!!!
Sheer madness...
And no, these generous offers do NOT include the RF 1,2/35.
But be reassured, in both cases, shipping is free!
Is Canon going the Leica way?

 

[TravelerNick]

In Germany, a wellknown website (Idealo) has published 2 different "offers" by retailers for the R3:
- Euro 7299
- Or, even worse, Euro 9999 !!!!!
Sheer madness...
And no, these generous offers do NOT include the RF 1,2/35.
Is Canon going the Leica way?

I doubt any retailer is in the position to publish prices just yet. All they're likely doing is updating the website to get ready . It's not unusual for shops to do that with inflated prices.

Are they even taking orders?

 

[privatebydesign]

In Germany, a wellknown website (Idealo) has published 2 different "offers" by retailers for the R3:
- Euro 7299
- Or, even worse, Euro 9999 !!!!!
Sheer madness...
And no, these generous offers do NOT include the RF 1,2/35.
Is Canon going the Leica way?

They just sound like placeholders to me.

 

[Del Paso]

I doubt any retailer is in the position to publish prices just yet. All they're likely doing is updating the website to get ready . It's not unusual for shops to do that with inflated prices.

Are they even taking orders?

I'm afraid they are...(preorders)

 

[Del Paso]

They just sound like placeholders to me.

Also my opinion, but they take preorders...maybe they'll correct the price afterwards.
Yet, knowing how expensive Canons are in Europe (EOS R 5's lowest price is about Euro 5300!), 7300 even -sadly- seem realistic.

 

[neuroanatomist]

On amazon.com there are 3rd party sellers listing the RF 100-500 for $3100 and $3500 (vs. the list price of $2700). There's a sucker born every minute.

Now, since you mentioned Leica, perhaps you might consider their R3 (the SLR from the 1970's). They're much cheaper than Canon's upcoming version.

 

[arbitrage]

My guess is that the R3 will be more in line with the A9II as far as MPs and price (no 8K). The R1 will be in line with the A1 as far as price and MPs (8K) but may also bring advancements like global shutter and/or QPAF. Canon already said dual-pixel AF for the R3 in the official press release so QPAF is not coming to it.

The few people I know that had the 1DXIII have now sold it just because of the R5. I'd be surprised that many who haven't dumped it already will not dump it once the R3 is out. The R1 will be a whole other story.

 

[R1-7D]

My guess is that the R3 will be more in line with the A9II as far as MPs and price (no 8K). The R1 will be in line with the A1 as far as price and MPs (8K) but may also bring advancements like global shutter and/or QPAF. Canon already said dual-pixel AF for the R3 in the official press release so QPAF is not coming to it.

I just can't see this occurring. Canon has stated (Russian executive interview) that this camera will be directly competing against the A1 and Z9. Why would Canon bring out a 24-30 megapixel camera to compete against two 8K capable cameras? From a marketing perspective, it would fall flat...

I'm more inclined to believe the opposite of what you say - ie: the R3 will be an 8K capable camera with a similar price point to the A1 and Z9. The R1 will be lower resolution, have a global shutter, along with other improvements to its focusing capabilities, and be priced even higher than what's currently out there.

 

[Ph0t0]

Also my opinion, but they take preorders...maybe they'll correct the price afterwards.
Yet, knowing how expensive Canons are in Europe (EOS R 5's lowest price is about Euro 5300!), 7300 even -sadly- seem realistic.

It's about 4200eur.

 

[koenkooi]

It's about 4200eur.

Here in .nl the R5 street price is €4549, grey import takes it down to €4200.

 

[Hector1970]

I think Canon will struggle to create a distinction between the R3 and R1.
I can’t see the R1 being bigger in size (there would be no practical reason to be bigger - battery size would be likely to be the same). Weather sealing would be the same.
They’d be down to say focusing ability , it would be very poor of Canon to only implement a better focusing system on an R1. It would be at best a software enhancement.
They could distinguish based in MP. 45 v 100 MP. I think there would likely be a trade off here. The 45MP might be superior at high ISO.
They could distinguish based on FPS but that is a real diminishing return. There’s very limited uses where 30 FPS is more useful than 20 FPS
I think they will find it hard to make an R1 a compelling prospect with an R3 in existence. It’s existence and high price might improve the sales of the R3 once both exist.
(It sort of reminds me when Olympus brought out the M1X and I thought what was the point with the OMD EM 1 Mark III in existence - bigger battery and a few software tricks were the main improvements)

 

[JohnC]

Take half of 45 mp, 23ish mp. and a theoretical 60fps. They probably have the means to make video and stills shooting nearly the same thing. Pick the frame you want, if you want. My suspicion is that’s a game changer for some applications. Who knows? We will see.

One thing I’m pretty confident about....If Canon has decided a clear distinction is possible then it most likely is. While they haven’t been the fastest moving company with regards to technology, when they do take a significant leap forward it usually sticks. Not too many failed projects littering the floor.