Canon USA: The R3 line will continue

[neuroanatomist]

My thoughts are the camera was RUSHED. Marketing forced them to announce it without all the features implemented.

Why would Canon need to rush something that came out right on schedule?

2012 - 1D X​

2016 - 1D X II​

2020 - 1D X III​

2024 - R1​

I'm hoping that more features are announced as we get closer to launch date (Even if they are announced as future firmware updates and not included out of the box).

I wouldn’t hold my breath, if I were you.

Of course, I preordered as soon as it was available, but I may cancel if the feature set does not change as we get closer to launch date.

As did I, and as anyone who was seriously considering the R1 and wanted it as soon as possible should have.

I will most likely keep my preorder.

 

[Quack]

I find it sad this term has become so entrenched on here that even the site admin is using it

Shows you that even the site admin fails to understand that a less expensive camera has less features. I would say that someone who fails to understand this incredibly simple concept is a "moron," but "moron," like "cripple," is a term I would not use because it is quite derogatory.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Now an R5S/R with an 80Mp sensor with all the software improvements of the R5 Mark II just makes sense. I would hope they focus on that, with a release in the next 12 months or so, and keep expectations low and on the back burner for the R3 Mark II. There is basically no reason to be talking about it right now other than address the elephant in the room (which is "is the R3 even relevant anymore").

I suspect we’ll see an 80-100 MP R5s at some point soon.

I think the R3 is ‘relevant’ because it’s cheaper than the R1. I’m not sure that Canon will make any more of them, assuming they have a decent inventory.

I doubt we’ll see an R3 II.

But then, I said we wouldn’t see an APS-C R body, which Canon did release without losing any market share as they dropped the M line. That just proves my ongoing point that Canon knows the market better than any of us.

 

[Lt Colonel]

On a selfish note. Maybe Canon will create a "wildlife" version the R3 II. Bump up the megapixels to mid 30's add pre-capture, adjustable frame rate, improved battery (why not) , and the new cross type auto focus. On the other hand, I'd like to have my hair back too.

 

[koenkooi]

Why would Canon need to rush something that came out right on schedule?

2012 - 1D X​

2016 - 1D X II​

2020 - 1D X III​

2024 - R1​

[...]

He has a point, though. That weird sensor that is rumoured to detect faces behind the camera is present in the body, but isn't mentioned by marketing or reviewers. That Canon released it on schedule doesn't mean there were no problems that caused rushing.

I could argue the other way as well, Canon didn't rush and released the not-completely-finished camera right on schedule.

Either way, this launch wasn't smooth!

 

[neuroanatomist]

He has a point, though. That weird sensor that is rumoured to detect faces behind the camera is present in the body, but isn't mentioned by marketing or reviewers. That Canon released it on schedule doesn't mean there were no problems that caused rushing.

I could argue the other way as well, Canon didn't rush and released the not-completely-finished camera right on schedule.

Either way, this launch wasn't smooth!

Fair point. But I suspect the unidentified sensor on the back of the camera, if it is indeed a facial recognition system, may have been subject to some regulatory issues that were outside of Canon's control. There are plenty of examples of tech products released with un-enabled hardware.

Definitely agree that Canon botched the launch. Seems to be a combination of two simultaneous launches with strong attempts to maintain secrecy. Much of the spec confusion was at the country-specific level, e.g. the ES X-sync speed that was cleared up by the R5II manual showing the 'sync priority mode' with a faster X-sync, accounting for some geographies specifying 1/320 s for the R1 and some specifying 1/400 s.

 

[yankiefrankie]

Why would Canon need to rush something that came out right on schedule?

2012 - 1D X​

2016 - 1D X II​

2020 - 1D X III​

2024 - R1​

I wouldn’t hold my breath, if I were you.


As did I, and as anyone who was seriously considering the R1 and wanted it as soon as possible should have.

I will most likely keep my preorder.

Just because it was announced on schedule does not mean that the engineers/developers were not rushing to complete features. I am a software engineer and I experience this problem often. ;-)

If this is the complete (and planned) feature set it doesn't make sense to me. Moving from the R3->R1 and gaining 10fps + pre-capture is not much of an improvement in my eyes. And it R1 does not look great when you put it next to the A9III. I do not pretend to understand the market more than Canon, but this R1 may end up driving more R3 sales than anything else.

I guess now I know why Canon did not add the pre-capture feature from the R8/R6ii to the R3. It is now the biggest differentiator between the R3/R1!

I really hope Canon does not keep around the R3 line just to get people to upgrade their sports cameras every 2 years. Add one or two new features to an R3 (but not the flagship lol) to get people to upgrade, then release an R1 2 years later with a few newer features, when the reality is most of these features could have been added via firmware.

I'm starting to go on a rant now, but I am one of those people who would be HAPPY to purchase firmware updates with new features. As long as the hardware can support it, keep adding new features and people can choose to buy them if they need them. Then, 4 years later, release a new camera with serious hardware improvements.

Anyway, I digress...

 

[neuroanatomist]

I guess now I know why Canon did not add the pre-capture feature from the R8/R6ii to the R3. It is now the biggest differentiator between the R3/R1!

I’d say it’s AF performance, and the ‘little things’ that will be clear from the manual but don’t always make spec lists.

For example, I find 7-10 fps a sweet spot for many subjects, but with the R3 I have to choose too slow (3 fps) or too fast (15 fps) if I want a silent shot. The R1 has more options.

I wonder if the R1 will have AF point-linked spot metering?

I really hope Canon does not keep around the R3 line just to get people to upgrade their sports cameras every 2 years. Add one or two new features to an R3 (but not the flagship lol) to get people to upgrade, then release an R1 2 years later with a few newer features, when the reality is most of these features could have been added via firmware.

If there’s an R3 II, my money is on a 30 MP global shutter sensor.

 

[P-visie]

Indeed. So now Nikon customers have two options for a 45-50MP camera. A R1 style and an R5 style.

Yes, that's fine for Nikon users. But would Nikon have released the Z8 within this short timeframe after the Z9 if the Z9 was selling very well?

 

[PinholeR5]

If this is the complete (and planned) feature set it doesn't make sense to me. Moving from the R3->R1 and gaining 10fps + pre-capture is not much of an improvement in my eyes. And it R1 does not look great when you put it next to the A9III. I do not pretend to understand the market more than Canon, but this R1 may end up driving more R3 sales than anything else.

While I do agree with the statement that the R3 -> R1 improvement is substantially smaller than what I (and probably most everyone) would have expected and substantially smaller than the R5 -> R5 II improvement, I will say that it is much largern than what you have stated above.

IMHO, the biggest improvement is in the AF system and that is (again, IMHO) the most critical differentiating factor for action/sports photography today. I think rolling shutter improvements are not as significant anymore, DR improvements are incremental, etc.

The AF system of the R1 will be substantially superior. The Cross-type AF points will allow for superior AF in many situations where the R3 fundamentally struggles. The DIGIC Acceleratior will allow for substantially improved AI AF algorithms that the R3 will never be able to accomodate. This is the main difference! Pre-capture is also not something to dismiss, though I agree that by itslelf not that exciting. And, as I said, even adding all this it is still a disappointing improvment for R3 -> R1 and significantly smaller than R5 -> R5 II improvement.

I personally will make the move R3 -> R1, just because of the AF system. I am moving R5 -> R5 II (happy with this one) and I know I will not like the R3 AF system after I start using the R5 II.

I'm starting to go on a rant now, but I am one of those people who would be HAPPY to purchase firmware updates with new features. As long as the hardware can support it, keep adding new features and people can choose to buy them if they need them. Then, 4 years later, release a new camera with serious hardware improvements.

I would be happy with that model as well.

 

[DBounce]

Why would Canon need to rush something that came out right on schedule?

2012 - 1D X​

2016 - 1D X II​

2020 - 1D X III​

2024 - R1​

I wouldn’t hold my breath, if I were you.


As did I, and as anyone who was seriously considering the R1 and wanted it as soon as possible should have.

I will most likely keep my preorder.

I don’t think Canon rushed the launch of the R1… and the timing bears that out. What I think really happened, is that Canon did not expect Sony to release the A9III with a global shutter sensor. That really through the monkey in the wrench. Released almost a year earlier, and in many regards better headline specs. All this while coming in at a fraction of the size and weight.

IMO, this suggests that Canon was indeed, as earlier rumors suggested, working on their own global shutter sensor, but just couldn’t get it to work well enough to launch in their flagship body. So, they instead opted for a fast rolling shutter design.

I’m not writing the R1 off yet. I preordered immediately. When I get it, I plan to directly compare it against my Sony A9III. If I’m not substantially impressed, then the added size and weight will see the Canon returned. At that point I’ll have to think long and hard about what to do with all my Canon glass. I’m hoping it doesn’t come to that.

 

[dirty soap]

Looks like the time between 3 series releases was 23 years. Seems like there's time to wait to see if the line is dead.

 

[Anon]

What I’m saying is that Canon has the data, and they launched a 24 MP R1. What do you infer from that? Logic says they believe it is what their customers want. My only claim is that they are most likely making data-driven decisions.

While I agree with this point, there might also be a cultural aspect. Having both studied in Japan (albeit for a short time) and having worked with Japanese companies I always noticed the power of seniority. Especially at university the professor was basically god. If he said that 1+1=3, then the students would have never argued against it.

It could be that whoever was in charge of the project decided to be conservative and stay in the tradition of the 1 series to keep a lower resolution - because why not, it worked well so far. Maybe the feedback of the professionals was more heterogeneous then we might think?

We will never know, but the point I am trying to make, is that while data definitely played a role in the development, there might also have been cultural and corporational aspects affecting the final design choices.

 

[P-visie]

If it was Canon Russia - those people were just unhinged.

I think usually Canon USA is pretty on point with PR, but to be honest, they can say anything now and change their minds 2 years down the road.

Yes, and the person who made that statement had no alternative than saying the R3 would continue. Saying Canon would stop or discontinue the R3, would have been disastrous for R3 sales, leaving Canon and dealers with (probably) a lot of stock.

The decision to continue or discontinue the R3 or to develop a successor to the R3 will be made in Canon’s Imaging Division HQ in Japan, not by Canon USA.

 

[MikeGalos]

While I agree with this point, there might also be a cultural aspect. Having both studied in Japan (albeit for a short time) and having worked with Japanese companies I always noticed the power of seniority. Especially at university the professor was basically god. If he said that 1+1=3, then the students would have never argued against it.

I had friends who taught tech subjects worldwide and Japan drove them nuts. The students would not ask questions or join in discussions. They had absolutely no feedback whether they were reaching the students or not.

 

[mdcmdcmdc]

Canon USA reps made an interesting comment to PetaPixel during the launch event. Canon assured them that the R3 line is not going away and will continue in the future. I think we have to take a step back and review exactly what the “3” model was in the past. The EOS-3 came out in

See full article...

A thoughtful and well-researched response to the "R1 is just an R3 Mark II" critics. Bravo!

 

[bn5fg]

R1 line = very fast shutter
R3 line = global shutter
R5 line = high MP

It would be very logical and appealing for me. I'm shooting with a flash most of the time and it would be cool to have access to a global shutter without switching to Sony. Canon's lens lineup is slowly becoming okayish, so a global shutter is the last line of defense for Sony.

 

[KAS]

I will echo some of the sentiments here. I used to rock a pair of 1ds3 cameras. Loved it. Top-of-the-line AF, build, battery, etc. Since ther merge of the 1d and 1ds lines, I've been hankering for a real replacement. I was really looking forward to this announcement of the R1, but, I am instead going with the R5mk2. I've always felt that I was making a concession with the 5 series...even though it is a fine quality camera. I feel like especially in this day, it's trivial to swap out sensors. It's otherwise all the same electronics. And even if the R1 had a single high resolution sensor, it also seems trivial to just capture in lower resolution. same buffer and processor speed, but you have a choice of resolution or speed in the same camera. But I'm not an engineer, so maybe it's less trivial than I think. Sure, I'm just a guy on the internet, but I am definitely one of those phantom photographers Who wants a rugged high resolution 1 series camera.

 

[jam05]

I have no idea on what they'll do in the future, but whatever it is - I think it will be "sideways" of the R1. it won't replace the R1.

it wouldn't surprise me, but as i was thinking about it.. i could see the R3 Mark II getting the first global shutter as well. something like a 20MP global shutter camera.

Another thing they could do - is move the R3 to APS-C - say give it a 40MP APS-C stacked sensor.

anyone's guess - but a 120MP R3 Mark II sounds good, as does a 40MP APS-C R3-S

I don't see any need for a global shutter. 50 year old technology introduced when readout speeds were in whole seconds and sacrificing whole stops of DR. The next R3 or R1 will break the 1ms level basically instantaneous readout. The R1 is already reading out faster than a mechanical shutter.

 

[John Wilde]

Just remember that everything Canon says is corporate PR.

Like every other camera company. Don't trust the words of any of them.