The thing is, i own a Canon R3 - and don`t mind about the 24m resolution - the pictures are sharp and full of detail… 1. i live in the Canon world and love it 2. the first revolution for me was the Canon 5dmark II which had even less resolution and showed great results… don`t only look for numbers - take a cam and work with it… when you know your cam as good as you can work with it with closed eyes… that`s the moment the cam gets its real destination - by the way: the R3 is complex but you can get wonderful macros and landscape photography and portraits - the low light capability in concerts is outstanding. I don`t feel it as a niche-cam… the 1dxs were too heavy and loud for my wildlife photography… they sound like a machine gun.. but with the still mode the new cams are fantastic… and yes - i own a r6 also, but i love the R3 a bit more… all these new cams are great - Nikon, Sony e.g. thanks for listening
@@zlatyklas that’s the thing the Nikon Z9 AF is now on par and in “some ways” better due to only having to put the camera into 1 auto focus mode and instantly having it detect face, eyes, animals eyes including birds, planes, trains, motorcycles, automobiles etc… plus the sensor scan rate is the fastest in the industry as this of course helps the AF speed. But the Canon “eye control” I’ll admit is bad ass and Canon has had great mirrorless AF for a while now.
You either need this camera, or you don’t. It’s as simple as that and you nailed it on the head when you said it’s a niche product. It’s unfortunate for Canon the the Z9 ever happened and it’s even more unfortunate that Canon is sticking with their $6000 price point…especially since I bought one. Haha. It’s the camera that fills my needs as a motorsports photographer - it’s almost tailored to what I shoot. But after over a year shooting on the R5, I’m ready to go back down in MP count. I would have preferred a 28-32mp camera, but anyone claiming 45-50mp images as a sports photographer is still manageable probably hasn’t shot an entire season with it and dealt with the computer slow downs and storage woes even in CRAW. However, with the R1 still unannounced, many R3s are certainly going to hit the used market very early when that goes live.
@@JonInLondon Agreed. Canon doesn't need to adjust it because lets face it. We are in the middle of a supply issue and lowering the price does not make sense unless demand for the camera is down. Nikon only priced the Z9 that cheap because they are getting crushed by Canon and Sony in sales and they want to make a big splash and get users on their mount. I mean look at the Sony A1....they still are out of stock at many places with a $6500 price point.
A niche product is the best way to put it. It's just not a camera for everyone. I guess Canon can afford to put something highly specified like this out though.
I love my R3, it’s a spectacular camera that does not get enough credit. I’m a wildlife photographer and in my experience, you do NOT need more megapixels!
Great video, the specs aside glass keeps people loyal to a brand... To move from one brand to another requires 'significant" benefits, at least for me. I'm happy with my R3 so far.
Yes agree, and I'd switch to Canon again if the R3 had two CFexpress Type B slots, was $500-$1000 less retail price thanks to the Z9...etc. As a true flagship shooter, I've always had two or three D5/D6 or Canon 1D.....camera's. But, this is clearly not the R1. I don't want an R1 or Z9, I want a 24mp-30mp fast low light beast with great external wifi/FTP accessory like the D4-D6 have and 1Dx series have. As a photojournalist I hate the built in wireless capabilities, they suck compared to the Canon or Nikon WT-6A or Canon WFT-E8A that work 99.9% of the time, mine is 100% reliable since 2016 and works while in a dead zone on assignment, I can transfer images around the world withing 2-5 minutes of taking an image, caption and all.
2:14 "...12,800 It is a very high value..." I'm always thrilled when I'm at a rare venue where I can use 12,800. Normally have to use 25,6k or even 32k for my action photography, going up or down 2/3 a stop depending on subject color. Course if I can use 12,8k with a f2.8, I normally switch to the 200-400 f4 and am again in the 25,6k to 32k range. Looking forward getting a R3 to see how it handles those conditions.
@@CZOV Why do you think the R6 will be advantageous over the R3 for pro indoor sports photography? Some of my professional cohorts prefer the R6 to the 1DX M3 but I didn't work for me. They, like me, all have pre orders in for the R3.
No. If You have neither, than You might just as well look at Sony even if only - as YOU say - cost efficiency is determining. Sony has WAY many more lense choice of upper HIGHEST quality AND at lower cost (than less good) and narrower choice on RF.- and Z-mounts. Just a fact. (Of course on Sony E- mount You can also put many more inapropriate or poorly performing lenses than on Canon and Nikon, sure You need to hear that.
@@AR-vf7vg Of course on the Z mount you can also put many more inappropriate or poorly performing lenses than on than the Sony mount due to adaptors that also include the Sony E mount lenses, sure You need to hear that.
@@AR-vf7vg you can use the adapter to bring in some Nikon DSLR glass which is cheaper but still great quality. Also the memory cards are going to be cheaper on this over the A1 that uses those new type a cards
The Z9 supposedly tracks all the individual type subjects well in the general setting. Will flip from bird to car with no problem. One doesn't have to choose the bird setting then quickly change that to the car setting. For example.
Hey guys, given the feedback about the CFExpress card being scorching hot, I would be interested to know what card was used. Delkin Power and Black cards run much cooler than the competition, so it’d be cool to see how that changes the slow motion time.
I used to watch your channel on my phone, but today decided to give it a try on my LGCX and it looks really good, you can see much more detail on a larger screen !
Can you go into more detail regarding dynamic range? Numbers, specs. Also no mention of ef lenses performance. Most professional sports are ripping on the external zooming Rf 70-200 models so it would be nice to see an ef 70-200 tested on the r3. Happy holidays!
The R5 shoots 12-bit RAW in Electronic Shutter mode, vs 14-bit in Mechanical. I'm assuming the R3 does the same. Probably to boost readout speed. But you won't likely notice a difference unless you're doing very heavy editing.
@@tempusrob It’s correct about the R5 but the R3 is the first Canon camera that also shoots 14 bit in ES mode. There‘s a clear difference in noise between 12 bit and 14 bit when you underexpose heavily and lift the exposure for 5 stops. Not sure if you will encounter any difference in a real life scenario.
@@leanderhoefler7054 Probably scenarios where you want this is shooting for the purpose of black and white where you should be exposing for highlights so you don't clip and bring up shadows in post.
High flash sync speed with studio strobes is no big deal. I only use 1/125 as the strobes actually fire at 1/1000 or higher. Never been an issue. There is also HHS with most flashes/strobes these days. I hardly ever use that even. The HF anit-flicker feature is cool. I could defo use that at events.
Please do an updated review of the Leica SL2. With the latest firmware improvements it's a far better camera than the one you used during your pre-production testing.
I honestly see better iso performance on the Canon R3 than the R6 and Panasonic S5. (look at the grays for example) It is a very minimal advantage, but I give it to the R3
I know Chris and Jordan are criticized for being biased or unprofessional. But they are in fact very hardworking dudes, trying to raise the bar for themselves every time.
@@Grr8jon performance of the Z9 and it’s build wouldn’t be enough to justify its $1700 more price tag the sensor and dynamic would be interesting though but we still haven’t seen a full production model yet with final images…. But nobody’s jumping camp for the Nikon
Canon views this as better than a 1DXIII and for less money. They are correct. The A1 is almost 1K more when you add the grip, and it does have a higher feature set than either the R3 or 1DXIII, so it justifies the cost. What's really making this seem out of sorts is the Z9, which was clearly priced in desperation by Nikon. If it really performs up to its spec sheet, it would command an equal price to the Sony, but Nikon needs to draw back market share. I do hope that camera stays at its price point, and drags the R1 price down closer to the A1. Otherwise I think we'll see a $8-10k USD price on it from Canon. R3 seems really good for me. I like the resolution as a good mix of detail and reasonable storage. Most of my shots are sports and I can't imagine dealing with 50mp files, particularly with the current cost of CF Express cards. But I just got an R6 I'm really happy with so I'll wait a bit and see how things shake out. I've been thinking of getting a pro series body, even though I probably don't need one. But I'm in that stage of life where my disposable income will be going away in a few years (kids in college, probably go through a corporate downsizing, etc), and the technology has advanced to the point where any of these near-flagships could be a 'last camera ever'. So I thought I might treat myself.
Thanks for this review. While it is useful to know how the R3 compares against the similar offerings from Sony and Nikon, I am more interested as to how it compares against Canon alternatives. I like that you used the R6 but how does it compare against the R5. Is it worth the additional cost and what do you get and possibly lose when you go from the R5 as a sports wildlife shooter. The difference in cost is something like $1800 Cdn and a grip for the R5 is about $500. Comparing a gripped R5 to the R3… pros and cons versus $1300 difference would likely serve more people than Sony vs Canon vs Nikon. Once you are in a system, only the foolhardy or ultra rich would switch for a specific camera model. Today’s offerings are just that good. Thanks
I owned the Z6 and Z7 and Lumix S1 and I still find the EVF on the Nikons better than Panasonics. Can't see any difference in Resolution. So for me its brightness too :D
@@thatjordandrake I think they were hoping for an update, since between the preview and this video you handled the Z9. People are just itching to know how the Z9, A1 and R3 viewfinders compare in the real world 🤷🏼♂️.
For me too 🙄.... it's confusing ... because I thought just like you ... Admittedly just looked at my big phone ... but doubtful that I think differently on the computer ... but I will check there too.🤔
Unless the test images have been muddled up during the video post-production, the results from the R3 are clearly better than both the R6 and S5 in these examples. Mr Nichols?
When I look at your 5 stop push, the R3 was noticeably cleaner in the black colour checker square and the darker surrounds of the sample board. R3 certainly did better in that test with finer grain noise. Other than that Canon won't attract anyone new to their R3 with the Z9 flogging it in most areas and cheaper. Only rusted on Canon users with a lot of Canon glass would buy this IMO. R3 actually made up my mind to quit Canon for good. I'm sticking with Sony and getting the Z9 to replace my D500.
as a video shooter i need to say something: At this pricepoint its at the same time impressive and disapointing. I often shoot weddings where Family group starts a dance and i start rolling in 4k120p on a gimbal...theeen they take much longer then expected and immediately after the couple does this absolutely amazing wedding dance choreo for another 10 Minutes straight... i could let the a7s3 just going on with 4k100 (im in Europe) and it handlet it like a champ. No warning no issues, almost 30mins of 4k120 that allowed me to later export an entire Sequence of the Family dance in 25p and at the same time have super high IQ 4k100p for some fancy dance edits in the trailer... oh and yeah, it didnt even use too much storage as all this was recorded in 280mbit/s 10bit 422... THATS the bar any future Camera will have to cross in order to appeal to me as a mainly video shooter...and even this much more expensive Cam isnt there...
@@shaungibbs7400 i do, the a7s3 is just that. But its also a very underrated Photo camera and im starting to do more photography as paid work because of it. But i didnt meant to start another Canon V Sony War here, the R3 is a very capable Camera and boy oh boy is the 6k gonna be nice…the Still images not to mention ofc. Ive shot with Sony and Canon for paid work and i like both systems for different reasons. The a7s3 is still a gemachanger for me as it is simply an unparalleled Tool for Lowlight, lightweight yet still amazingly capable and very cost efficient Camera when i consider ALL Parts (Using in the Field, Photography, Gimbal Work, Autofocus, Storage use, Battery, Record limits…) I just love what tools we have nowadays, the types of shots i can get as a solo Shooter were simply unthinkable just a few years ago (heck yeah 135mm 1.8 on a Gimbal with autofocus!), and this goes for Canon just as well. Their Limitations are still a bit too much for me as a mein System, but theres no hate.
@@JackFN_VR64 would you be mad if canon put in 4k120 without overheating by putting in a heatsink? It would be cheap and easy to implement in such a big body and all heatissues would be gone. Everyone would profit from it. For THIS asking price, especially compared to nikons latest move, i think they could manage.
This is like a big-booty a9, with eye tracking but with better video capabilities. Seems decent, but very outclassed by the z9 (and a1). Though i have a feeling that the r1 is going to leapfrog the competition, as seems customary in this industry.
I just never understood this release from Canon. A1 price, but not as good. The eye AF, did anyone need that? Would you really want that? How does it make shooting any easier? Seems gimmicky. On top of that, this review makes it sound like it doesn't work very well. Bravo Nikon. The Z9 looks like the clear value between itself, the A1, and R3. I would buy an argument that the A1 is better than the Z9, but not that the R3 is, and the Z9 is $1000 less than both of them. $1000 doesn't seem like much when you're spending this much money, but it's $1000!! That could be the difference between deciding to buy a nice lens as well or not.
@@dougsv1 true. I'll still maintain my position even though my facts are whack 😂. It's still more expensive than a Z9, and personally I want high megapixels if I'm paying this much for a camera. That's just me though and I'm sure this camera is for someone.
Keep in mind when shooting the sony A1 in crop mode (still close 21MP vs 24MP) the flash sync is 1/250 and 1/500 for electronic and mech shutter. Small detail but helps i guess so ff its 1/400(mech), 1/200(elec) and crop its 1/500(mech) and 1/250(elec).
Me now shooting the R5 with a battery grip for a year now after many years of 1DX..: Having the R3 in hand feels so much at home! lighter, faster, AF great, .... It clicks all the boxes of interest shooting wildlife, reportage, ... during those ancient 1DX times. Why do you want to sell me more MPX? Oh yes, I will prefer the R5 or R doing landscape stuff.
Hi, do you feel mirror less changed, improved your photography? I'm asking cause you have experience with the 1dx. I can get the 1dxIII (almost new) for half the price of the R3...
@@mdbedelsohn4307 Yes, mirrorless changed and improved my photography! I loved my 1DX, even much more the 1DXII. But holding it in my hands today: It is an out aged dinosaur not fit for more than 50% for my shots today. The 1DXIII is a phenomenal DSLR, but I would not invest in it. It is more or less fit for purpose as long as you shoot in liveview but do not need the screen tilting. But for those genres this camera is the wrong approach (landscape and things). It lacks IBIS, access to the latest and greatest in AF and you will not get access to the great RF lenses. But do not sell all of your EF glass, some is worth holding like the 85 1.4 IS, 35 1.4 II and the 70-200 2.8 IS II or III or the 70-200 4.0 IS II, 16-35 III, 100 Macro IS and big whites.
Three quick observations: 1. 60-70 kph and Chris' hair didn't move. Make of it what you will. 2. Jordan runs like a 5 year old boy who just learned to run really really really fast. 3. Chris I remember photos of your beautiful little girl before she could crawl; time sure does fly.
Thanks for the helpful review. I sympathize with how cold you guys are in Calgary right now. I was born and raised in Calgary, but moved to San Diego County several decades ago. The weather is definitely more temperate here. You concluded that the Canon R3 is more of a niche camera than the Sony Alpha 1. I do not know enough about the Nikon Z9 to have my own opinion, but what you've said about it here suggests that it is more similar to the Alpha 1 than the R3. Luckily for me, the Canon R3's niche is exactly where I am. I want a camera that, first and foremost, is good for shooting in low light and for shooting motorsports (primarily car racing). The high MP (50) Sony Alpha 1 is significantly worse for my needs than the Canon R3. I owned an Alpha 1 system and, after using it for about three months in a variety of situations that I like to shoot, I gave up on the Alpha 1 and sold it for considerably less than I paid for it. I did not make that decision lightly, but I love photography too much to keep shooting with a system that I just did not like. The Alpha one was not great in either low light or for shooting motorsports. Where it was great was shooting in situations where I did not need the camera to react quickly, and it took stunning high MP pictures. The bird/human tracking that so impressed me in a demo (which convinced me to sell my Nikon DSLR system and purchase the Alpha 1), was poor/inconsistent at tracking fast-moving racing cars. I missed a lot of shots at an autocross, it kept losing the cars, sometimes stopping to track pylons. Too many of my low light shots were unrecoverable. Furthermore, from the short hands-on opportunity that I had with an R3, it has a much more intuitive user interface and better ergonomics than the Alpha 1 - this is from someone who shot with Nikon SLRs (Nikkormat and F2AS) for 30 years and DSLRs (most recently D5 and D4s) for 20 years, with no experience shooting Canons until recently (Canon's R6). The Canon R3 seals the deal for me with dedicated car racing tracking, and a firmware update will bring that to my Canon R6 in early December. Jan in San Diego
You are comparing it with Z9 and A1, but you don’t mention they are flagship cameras whereas the R3 is not. In that way R3 wins hands down in all aspects!
@@memcrew1 ya my pre-order finally came in on November 2021, and I've put about 40l frames through it already. This was the exact camera I was waiting for to replace my 1Dx.
Jordan, the hair is lookin' good! You need to tell us your secret. Transplants? Toupee? VFX? Maybe a side business. Jordan's hair products, lol. Seriously, I shoot mainly video, so comparisons will be welcome.
I predict it does not sell well. It already does not fair well in a market that has an A1 and Z9. The competition has already proven that a camera can shoot fast and have high resolution. Who would buy this camera? Someone who has a lot of Canon glass is not willing to wait for the R1 and has more money than sense. If the R1 does not use the R3 body, and compete with the A1 and Z9 it will be as big a failure as this camera is. I think the R3 is the best example of a camera company underestimating what the competition can do in short order. They announced it and and it was immediately trounced buy the A1 and Canon said, this is not our flagship. Ok what it is compared to the A1? A failure to anticipate what the competition was going to do, and now the Z9 was announced and the R3 is DOA when compared to the Z9. While other manufacturers are looking to the future like Sony with curved sensors, 127mp sensors, Global shutters, Sensor with built in AI. Canon looks back to the eye control viewfinder from the failed EOS 3 eye control. All 24 megapixels at the outrageous price of $6k dollars The 1dx3 is in the grave and this camera is one step behind it. I know that I am not dumb enough to buy one. I thought Canon turned the corner with the R5. Paula Abdule said it best. 2 steps forward 2 step back. rather 1 step forward, 2 steps back, back to eye controller and 24 megapixels. I feel like I am back in the 80s, Canon has a time machine that move you and technology back to the past LOL
@@RayValdezPhotography I'll easily have a a few hundred clips in a project, so I really rather not (plus losing resolution). You'll be giving up first days, then maybe even months worth of time over the course of years of work rotating if you are a full time pro. Also if you 2nd shoot or shoot for a company that edits, I could see that being a problem. All based on a very simple feature that is in most (if not all) other modern cameras. There is no good reason that Canon can't keep it on in a $6,000 pro camera when my GH4 that I got used for $600 (that was released in 2014 no less) can do it. By your same logic, why does anyone care about auto focus in photography, can't you just manually focus your shots? Sure, you could... but if a $6,000 (or $600) came with no photo AF, that would be absurd. Excusing the lack of a simple, basic and very beneficial feature because there is some other way around it should not excuse it.
@@nikoolix depends on how much you have to rotate. are you rotating it 90 degrees or something . if i have to rotate it is like 2 degrees if even noticable and that's handheld. on a tripod, i dont see how a person can have level issues. I dont have rotation issues so it is not something i struggle with.
The footage looks real, real good. The colours are amazing. If the AF (stickiness, subject tracking) could be on the same level as the Sony AS3 / FX3 / A1 everyone would jump to Canon. On the other hand, if Sony comes with Conon colours in a firmware ......
The AF of the R5 was already better then that of the A1 and R3 even improved on that. Sony is in a hard position at the moment given that the A1 cost nearly double but the R5 was the better product overall. Add to that that Canon has a huge advantage in lens market Sony really fights to somehow keep up. Their 50mm was a good achievement although considered that the competition had something similar for 20-30 years its not that amazing anymore (not wanting to downplay the 50mm, it is an amazing lens!) But for many photographers I dont think there is even much decision making required currently.
@@Seitenwerk What are you talking about? Sony is behind wit lenses in the mirror-less domain??? Why don't you throw the dynamic range in there too to make it more ridiculous. All reviewers / bloggers have the opposite opinion except for the out of the box usability or when photography is more important.
Sony colors have improved a ton with the a7siii and A1, but most consumers don't care about that really. Both Sony and Canon are great options though right now. ✅
@@Seitenwerk the Canon R5 is a great camera (especially for the price), but it is in no way in the same league as the Sony A1/Canon R3/Nikon Z9. There are significant benefits for the extra cost.
Okay, so this episode was shot on an R3. Did anyone besides me feel like the lads' skin tones looked kind of like a salmon filet? Also, I think the video overplays the significance of the difference in flash sync speeds of 1/180 vs 1/200. Normally when you're shooting with flash, the only reason you're concerned about shutter speed is to control the contribution made by ambient light, so the Sony and Nikon would let you reduce the ambient by one-third stop more... likely not even a noticeable difference. Even the mechanical-shutter difference between Canon's 1/200 and Sony's 1/400 isn't as much as it sounds like in terms of flash results.
That’s what happens when you price at customer loyalty prices and not competition pricing. Get roped into a bracket the camera shouldn’t be competing in
I am glad Nikon did well with the Z9. The performance and the price-point are great advantages over the R3. If R3 was $5000 instead of $6000, it'd make a lot more sense; especially since it's not even the flagship. How much will the R1 cost, then? $7000? How much better does it have to be to beat the A1 and Z9, then?
The R3 really seems to be a stopgap. It’s a great camera, but the R5 has most of the performance in a smaller, cheaper body, and it’s not quite the rumoured R1 that has all the speed and the extra resolution. It’s like a throwback to a time where fast cameras were 20-30 and image quality cameras were 40-50 megapixels, like a 1DX and a 5DS, or a D6 and D850. But since the R5 can do up to 20 FPS why compromise resolution unless you desperately need the faster readout?
Which sports photography camera would you recommend? r3, r5, r6, 1DXii, z9, a1 I'm with a Canon camera, so it's also important that the camera works well with an adapter for EF lenses
Just a comment in here 5:50 when you talk about heating. I see the coat you are wearing. Just mentioning that are many other places in the earth where right now people dont need such a big coat and whats worse, they are probably getting +10-15 degrees on summer compared to your country. Just mentioning. The heating topic is VERY environment sensitive.
Great review. I've decided to go ahead and order a Canon R6 as I primarily use my current mirrorless ( Canon R) in low light settings and it's OK, but not great). I'm not a pro but have been a hobbyist going back to my Canon F1n days. Based on this review, the R6 is seems pretty close in regard to low light performance and dynamic range and the R6 II (R3 sensor) which is coming doesn't seem worth the wait to me.
I really had wished the R3 had 45 MP I’m a winter sports photographer and having the extra MP for cropping is a great feature to have. I get me R3 this Friday then off to Lake Louise to shoot FIS World Cup, I did have a chance to handle a Z9, I didn’t really love the ergonomics compared to the R3, I think the build quality of the Canon is a little nicer then the Nikon. Right now as a sports photographer not having a native 400/2.8 from Nikon is a real problem and who knows when there new Z 400;2,8 will actually ship? I assume there will be some prototype of the 400/2.8 at the Winter Olympics. I will probably switch to Nikon next winter. One thing I hate about the new RF lenses especially on there 100-500 RF is the zoom through is ridiculous as is on the RF 70-200/2.8 I wish Canon would have stuck with internal zoom at the expense of extra weight and length
It a great camera, but at $6000 dollars without dual CFExpress, only 12fps Mech Shutter( I think they can do better than 12fps, 1dxiii is 20fps mech), rubber 'golf ball' texture grip(looks like the R1 is using back the faux leather grain material)
@@lnz971 1dxiii is 16fps and 20fps LiveView mech shutter, I didn't say Mech shutter is better than the electronic one. But if they have the technology why didn't they put it into this camera. Maybe they already plan to put the 1dxiii mech shutter, dual CFExpress, faux leather grip, bigger MP into their future R1 camera. And Nikon put everything they got into the Z9 for $5496.
Chris: Talks about AF tracking Jordan
The camera: Subject to detect - Animals
dpreview is rife with underrated comedy XD
The thing is, i own a Canon R3 - and don`t mind about the 24m resolution - the pictures are sharp and full of detail… 1. i live in the Canon world and love it 2. the first revolution for me was the Canon 5dmark II which had even less resolution and showed great results… don`t only look for numbers - take a cam and work with it… when you know your cam as good as you can work with it with closed eyes… that`s the moment the cam gets its real destination - by the way: the R3 is complex but you can get wonderful macros and landscape photography and portraits - the low light capability in concerts is outstanding. I don`t feel it as a niche-cam… the 1dxs were too heavy and loud for my wildlife photography… they sound like a machine gun.. but with the still mode the new cams are fantastic… and yes - i own a r6 also, but i love the R3 a bit more… all these new cams are great - Nikon, Sony e.g. thanks for listening
DPReview - this was a serious review. No playing around on this one.
I like that he said at the end: “otherswise your getting more resolution and better features with the ZED 9 and A1”… Nikon!
… or Sony! 😄
But not AF :)
@@zlatyklas that’s the thing the Nikon Z9 AF is now on par and in “some ways” better due to only having to put the camera into 1 auto focus mode and instantly having it detect face, eyes, animals eyes including birds, planes, trains, motorcycles, automobiles etc… plus the sensor scan rate is the fastest in the industry as this of course helps the AF speed. But the Canon “eye control” I’ll admit is bad ass and Canon has had great mirrorless AF for a while now.
@@erichramone7812 agree.
Gotta say Nikon looking nice at 5500 usd right now
I hope I am not the only photographer who does not care about video, high frame rates or eye focus.... Love my Canon R3... Last Canon was 5DMK 2.....
You either need this camera, or you don’t. It’s as simple as that and you nailed it on the head when you said it’s a niche product. It’s unfortunate for Canon the the Z9 ever happened and it’s even more unfortunate that Canon is sticking with their $6000 price point…especially since I bought one. Haha. It’s the camera that fills my needs as a motorsports photographer - it’s almost tailored to what I shoot. But after over a year shooting on the R5, I’m ready to go back down in MP count. I would have preferred a 28-32mp camera, but anyone claiming 45-50mp images as a sports photographer is still manageable probably hasn’t shot an entire season with it and dealt with the computer slow downs and storage woes even in CRAW. However, with the R1 still unannounced, many R3s are certainly going to hit the used market very early when that goes live.
Pretty sure they'll keep the price-point for as long as they can sell as many as they can make... then adjust it...
@@JonInLondon Agreed. Canon doesn't need to adjust it because lets face it. We are in the middle of a supply issue and lowering the price does not make sense unless demand for the camera is down. Nikon only priced the Z9 that cheap because they are getting crushed by Canon and Sony in sales and they want to make a big splash and get users on their mount. I mean look at the Sony A1....they still are out of stock at many places with a $6500 price point.
A niche product is the best way to put it. It's just not a camera for everyone. I guess Canon can afford to put something highly specified like this out though.
But how much more will the R1 cost?
@@markusschlevogt how could the R1 not cost $8k then? 🤷♂️
I love my R3, it’s a spectacular camera that does not get enough credit. I’m a wildlife photographer and in my experience, you do NOT need more megapixels!
Great video, the specs aside glass keeps people loyal to a brand... To move from one brand to another requires 'significant" benefits, at least for me. I'm happy with my R3 so far.
2021's Best and the Worst video will be Awesome! 🐼🙌🏼❤️
Coming up! Go Jordan!
First time when somebody talks about video, i heard Nikon name :D nice
That flicker reduction is pretty good. More manufacturers should add it using firmware update if possible.
Yeah, at least add this to R5. But wait 6 months because the R3 has trouble enough to prove itself worthy as it is.
Yes agree, and I'd switch to Canon again if the R3 had two CFexpress Type B slots, was $500-$1000 less retail price thanks to the Z9...etc. As a true flagship shooter, I've always had two or three D5/D6 or Canon 1D.....camera's. But, this is clearly not the R1. I don't want an R1 or Z9, I want a 24mp-30mp fast low light beast with great external wifi/FTP accessory like the D4-D6 have and 1Dx series have. As a photojournalist I hate the built in wireless capabilities, they suck compared to the Canon or Nikon WT-6A or Canon WFT-E8A that work 99.9% of the time, mine is 100% reliable since 2016 and works while in a dead zone on assignment, I can transfer images around the world withing 2-5 minutes of taking an image, caption and all.
2:14 "...12,800 It is a very high value..." I'm always thrilled when I'm at a rare venue where I can use 12,800. Normally have to use 25,6k or even 32k for my action photography, going up or down 2/3 a stop depending on subject color. Course if I can use 12,8k with a f2.8, I normally switch to the 200-400 f4 and am again in the 25,6k to 32k range. Looking forward getting a R3 to see how it handles those conditions.
My guess is you will be better off with R6 than R3/R5.
@@CZOV Why do you think the R6 will be advantageous over the R3 for pro indoor sports photography? Some of my professional cohorts prefer the R6 to the 1DX M3 but I didn't work for me. They, like me, all have pre orders in for the R3.
Epic moment @4:19 when Jordan surprises Chris! Love these videos and the reviews are amazing too
I’ve had my R3 since it came out. It’s an amazing camera and the best I’ve owned.
Is the image quality different or better than R6 or 5? How would you compare it in this regard?
How come the main problem of Rolling Shutter which is one of the main issues for a Sports Photographer is not reviewed !!!!
So can we now expect Jordan to wear a Canon T-shirt for his next Panasonic Lumix review? 😅
Probably a teaser for the camera a lot of people are waiting for.
This was a BS move on Jordan, sorry, clearly discredits the review.
certainly not
@@pgulysse1 😂
Dang, you camera freaks freaking out like there is no tomorrow! 😂😂😂😂😂😂
Nikon is the way to go when it comes to price as it currently stands
No. If You have neither, than You might just as well look at Sony even if only - as YOU say - cost efficiency is determining. Sony has WAY many more lense choice of upper HIGHEST quality AND at lower cost (than less good) and narrower choice on RF.- and Z-mounts. Just a fact.
(Of course on Sony E- mount You can also put many more inapropriate or poorly performing lenses than on Canon and Nikon, sure You need to hear that.
@@AR-vf7vg Of course on the Z mount you can also put many more inappropriate or poorly performing lenses than on than the Sony mount due to adaptors that also include the Sony E mount lenses, sure You need to hear that.
@@michaelkettleson7317 lol 😆 yes lol, I needed that to fuel my much needs for good moods.
@@AR-vf7vg you can use the adapter to bring in some Nikon DSLR glass which is cheaper but still great quality. Also the memory cards are going to be cheaper on this over the A1 that uses those new type a cards
The Z9 supposedly tracks all the individual type subjects well in the general setting. Will flip from bird to car with no problem. One doesn't have to choose the bird setting then quickly change that to the car setting. For example.
I'm sure that will be tested.
Can't wait for Z9 vs R3 vs A1 video
I come for the in-depth knowledgeable reviews, but I stay for the “Jacket Explanation” chapters lol. Well done.
lol in-depth
So it's an A9-class being sold for the A1's price?
Love to see a R3 Z9 A1 comparison in the future.
I love the Lumix shirt.....
Not to mention those A1 and Z9 have dual fast CF slot, but R3 only has one...
Good job, guys! I am looking forward to the comparison video between Canon R3, Nikon Z9 and Sony A1.
Hey guys, given the feedback about the CFExpress card being scorching hot, I would be interested to know what card was used. Delkin Power and Black cards run much cooler than the competition, so it’d be cool to see how that changes the slow motion time.
I was not aware of any CFx cards running cooler than any others.
Is there a great difference in price? Is it different technology or speed?
Can't wait to buy this in 10 years time, second hand, when I don't need a mortgage to buy it.
I used to watch your channel on my phone, but today decided to give it a try on my LGCX and it looks really good, you can see much more detail on a larger screen !
Nice story bro
Can you go into more detail regarding dynamic range? Numbers, specs. Also no mention of ef lenses performance. Most professional sports are ripping on the external zooming Rf 70-200 models so it would be nice to see an ef 70-200 tested on the r3. Happy holidays!
A thumbs up for Jordan´s upcoming camera shoot out!
How does electronic shutter have an impact on Dynamic Range? Are there any references I could read on this?
The R5 shoots 12-bit RAW in Electronic Shutter mode, vs 14-bit in Mechanical. I'm assuming the R3 does the same. Probably to boost readout speed. But you won't likely notice a difference unless you're doing very heavy editing.
@@tempusrob It’s correct about the R5 but the R3 is the first Canon camera that also shoots 14 bit in ES mode.
There‘s a clear difference in noise between 12 bit and 14 bit when you underexpose heavily and lift the exposure for 5 stops. Not sure if you will encounter any difference in a real life scenario.
@@leanderhoefler7054 Probably scenarios where you want this is shooting for the purpose of black and white where you should be exposing for highlights so you don't clip and bring up shadows in post.
@@tempusrob The question, and it's a good one, was about dynamic range not bit depth.
@@hankroest6836 Wouldn't dynamic range get a hit though? Less information is getting stored after all.
High flash sync speed with studio strobes is no big deal. I only use 1/125 as the strobes actually fire at 1/1000 or higher. Never been an issue. There is also HHS with most flashes/strobes these days. I hardly ever use that even. The HF anit-flicker feature is cool. I could defo use that at events.
Please do an updated review of the Leica SL2. With the latest firmware improvements it's a far better camera than the one you used during your pre-production testing.
I honestly see better iso performance on the Canon R3 than the R6 and Panasonic S5. (look at the grays for example) It is a very minimal advantage, but I give it to the R3
I never knew I needed a photo Bob Villa in my life.
I know Chris and Jordan are criticized for being biased or unprofessional. But they are in fact very hardworking dudes, trying to raise the bar for themselves every time.
I don’t doubt you’ve seen such criticism. I never have. They are among the best at what they do. Very professional and unbiased imho.
uh... no
If Canon price this at US$4500, it would be very compelling. At the current price point, not so much.
Would that price point tank R5 sales?
@@livejames9374 R5 has been introduced quite some time now, I guess the impact won't be big.
@@shang-hsienyang1284 R5 has only been out for 1 year
It would compete with the R5. This has a stacked sensor and a better build. It's on a different level.
@@Grr8jon performance of the Z9 and it’s build wouldn’t be enough to justify its $1700 more price tag the sensor and dynamic would be interesting though but we still haven’t seen a full production model yet with final images…. But nobody’s jumping camp for the Nikon
Canon views this as better than a 1DXIII and for less money. They are correct. The A1 is almost 1K more when you add the grip, and it does have a higher feature set than either the R3 or 1DXIII, so it justifies the cost. What's really making this seem out of sorts is the Z9, which was clearly priced in desperation by Nikon. If it really performs up to its spec sheet, it would command an equal price to the Sony, but Nikon needs to draw back market share. I do hope that camera stays at its price point, and drags the R1 price down closer to the A1. Otherwise I think we'll see a $8-10k USD price on it from Canon.
R3 seems really good for me. I like the resolution as a good mix of detail and reasonable storage. Most of my shots are sports and I can't imagine dealing with 50mp files, particularly with the current cost of CF Express cards. But I just got an R6 I'm really happy with so I'll wait a bit and see how things shake out. I've been thinking of getting a pro series body, even though I probably don't need one. But I'm in that stage of life where my disposable income will be going away in a few years (kids in college, probably go through a corporate downsizing, etc), and the technology has advanced to the point where any of these near-flagships could be a 'last camera ever'. So I thought I might treat myself.
Thanks for this review. While it is useful to know how the R3 compares against the similar offerings from Sony and Nikon, I am more interested as to how it compares against Canon alternatives. I like that you used the R6 but how does it compare against the R5. Is it worth the additional cost and what do you get and possibly lose when you go from the R5 as a sports wildlife shooter. The difference in cost is something like $1800 Cdn and a grip for the R5 is about $500. Comparing a gripped R5 to the R3… pros and cons versus $1300 difference would likely serve more people than Sony vs Canon vs Nikon. Once you are in a system, only the foolhardy or ultra rich would switch for a specific camera model. Today’s offerings are just that good. Thanks
I wonder did they do an updated review of R3 with the firmware update
Great review as always. You didn't talk about the EVF. How does it compare with the A1 and Z9. Would you go for Resolution R3 or brightness Z9?
They are biased... :p
I'm for brightness
I owned the Z6 and Z7 and Lumix S1 and I still find the EVF on the Nikons better than Panasonics. Can't see any difference in Resolution. So for me its brightness too :D
We talked about EVF extensively in our preview video, so we didn't go over it again here.
@@thatjordandrake I think they were hoping for an update, since between the preview and this video you handled the Z9. People are just itching to know how the Z9, A1 and R3 viewfinders compare in the real world 🤷🏼♂️.
I'm so confused while watching the high Iso chapter, R3 looks clearly better than R6 and S5....
For me too 🙄.... it's confusing ... because I thought just like you ... Admittedly just looked at my big phone ... but doubtful that I think differently on the computer ... but I will check there too.🤔
Unless the test images have been muddled up during the video post-production, the results from the R3 are clearly better than both the R6 and S5 in these examples. Mr Nichols?
Same for me! 😏
Same here.
When I look at your 5 stop push, the R3 was noticeably cleaner in the black colour checker square and the darker surrounds of the sample board. R3 certainly did better in that test with finer grain noise.
Other than that Canon won't attract anyone new to their R3 with the Z9 flogging it in most areas and cheaper. Only rusted on Canon users with a lot of Canon glass would buy this IMO. R3 actually made up my mind to quit Canon for good. I'm sticking with Sony and getting the Z9 to replace my D500.
Yep, I saw at least a one stop improvement in the R3 files. Maybe YT compression?
Can you include tap dance test for fast moving subject?
Looking forward to that Z9 A1 R3 shootout video.
as a video shooter i need to say something: At this pricepoint its at the same time impressive and disapointing. I often shoot weddings where Family group starts a dance and i start rolling in 4k120p on a gimbal...theeen they take much longer then expected and immediately after the couple does this absolutely amazing wedding dance choreo for another 10 Minutes straight...
i could let the a7s3 just going on with 4k100 (im in Europe) and it handlet it like a champ. No warning no issues, almost 30mins of 4k120 that allowed me to later export an entire Sequence of the Family dance in 25p and at the same time have super high IQ 4k100p for some fancy dance edits in the trailer...
oh and yeah, it didnt even use too much storage as all this was recorded in 280mbit/s 10bit 422... THATS the bar any future Camera will have to cross in order to appeal to me as a mainly video shooter...and even this much more expensive Cam isnt there...
If you are a professional wedding videographer why are you not using professional dedicated video cameras?
@@shaungibbs7400 why would he even look at R3 if he doesn't even take photos...
bruh, the camera is more expensive than the 7siii because it can also take photos. fast ones. lots of them.
@@shaungibbs7400 i do, the a7s3 is just that. But its also a very underrated Photo camera and im starting to do more photography as paid work because of it.
But i didnt meant to start another Canon V Sony War here, the R3 is a very capable Camera and boy oh boy is the 6k gonna be nice…the Still images not to mention ofc. Ive shot with Sony and Canon for paid work and i like both systems for different reasons.
The a7s3 is still a gemachanger for me as it is simply an unparalleled Tool for Lowlight, lightweight yet still amazingly capable and very cost efficient Camera when i consider ALL Parts (Using in the Field, Photography, Gimbal Work, Autofocus, Storage use, Battery, Record limits…)
I just love what tools we have nowadays, the types of shots i can get as a solo Shooter were simply unthinkable just a few years ago (heck yeah 135mm 1.8 on a Gimbal with autofocus!), and this goes for Canon just as well. Their Limitations are still a bit too much for me as a mein System, but theres no hate.
@@JackFN_VR64 would you be mad if canon put in 4k120 without overheating by putting in a heatsink? It would be cheap and easy to implement in such a big body and all heatissues would be gone. Everyone would profit from it. For THIS asking price, especially compared to nikons latest move, i think they could manage.
This is like a big-booty a9, with eye tracking but with better video capabilities. Seems decent, but very outclassed by the z9 (and a1). Though i have a feeling that the r1 is going to leapfrog the competition, as seems customary in this industry.
I just never understood this release from Canon. A1 price, but not as good. The eye AF, did anyone need that? Would you really want that? How does it make shooting any easier? Seems gimmicky. On top of that, this review makes it sound like it doesn't work very well.
Bravo Nikon. The Z9 looks like the clear value between itself, the A1, and R3. I would buy an argument that the A1 is better than the Z9, but not that the R3 is, and the Z9 is $1000 less than both of them. $1000 doesn't seem like much when you're spending this much money, but it's $1000!! That could be the difference between deciding to buy a nice lens as well or not.
R3 is 6000 USD by the way, not 6500 USD like the a1
@@dougsv1 true. I'll still maintain my position even though my facts are whack 😂.
It's still more expensive than a Z9, and personally I want high megapixels if I'm paying this much for a camera. That's just me though and I'm sure this camera is for someone.
Keep in mind when shooting the sony A1 in crop mode (still close 21MP vs 24MP) the flash sync is 1/250 and 1/500 for electronic and mech shutter. Small detail but helps i guess so ff its 1/400(mech), 1/200(elec) and crop its 1/500(mech) and 1/250(elec).
This seemed more impressive before the Z9 came out for far less money to do more than this. Disappointing about the eye AF for Jordan.
Color theory on the Canon is still just better and with the adapter, the glass economy is just better with Canon.
Can’t wait for the comment section on that comparison video… 🤣
Z9 and A1 all the way baby!
THANK U FINALLY found SOMEONE TESTED 4k120! Thank you
Me now shooting the R5 with a battery grip for a year now after many years of 1DX..:
Having the R3 in hand feels so much at home!
lighter, faster, AF great, ....
It clicks all the boxes of interest shooting wildlife, reportage, ... during those ancient 1DX times.
Why do you want to sell me more MPX?
Oh yes, I will prefer the R5 or R doing landscape stuff.
Hi, do you feel mirror less changed, improved your photography? I'm asking cause you have experience with the 1dx. I can get the 1dxIII (almost new) for half the price of the R3...
@@mdbedelsohn4307 Yes, mirrorless changed and improved my photography!
I loved my 1DX, even much more the 1DXII. But holding it in my hands today: It is an out aged dinosaur not fit for more than 50% for my shots today.
The 1DXIII is a phenomenal DSLR, but I would not invest in it. It is more or less fit for purpose as long as you shoot in liveview but do not need the screen tilting. But for those genres this camera is the wrong approach (landscape and things). It lacks IBIS, access to the latest and greatest in AF and you will not get access to the great RF lenses.
But do not sell all of your EF glass, some is worth holding like the 85 1.4 IS, 35 1.4 II and the 70-200 2.8 IS II or III or the 70-200 4.0 IS II, 16-35 III, 100 Macro IS and big whites.
I wonder if the reason for the level gauge in recording is because it's a "feature" on their cinema cameras? 🤔🤔
Three quick observations:
1. 60-70 kph and Chris' hair didn't move. Make of it what you will.
2. Jordan runs like a 5 year old boy who just learned to run really really really fast.
3. Chris I remember photos of your beautiful little girl before she could crawl; time sure does fly.
@7:17 Oh, OM/Olympus 20mm 1.4 review coming... ? Looking forward to it!
Well, I can't afford the R3, but I am watching this anyway. Thank you Chris 👏👏👏👏
Unbiased Jordan’s review in Panasonic’s t-shirt lol. 👍 for LUMIX T-shirt
Thanks for the helpful review. I sympathize with how cold you guys are in Calgary right now. I was born and raised in Calgary, but moved to San Diego County several decades ago. The weather is definitely more temperate here.
You concluded that the Canon R3 is more of a niche camera than the Sony Alpha 1. I do not know enough about the Nikon Z9 to have my own opinion, but what you've said about it here suggests that it is more similar to the Alpha 1 than the R3. Luckily for me, the Canon R3's niche is exactly where I am.
I want a camera that, first and foremost, is good for shooting in low light and for shooting motorsports (primarily car racing). The high MP (50) Sony Alpha 1 is significantly worse for my needs than the Canon R3. I owned an Alpha 1 system and, after using it for about three months in a variety of situations that I like to shoot, I gave up on the Alpha 1 and sold it for considerably less than I paid for it. I did not make that decision lightly, but I love photography too much to keep shooting with a system that I just did not like.
The Alpha one was not great in either low light or for shooting motorsports. Where it was great was shooting in situations where I did not need the camera to react quickly, and it took stunning high MP pictures. The bird/human tracking that so impressed me in a demo (which convinced me to sell my Nikon DSLR system and purchase the Alpha 1), was poor/inconsistent at tracking fast-moving racing cars. I missed a lot of shots at an autocross, it kept losing the cars, sometimes stopping to track pylons. Too many of my low light shots were unrecoverable.
Furthermore, from the short hands-on opportunity that I had with an R3, it has a much more intuitive user interface and better ergonomics than the Alpha 1 - this is from someone who shot with Nikon SLRs (Nikkormat and F2AS) for 30 years and DSLRs (most recently D5 and D4s) for 20 years, with no experience shooting Canons until recently (Canon's R6). The Canon R3 seals the deal for me with dedicated car racing tracking, and a firmware update will bring that to my Canon R6 in early December.
Jan in San Diego
Wow, great comment. I hope the R3 works great for ya!
Can't wait for that comparison video!
Jordan and the Lumix tshirt FTW!!! lol
👉👉 just go with Sony Alpha One. No compromises. best of all. Best at all.
You are comparing it with Z9 and A1, but you don’t mention they are flagship cameras whereas the R3 is not. In that way R3 wins hands down in all aspects!
indeed, i prefer the nikon z9 to the canon r3 but the RF lenses... cant be beat. 28-70 f2... what a lens.
Great job guys! love the video. Oh, btw Jordan could wear his shirt inside out the next time there's a logo on it. :)
Nikon Z9 cost less. Has higher resolution sensor and doesn’t overheat. Sony, Canon, Nikon all have incredible AF. Nikon Z9 for the win.
Great video Chris and honest view 😊👍
Thanks for this review, now if Canon could expedite my R3 pre-orders that'd be great! lol Can't wait to have this alongside my R5 for my updated kit!
As long as you don't get it before me ☺️
@@TheFedoraMedia oh I will lol... I hope!? hah
@@pawelecphoto did you get the R3, and are you happy with it?
@@memcrew1 ya my pre-order finally came in on November 2021, and I've put about 40l frames through it already. This was the exact camera I was waiting for to replace my 1Dx.
@@pawelecphoto Beautiful! I just left B&H with the R3 and an RF 24-70.
A lot of people are saying they are going to pass, but according to my supplier, demand is much higher than they expected.
Have you done a side-by-side comparison with the Nikon Z9?
Jordan, the hair is lookin' good! You need to tell us your secret. Transplants? Toupee? VFX?
Maybe a side business. Jordan's hair products, lol.
Seriously, I shoot mainly video, so comparisons will be welcome.
very informative review thank you 🙏 what a camera, it's good to see internal RAW video becoming a thing
I predict it does not sell well. It already does not fair well in a market that has an A1 and Z9. The competition has already proven that a camera can shoot fast and have high resolution. Who would buy this camera? Someone who has a lot of Canon glass is not willing to wait for the R1 and has more money than sense. If the R1 does not use the R3 body, and compete with the A1 and Z9 it will be as big a failure as this camera is. I think the R3 is the best example of a camera company underestimating what the competition can do in short order. They announced it and and it was immediately trounced buy the A1 and Canon said, this is not our flagship. Ok what it is compared to the A1? A failure to anticipate what the competition was going to do, and now the Z9 was announced and the R3 is DOA when compared to the Z9. While other manufacturers are looking to the future like Sony with curved sensors, 127mp sensors, Global shutters, Sensor with built in AI. Canon looks back to the eye control viewfinder from the failed EOS 3 eye control. All 24 megapixels at the outrageous price of $6k dollars The 1dx3 is in the grave and this camera is one step behind it. I know that I am not dumb enough to buy one. I thought Canon turned the corner with the R5. Paula Abdule said it best. 2 steps forward 2 step back. rather 1 step forward, 2 steps back, back to eye controller and 24 megapixels. I feel like I am back in the 80s, Canon has a time machine that move you and technology back to the past LOL
No level while recording is insane and a serious problem for people like me that are run and gun and prone to not being level naturally.
what do you mean. cant you just rotate in post.
@@RayValdezPhotography I'll easily have a a few hundred clips in a project, so I really rather not (plus losing resolution). You'll be giving up first days, then maybe even months worth of time over the course of years of work rotating if you are a full time pro. Also if you 2nd shoot or shoot for a company that edits, I could see that being a problem. All based on a very simple feature that is in most (if not all) other modern cameras. There is no good reason that Canon can't keep it on in a $6,000 pro camera when my GH4 that I got used for $600 (that was released in 2014 no less) can do it. By your same logic, why does anyone care about auto focus in photography, can't you just manually focus your shots? Sure, you could... but if a $6,000 (or $600) came with no photo AF, that would be absurd. Excusing the lack of a simple, basic and very beneficial feature because there is some other way around it should not excuse it.
@@RayValdezPhotography Say that again: "You can just throw away resolution in post". What an incredibly stupid comment.
@@nikoolix depends on how much you have to rotate. are you rotating it 90 degrees or something . if i have to rotate it is like 2 degrees if even noticable and that's handheld. on a tripod, i dont see how a person can have level issues. I dont have rotation issues so it is not something i struggle with.
The footage looks real, real good. The colours are amazing. If the AF (stickiness, subject tracking) could be on the same level as the Sony AS3 / FX3 / A1 everyone would jump to Canon. On the other hand, if Sony comes with Conon colours in a firmware ......
The AF of the R5 was already better then that of the A1 and R3 even improved on that. Sony is in a hard position at the moment given that the A1 cost nearly double but the R5 was the better product overall. Add to that that Canon has a huge advantage in lens market Sony really fights to somehow keep up. Their 50mm was a good achievement although considered that the competition had something similar for 20-30 years its not that amazing anymore (not wanting to downplay the 50mm, it is an amazing lens!) But for many photographers I dont think there is even much decision making required currently.
@@Seitenwerk What are you talking about? Sony is behind wit lenses in the mirror-less domain??? Why don't you throw the dynamic range in there too to make it more ridiculous. All reviewers / bloggers have the opposite opinion except for the out of the box usability or when photography is more important.
Sony colors have improved a ton with the a7siii and A1, but most consumers don't care about that really. Both Sony and Canon are great options though right now. ✅
@@Seitenwerk the Canon R5 is a great camera (especially for the price), but it is in no way in the same league as the Sony A1/Canon R3/Nikon Z9. There are significant benefits for the extra cost.
At last, Jordan had an appropriate red canon winter coat on.
Okay, so this episode was shot on an R3. Did anyone besides me feel like the lads' skin tones looked kind of like a salmon filet? Also, I think the video overplays the significance of the difference in flash sync speeds of 1/180 vs 1/200. Normally when you're shooting with flash, the only reason you're concerned about shutter speed is to control the contribution made by ambient light, so the Sony and Nikon would let you reduce the ambient by one-third stop more... likely not even a noticeable difference. Even the mechanical-shutter difference between Canon's 1/200 and Sony's 1/400 isn't as much as it sounds like in terms of flash results.
Been waiting for this one :)
That’s what happens when you price at customer loyalty prices and not competition pricing. Get roped into a bracket the camera shouldn’t be competing in
I wonder how R3's IBIS performs in video with wide lenses.
Prolly similar to R5.
Great! My night has been made, sometimes staying up pays off
2:35 the r3 looks noticeably cleaner to me
I am glad Nikon did well with the Z9. The performance and the price-point are great advantages over the R3. If R3 was $5000 instead of $6000, it'd make a lot more sense; especially since it's not even the flagship. How much will the R1 cost, then? $7000? How much better does it have to be to beat the A1 and Z9, then?
Waiting for your review from so long
Too big and heavy for a camera without electronic ND, and for stills, too low resolution for the price.
Quick correction. It’s not called “the canon r3 vers Sony a9”. The word you’re looking for is versus.
I am very much interested in the three-way comparison.
This should be the new t shirt design!
Well, I guess we should wait for R1 :)
R3 vs A9II vs Z9 vs A1?
Will you add the A9II in your next video?
The R3 really seems to be a stopgap. It’s a great camera, but the R5 has most of the performance in a smaller, cheaper body, and it’s not quite the rumoured R1 that has all the speed and the extra resolution. It’s like a throwback to a time where fast cameras were 20-30 and image quality cameras were 40-50 megapixels, like a 1DX and a 5DS, or a D6 and D850. But since the R5 can do up to 20 FPS why compromise resolution unless you desperately need the faster readout?
Because for serious sports/events shooters the R5 has too many compromises. It really isn’t a pro body.
Which sports photography camera would you recommend?
r3, r5, r6, 1DXii, z9, a1
I'm with a Canon camera, so it's also important that the camera works well with an adapter for EF lenses
Just a comment in here 5:50 when you talk about heating. I see the coat you are wearing. Just mentioning that are many other places in the earth where right now people dont need such a big coat and whats worse, they are probably getting +10-15 degrees on summer compared to your country. Just mentioning. The heating topic is VERY environment sensitive.
Plz do canon r6 vs sony a7iv
Great review. I've decided to go ahead and order a Canon R6 as I primarily use my current mirrorless ( Canon R) in low light settings and it's OK, but not great). I'm not a pro but have been a hobbyist going back to my Canon F1n days. Based on this review, the R6 is seems pretty close in regard to low light performance and dynamic range and the R6 II (R3 sensor) which is coming doesn't seem worth the wait to me.
brother, return that camera, RETURN THAT CAMERA THERES A MARK ii
Its NOT the R3 sensor
Great video. I'm planning to buy the r3, but I have one question. In full electronic shutter mode, can you use high speed sync flash?
I really had wished the R3 had 45 MP I’m a winter sports photographer and having the extra MP for cropping is a great feature to have. I get me R3 this Friday then off to Lake Louise to shoot FIS World Cup, I did have a chance to handle a Z9, I didn’t really love the ergonomics compared to the R3, I think the build quality of the Canon is a little nicer then the Nikon. Right now as a sports photographer not having a native 400/2.8 from Nikon is a real problem and who knows when there new Z 400;2,8 will actually ship? I assume there will be some prototype of the 400/2.8 at the Winter Olympics. I will probably switch to Nikon next winter. One thing I hate about the new RF lenses especially on there 100-500 RF is the zoom through is ridiculous as is on the RF 70-200/2.8 I wish Canon would have stuck with internal zoom at the expense of extra weight and length
Nothing stopping you from using adapted internal zooms. The RF 70-200 is great, light and small and closer MFD. I sold the EF for those reasons.
I love the R3 because it means the R1 @ higher resolution is not far away.
;-)
8:57 Chris with the anime nose right thar
What about taking photos when you are shooting videos - was there any delay or a slide was skipped?
It a great camera, but at $6000 dollars without dual CFExpress, only 12fps Mech Shutter( I think they can do better than 12fps, 1dxiii is 20fps mech), rubber 'golf ball' texture grip(looks like the R1 is using back the faux leather grain material)
1dxiii is 16fps and 20 Electronic… i prefer having 30 electronic shutter
@@lnz971 1dxiii is 16fps and 20fps LiveView mech shutter, I didn't say Mech shutter is better than the electronic one. But if they have the technology why didn't they put it into this camera. Maybe they already plan to put the 1dxiii mech shutter, dual CFExpress, faux leather grip, bigger MP into their future R1 camera. And Nikon put everything they got into the Z9 for $5496.