The “3 Series” to continue after the EOS R3?
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
I would love it if they’d just offer the R6mk3 in the R3 body. I have the battery grip for the R6(mk1) and find it oversized for the camera. Having the option to buy an R6 with integrated grip would be cool (for me).
Upvote
0
I think nearly everyone else thinks the Nikon Z8 is, in fact, the counterpart of the Canon R5 series. It is Nikon's non-integrated grip, pro-level, 45 MP camera good for action as well as any other category of photography. Gee, just like the Canon R5 series is a non-integrated grip, pro level, 45 mp camera good for action as well as any other category of photography. The two cameras are in the same general price category. As the Z8 has no integrated grip, it is not comparable to the R3. The Z8, I believe, in all likelihood, has replaced the Z7. I don't see any room in the Nikon lineup for the Z7 series to continue. Just my opinions, obviously.
Upvote
0
I wouldn't say everyone else--there are plenty in Nikon forums who have expressed wishes for a more capable R7 upgrade--but there are very few still holding out hope for one due to the price point and nature of the Z8. Of course, many Nikon enthusiasts are happy with Nikon's current offerings. Several of my Nikon friends love their Z8 cameras and find it a natural successor to the D850. However, having used the R5 since its inception, I long for a more capable all-around Nikon body in a compact package. Although there are plenty (but, apparently, not enough) who think like I do, the general opinion is that a Z7 successor-- if it ever comes--will be an ultra-high resolution body (80-100MP). There is a market for such a beast, but I won't be in line to purchase one.
Upvote
0
A high MP R3 doesn't make sense, IMO. Canon has walked themselves in to a weird corner. They can't cohesively price the R3 under an R1, because... all things equal, the high MP body will be the more desirable body. It would be odd to have a high pixel count and effectively a better camera for less than the R1 (it will almost certainly be better in most ways because of its age). Sure, the R1 may have better noise handling, but largely, the R3 will be the flagship in that scenario and we all know how little Canon liked that moniker even before the R1 was announced.
On the flipside, they could reorganize in 2026 and make the R3 the de facto sports body, and basically make an R1 replacement and move the R1 II to the high pixel count body and clean up the line.
If I'm honest, both seem like weird decisions, in light of their current stance. Personally, I still find it hard to believe the R3 will continue. I think the more likely direction will be the dropping of the R3, and the continuance of a single 1 Series body. But I can also see the dropping of the R3 and the introduction of a second 1 Series body, like in the past.
On the flipside, they could reorganize in 2026 and make the R3 the de facto sports body, and basically make an R1 replacement and move the R1 II to the high pixel count body and clean up the line.
If I'm honest, both seem like weird decisions, in light of their current stance. Personally, I still find it hard to believe the R3 will continue. I think the more likely direction will be the dropping of the R3, and the continuance of a single 1 Series body. But I can also see the dropping of the R3 and the introduction of a second 1 Series body, like in the past.
Upvote
0
No Business, only saying i have one.
My grinder is a Eureka Mignon Magnifico. Bezzera and Eureka is a good combination. It was recommended to me by my local Espresso-Dealer. Everything fine!
Upvote
0
The launch price of the R3 was $6K USD.
The launch price of the R1 is $6,300 USD.
That is not very much of a price difference.
The R3 II could even be the same price.
The R7 and R8 were the same price at launch.
Upvote
0
In that case, the key would be that it won't be "all things equal".
If they go the high res route, I can see them making a 80 MP body at 15 or 20 fps, and leave out some of the nice stuff in the R1 like the 0.9x EVF and the matched CFe slots, etc...
Basically take the current R3 body, put a sensor at the same pixel density as the R7 but FF and whatever DIGIC generation is current in 2026. I can see this camera being priced at $4500 to $5000.
In this scenario, the R1 would still be the flagship fast sports body, like the 1 series has been since the 1DX.
Of course, they can do the same thing to the R5II body (replace the 45MP stacked sensor with an 80 MP FF sensor) and call it an R5s and price it the same way.
Upvote
0
As someone with an R1 on pre-order (and seriously considering ordering a second by selling off more of my gear), I’m a bit perplexed.
I think the next logical step for the R3 would be to refine it with a modern AF system from the R1/R5II, update the interface, switch to full-size HDMI, redundant format card slots, and keep the same sensor and viewfinder. It’s similar to what Sony did with the A9 to A9II or the A7R3 to A7R4. Canon would be better off positioning it in the $4500-5000 range (like the A9), instead of the R3’s original $6000 price point.
I know some might not like this, but there really isn’t much room for the R3 to grow without stepping on the R1’s toes. Honestly, the R1 wasn’t the huge leap we expected. Some will defend it, but that’s not based on facts. The R1 isn’t a massive jump over the R3 to warrant the multi-year hype - this lead to a lot of justified expectation. You’re welcome to disagree, but remember, I have one on order. It clearly didn’t bother me enough to stop me—I think the R1 fixes all the shortcomings I had with the R3, which I’ve used almost daily since launch. In that sense, the R3 was perhaps a testbed for the refinement of the R1. I’m willing to pay for that, especially with a sensor readout speed faster than a mechanical shutter. (Still, the drop in LCD resolution on the R1 and lack of CFE 4.0 support baffles me.)
Given the name “R1,” we probably won’t see a direct successor for another 4 years. And who knows where the market will be in the next 2-3? It’s pretty clear global shutter is the next big move. The R1 is the flagship, and I don’t see any camera below it getting a better sensor or viewfinder anytime soon. That said, I’d welcome an R1S, R1X, or R3II with dual card slots, a larger battery, and the build quality I want, paired with a higher-res sensor as a backup to the R1.
(P.S. I love the R3 body—it’s the best I’ve ever handled, used, or owned. The R1 is slightly larger, so we’ll see how that affects handling and packing.)
I think the next logical step for the R3 would be to refine it with a modern AF system from the R1/R5II, update the interface, switch to full-size HDMI, redundant format card slots, and keep the same sensor and viewfinder. It’s similar to what Sony did with the A9 to A9II or the A7R3 to A7R4. Canon would be better off positioning it in the $4500-5000 range (like the A9), instead of the R3’s original $6000 price point.
I know some might not like this, but there really isn’t much room for the R3 to grow without stepping on the R1’s toes. Honestly, the R1 wasn’t the huge leap we expected. Some will defend it, but that’s not based on facts. The R1 isn’t a massive jump over the R3 to warrant the multi-year hype - this lead to a lot of justified expectation. You’re welcome to disagree, but remember, I have one on order. It clearly didn’t bother me enough to stop me—I think the R1 fixes all the shortcomings I had with the R3, which I’ve used almost daily since launch. In that sense, the R3 was perhaps a testbed for the refinement of the R1. I’m willing to pay for that, especially with a sensor readout speed faster than a mechanical shutter. (Still, the drop in LCD resolution on the R1 and lack of CFE 4.0 support baffles me.)
Given the name “R1,” we probably won’t see a direct successor for another 4 years. And who knows where the market will be in the next 2-3? It’s pretty clear global shutter is the next big move. The R1 is the flagship, and I don’t see any camera below it getting a better sensor or viewfinder anytime soon. That said, I’d welcome an R1S, R1X, or R3II with dual card slots, a larger battery, and the build quality I want, paired with a higher-res sensor as a backup to the R1.
(P.S. I love the R3 body—it’s the best I’ve ever handled, used, or owned. The R1 is slightly larger, so we’ll see how that affects handling and packing.)
Upvote
0
Nikon could make the Z7 a higher resolution camera and give it a 61 MP sensor or choose an even higher pixel count. Voila, new room found for the Z7 and it might attract a lot of buyers.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I still think of the R1 as actually being the camera that was supposed to be a R3 Mark II but all the pressure on Canon to release a R1 made them rebadge it as the R1. If the R1 as we know it was intended to be a R1 all along, I feel they missed the mark creating a true flagship camera as a worthy successor to the 1Dx Mark III. For the price, I find it rather underwhelming and reports seem to be the low light performance of the R5 Mark II are not that thrilling either, perhaps the downside to so many people falling for the marketing hype and demanding back side illumination and stacked sensor designs, neither of which determine the image quality, only the die fabrication method.
Upvote
0
I'll take a look at the Magica. Seems nice too. If it is not too large, since I'm the only one drinking coffee. I'll have to buy it in Germany, in Calw, prices are lower compared to France.No Business, only saying i have one.
Upvote
0
Not at all!
The R3 was supposed to become the Panasonic S1, while the R1 was originally a prototype for the Sony A 9 III. Since it was not good or maybe advanced enough for them, they rejected it, so that it became a Canon. Canon will perform a last minute change and fit it with a tinfoil strobe mount cover.
This is the naked truth!
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Aahahahaha yesses!!! Thank you!
I was quite surprised to have to scroll that far down to see the good old R3/1 conspiracy come up again.
Upvote
0
Canon with the R1 is delivering now something close to the functionality of an R3 II. And that leaves everyone confused as to how these bodies are supposed to be distinguished, aside from being out-of-sync in their release schedules.
When the R3 came out, it was supposedly a non-flagship camera, but few pros went and bought the older 1Dx III "flagship" once the R3 came out. It was clearly the superior sports shooter. Anyone here who owned an R3 last year think it wasn't the flagship?
People wondered (are still wondering?) what the R1 could do to surpass it. This is why some people argued it would be a better resolution. Turns out that AF, video and a few other improvements are making plenty of people consider it a decent enough upgrade. But if they'd called it the R3 II, would anyone have blinked? Likewise, if the R3 had been called the R1, would anyone have thought it odd?
The initial indication that there would be another R3 came from some mid-level exec at a launch party answering an off-hand question. I took that as one of those fibs that camera companies usually say. They never admit a line is dead until it's been gone a bunch of years.
If they truly are going to come out with an R3 II, and market in a similar way that the branded it last time around, it'll be something akin to an R1 II, with a few updates and the smaller (better) form factor. You'll essentially have flagships for men/women, big-handed/small-handed people, updated off-cycle from one another.
-tig
When the R3 came out, it was supposedly a non-flagship camera, but few pros went and bought the older 1Dx III "flagship" once the R3 came out. It was clearly the superior sports shooter. Anyone here who owned an R3 last year think it wasn't the flagship?
People wondered (are still wondering?) what the R1 could do to surpass it. This is why some people argued it would be a better resolution. Turns out that AF, video and a few other improvements are making plenty of people consider it a decent enough upgrade. But if they'd called it the R3 II, would anyone have blinked? Likewise, if the R3 had been called the R1, would anyone have thought it odd?
The initial indication that there would be another R3 came from some mid-level exec at a launch party answering an off-hand question. I took that as one of those fibs that camera companies usually say. They never admit a line is dead until it's been gone a bunch of years.
If they truly are going to come out with an R3 II, and market in a similar way that the branded it last time around, it'll be something akin to an R1 II, with a few updates and the smaller (better) form factor. You'll essentially have flagships for men/women, big-handed/small-handed people, updated off-cycle from one another.
-tig
Upvote
0
Price difference is minimal, but space needs aren't. I'll check, then decide. And allow myself half a year to succeed.
With French or Italian beans chances of success are high! So long, Bialetti!
Upvote
0
Similar threads
