Another thorough review however I think it likely sells the R3 a little short. As a sports shooter, and recognizing this camera would be an obvious choice for sports, the improvements in the R3 over the R5 or other mirrorless options are much more significant. The improved battery life is a major factor as are the smaller file sizes. I suspect the weather sealing and overall robustness are also improved and the ability to shoot 30 FPS ( no rolling shutter) versus 12 is also very significant. I understand the focus speed is also better than other Canon mirrorless cameras. The best in class tracking is also huge. I suspect button placement is also consistent with the 1Dx series so the personal issues raised here are unsupported. The larger body and grip also pares up well with the large telephoto lenses this camera will frequently be attached. When you get to this level and price point you really need to review the product more specifically for the task for which is was designed. If you’re a sports shooter with the budget, this is what you want. Dustin is looking at it too generically IMO. YMMV.
I preordered this camera and got it two days after thanksgiving. I owned the 1DXM2 for 3 years… bought the R, but gave it away… bought the R5 but returned it. The overheating was a real issue whenever I wanted to shoot video. And at the time the 8K files were difficult to work with (I think this is still true even on M1 macs… I might have to test it out?). The R3 is in a completely different league to that camera. IMO, it’s the best mirrorless option going right now. Including compared to the Nikon Z9, as that camera’s biggest feature is internal ProRes Raw… which is mitigated by both subpar dynamic range and the fact that it cannot work with Davinci Resolve. I’m not mentioning Sony’s A1 because it does not shoot raw video internally.
The real comparison with the R5 is actually 20FPS vs 30FPS using the electronic shutters on both cameras, but definitely the R3 is the superior sports focused camera.
@@DustinAbbottTWI perhaps for some. The rolling shutter effect with the R5 makes the electronic shutter unusable for sports action, that’s why I said 12. I’ve read the electronic shutter in the R3 with the stacked sensor eliminates this.
The position of the On/Off switch is consistent with the 1D series. Personally, as a former 1D series owner I would be disappointed to find it anywhere else. The only thing missing is the battery door switch lever.
Because of social media nowadays I find myself shooting in the vertical orientation much more often than not, I really love the idea of an Integrated grip as it’s much more ergonomic than twisting your wrists. Maybe in a few years I might be able to afford something this nice! Wonderful review as always!
A spot on, open, genuine review and conclusion of this new camera from Canon. Having witnessed various other togs in the field testing this camera as well as the Nikon Z 9, there is always a love/hate relationship, but if we put that aside we are having the best times for cameras these days. Although we are seeing and having brilliant camera and technology in our hands, we must not forget that to complement our enjoyment of photography we should also be printing more photographs and not less. Excellent hoodie logo by the way... Kind regards Paul Paterson Photography
In other reviews I saw a1 not only keeping up with R3 in autofocus but sometimes even topping it, of course as you yourself said the canon tracking seemed more organic in evf so props to canon. But a1 doing it at 50 megapixel is ridiculous.
Both of them are masterful at tracking, despite what fanboys for either brand would otherwise claim. But yes, the A1s ability to do it with that much resolution flowing through the pipes is very impressive.
I spent an entire day at a college doing portraits, dance & video, 10AM - 4PM, only went down to 50%, I went through two B10X Plus batteries in that time, far better than my old R5.
Thank you for your video! I am tempted to trade our R5 in for either a R3 or Nikon Z9. Does the R3 have back button illumination? In your opinion, would I be making a huge mistake? We use our Canon and Fujifilm X-T4s for weddings and other genres.
@@DustinAbbottTWI - I would prefer faster eye AF, low-light performance (evening/night weddings or darker churches and receptions), smaller files, lighter camera than a R5 with battery grip, better weather sealing, no overheating, new hot-shoe when switching to video, better battery life, and GPS. As I said, we used the Fujifilm X cameras (16MP to 26MP APS-C) and have had very happy customers in the past. I do not believe we ever had anyone blow up a print to billboard size. Of course, if we ever encountered someone with that desire, we would have to use a different tool. Granted, we would be making a huge compromise if we had to crop any of our keepers.
@@johnpeterka8355 R3 hands down. I owned 2 R5's and sold one for the R3. I never reached for my R5 because I loved the feel and the images that came out of my R3. Hit rate was better on my R3 and the dynamic range/low light performance i a night and day difference. Needless to say I sold my second R5 for another R3.
The R1 would need to be at least 45-50 MP BSI camera that does everything that the Nikon Z9, Sony A1, and Canon R3 currently do, plus it would need to have a better sensor, processors, dynamic range, low-light performance with low-grain output, dual CF Express B cards, full HDMI port, new hot shoe (like R3), replaced the mechanical shutter with electronic, video menu like the C300 or Canon R5C, and be as light as the R3.
Typically excellent and thorough review. Top flight camera, however I have all the features I need in my still excellent 6D. Also, no longer affordable for me + expensive native glass. Have quality and enduring mix of EF L and Sigma Art glass. Good luck to those with both the true need and deeper pockets.
I don't want 60MP for that, obviously, but Sony has proven that there is a market for those who want both the speed and resolution. But yes, for some applications lower resolution is preferable.
@@stephencostantini5556 Yeah, I suppose if you're using a 100-400 or 100-500 the extra megapixels for cropping is potentially useful however I'm currently using a 600 f4 + 1.4 with R3 and don't really have any issues with small birds.
It is a downside when there are other cameras that can do much more mp for less money. If you don't want 45-50mp there is always the option to lower the file size in the settings.
Great review as always. The eye control focus is compelling I just wish the lenses would catch up to Sony. The lenses I have and love and the ones I don’t. The canon rf 70-200 2.8 is my favourite lens in this kit. Great performance to size ratio. Canon rf 85 1.2. Not a fan of the size and weight and compared to the Sony GM 1.4 that I had years ago I notice no improvement in IQ. Canon rf 35 1.8. Hate it. Renders terrible to my eye, feels clunky. Canon rf 14-35 f4. Well over priced for the IQ. Great size but the barrel distortion and dark corners are shocking in this price point. Pretty much the only reason I am still in the canon space is for the brilliant experience using the canon R6 and canon 70-200. But I can’t deny I am actively looking at the Sony a74, 135 GM 1.8 - New sigma 85 1.4 - 50 1.2 GM. 35 1.4 GM. Tamron 35 - 150. - sigma 14-24 2.8. Fingers crossed canon catches up.
No need. The R5 can do all I need. And if I would spend such amount of money I would spend it on Sony A1 or Nikon Z9. The R3 is for me the wrong product on the Roadmap.
Another thorough review however I think it likely sells the R3 a little short. As a sports shooter, and recognizing this camera would be an obvious choice for sports, the improvements in the R3 over the R5 or other mirrorless options are much more significant. The improved battery life is a major factor as are the smaller file sizes. I suspect the weather sealing and overall robustness are also improved and the ability to shoot 30 FPS ( no rolling shutter) versus 12 is also very significant. I understand the focus speed is also better than other Canon mirrorless cameras. The best in class tracking is also huge. I suspect button placement is also consistent with the 1Dx series so the personal issues raised here are unsupported. The larger body and grip also pares up well with the large telephoto lenses this camera will frequently be attached. When you get to this level and price point you really need to review the product more specifically for the task for which is was designed. If you’re a sports shooter with the budget, this is what you want. Dustin is looking at it too generically IMO. YMMV.
I preordered this camera and got it two days after thanksgiving. I owned the 1DXM2 for 3 years… bought the R, but gave it away… bought the R5 but returned it. The overheating was a real issue whenever I wanted to shoot video. And at the time the 8K files were difficult to work with (I think this is still true even on M1 macs… I might have to test it out?). The R3 is in a completely different league to that camera. IMO, it’s the best mirrorless option going right now. Including compared to the Nikon Z9, as that camera’s biggest feature is internal ProRes Raw… which is mitigated by both subpar dynamic range and the fact that it cannot work with Davinci Resolve. I’m not mentioning Sony’s A1 because it does not shoot raw video internally.
The real comparison with the R5 is actually 20FPS vs 30FPS using the electronic shutters on both cameras, but definitely the R3 is the superior sports focused camera.
@@DustinAbbottTWI perhaps for some. The rolling shutter effect with the R5 makes the electronic shutter unusable for sports action, that’s why I said 12. I’ve read the electronic shutter in the R3 with the stacked sensor eliminates this.
The position of the On/Off switch is consistent with the 1D series. Personally, as a former 1D series owner I would be disappointed to find it anywhere else. The only thing missing is the battery door switch lever.
I understand that attraction, though I don't find the ergonomics very good.
Because of social media nowadays I find myself shooting in the vertical orientation much more often than not, I really love the idea of an Integrated grip as it’s much more ergonomic than twisting your wrists. Maybe in a few years I might be able to afford something this nice! Wonderful review as always!
Here's hoping you get one someday!
A spot on, open, genuine review and conclusion of this new camera from Canon. Having witnessed various other togs in the field testing this camera as well as the Nikon Z 9, there is always a love/hate relationship, but if we put that aside we are having the best times for cameras these days. Although we are seeing and having brilliant camera and technology in our hands, we must not forget that to complement our enjoyment of photography we should also be printing more photographs and not less.
Excellent hoodie logo by the way...
Kind regards
Paul Paterson Photography
Thanks a lot, Paul
Best reviews ever by a wide margin. Thanks.
Thank you very much!
In other reviews I saw a1 not only keeping up with R3 in autofocus but sometimes even topping it, of course as you yourself said the canon tracking seemed more organic in evf so props to canon. But a1 doing it at 50 megapixel is ridiculous.
Both of them are masterful at tracking, despite what fanboys for either brand would otherwise claim. But yes, the A1s ability to do it with that much resolution flowing through the pipes is very impressive.
Thanks for the great review. Still on the fence to get either the 1DX3 or the R3 for action and wildlife.
Fair enough. I'm pretty convinced about mirrorless at this point.
Why anyone would consider the 1DX series at this point is beyond me
I spent an entire day at a college doing portraits, dance & video, 10AM - 4PM, only went down to 50%, I went through two B10X Plus batteries in that time, far better than my old R5.
Exactly. Not surprised.
Thank you for your video! I am tempted to trade our R5 in for either a R3 or Nikon Z9. Does the R3 have back button illumination? In your opinion, would I be making a huge mistake? We use our Canon and Fujifilm X-T4s for weddings and other genres.
Do you need the burst speed? I'm just curious as a wedding photographer, where I would personally prefer the higher resolution.
@@DustinAbbottTWI - I would prefer faster eye AF, low-light performance (evening/night weddings or darker churches and receptions), smaller files, lighter camera than a R5 with battery grip, better weather sealing, no overheating, new hot-shoe when switching to video, better battery life, and GPS. As I said, we used the Fujifilm X cameras (16MP to 26MP APS-C) and have had very happy customers in the past. I do not believe we ever had anyone blow up a print to billboard size. Of course, if we ever encountered someone with that desire, we would have to use a different tool. Granted, we would be making a huge compromise if we had to crop any of our keepers.
@@johnpeterka8355 R3 hands down. I owned 2 R5's and sold one for the R3. I never reached for my R5 because I loved the feel and the images that came out of my R3. Hit rate was better on my R3 and the dynamic range/low light performance i a night and day difference. Needless to say I sold my second R5 for another R3.
The R1 would need to be at least 45-50 MP BSI camera that does everything that the Nikon Z9, Sony A1, and Canon R3 currently do, plus it would need to have a better sensor, processors, dynamic range, low-light performance with low-grain output, dual CF Express B cards, full HDMI port, new hot shoe (like R3), replaced the mechanical shutter with electronic, video menu like the C300 or Canon R5C, and be as light as the R3.
LOL - no pressure!~
Beautiful camera and amazing features. I would like to be honest, it's not for me. The R5 checks all boxes 😎👍
I'm in the same boat, but I'm glad the camera exists!
Typically excellent and thorough review.
Top flight camera, however I have all the features I need in my still excellent 6D.
Also, no longer affordable for me + expensive native glass. Have quality and enduring mix of EF L and Sigma Art glass. Good luck to those with both the true need and deeper pockets.
Definitely a specialist camera and not for everyone.
Thanks
Welcome
Why is 24 megapixels a downside? Obviously you don't shoot pro sports. Imagine having to deal with over 3000 pictures at 60 megapixels!
I don't want 60MP for that, obviously, but Sony has proven that there is a market for those who want both the speed and resolution. But yes, for some applications lower resolution is preferable.
24mp is enough for wildlife aswell. ^^
@@frostybe3r No doubt telephoto lenses are very expensive, so if you can't afford them pixels will be your next choice.
@@stephencostantini5556 Yeah, I suppose if you're using a 100-400 or 100-500 the extra megapixels for cropping is potentially useful however I'm currently using a 600 f4 + 1.4 with R3 and don't really have any issues with small birds.
It is a downside when there are other cameras that can do much more mp for less money. If you don't want 45-50mp there is always the option to lower the file size in the settings.
Great review as always. The eye control focus is compelling I just wish the lenses would catch up to Sony. The lenses I have and love and the ones I don’t. The canon rf 70-200 2.8 is my favourite lens in this kit. Great performance to size ratio. Canon rf 85 1.2. Not a fan of the size and weight and compared to the Sony GM 1.4 that I had years ago I notice no improvement in IQ. Canon rf 35 1.8. Hate it. Renders terrible to my eye, feels clunky. Canon rf 14-35 f4. Well over priced for the IQ. Great size but the barrel distortion and dark corners are shocking in this price point. Pretty much the only reason I am still in the canon space is for the brilliant experience using the canon R6 and canon 70-200. But I can’t deny I am actively looking at the Sony a74, 135 GM 1.8 - New sigma 85 1.4 - 50 1.2 GM. 35 1.4 GM. Tamron 35 - 150. - sigma 14-24 2.8. Fingers crossed canon catches up.
I was initially really impressed with some of the early RF lenses but have been disappointed with some recently relative to what I see on Sony
second… great reviee!
Glad you enjoyed it
No need. The R5 can do all I need. And if I would spend such amount of money I would spend it on Sony A1 or Nikon Z9. The R3 is for me the wrong product on the Roadmap.
And that will be true for many users. This is a specialist tool