Canisdirus

At 24mp..it's way overpriced...by about 2 grand.

gener202002

Yes, baron silverton, I agree

If you read the following posts, you would see that I agree with that. My wow was regarding the capabilities of the camera, which I did not take the time to list all of. I said in several subsequent posts that the price was fair, just that I personally cannot afford it.

I would buy the camera in a moment if I could. Even though it is a better camera than I personally need to get great pictures. I am wowwed by what I perceive as the value of this camera. I would love to have it.

tgreenhaw

Although either camera can do nearly anything, I think its a bit of an apples to oranges comparison. The specs he is comparing are what is important to him and he is openly biased.

He doesn't discuss IQ under various conditions, lens family considerations or ruggedness - factors which are of paramount importance to photojournalists the R3 is designed to deliver. He also doesn't compare auto focus and image stabilization which I suspect put the R3 system in a different league.

I suspect the high end Sony is better when high pixel counts are required and the Canon is best when low light conditions and ruggedness are important.

Both are excellent tools for the professional, but the type of work dictates which one might be best.

For a prosumer like me, neither make sense because of cost.

azted Loc: Las Vegas, NV.

Sony seems to have subdivided the market better than Canon or Nikon. This R3 is an attempt by Canon to go after the A9 line. You have to love competition!

Canisdirus

Specs are specs...I assume you are talking about the video reference (since you don't bother to quote who you are replying to).
As for lenses...Sony has first place there in mirrorless...in spades.
Ruggedness...lol...huh? Both cameras are made with the same type of materials. The Sony is over half a pound lighter...which is great...but that's just tight designing. A plus, not a minus.
Both will do low light with aplomb. Yes, the Canon goes higher in ISO...but so what.
Sony A1 goes to 32000. Believe me... I will NEVER be shooting ISO at 32000...anywhere...anytime. So who cares if another camera goes higher? It's kind of useless.
I don't care which camera you use...the noise will be...very very noticeable.

jackm1943 Loc: Omaha, Nebraska

I agree entirely. Something like a Nikon 850 or Canon 5D4 would be vastly superior for the hobbyist, or even any of the new mirrorless cameras for half the price.

baron_silverton Loc: Los Angeles, CA

Yes - it definitely appears to be all that. I am interested to see what the Nikon response will be in the Z9, which promises to be amazing as well.

baron_silverton Loc: Los Angeles, CA

We agree that the R3 is not for hobbyists and I think Canon has also stated this. It is a fact and not controversial.

That said, I would say that the R6 or Z6ii would be superior for the hobbyist - both being a much lower price point than the D850 or 5Dmk4, and both with good features and excellent IQ.

Mirrorless is definitely the way to go now over DSLR for people starting out, or even for people that are upgrading - DSLR R&D is over and there will be no new products (or at least very few).

For the price of a D850, one can get the Z6ii and the 24-70 f/4 S lens (which is an incredible lens for the price) and still have $500 left over - which means they could also get the 50mm 1.8 S - which is arguably the best 50mm lens in existence for under $2000.00 and they could have all this for the price of the D850 with no lens at all.

Then they would also have 2 lenses that could grow with them as they got new bodies in the future - something that would not be true of any lens that they buy with the D850.

A similar scenario might be given for the R6 - although the R6 is $500 more than the Z6ii making the value proposition for total kit for under $3k less desirable. Still, you could get an R6 and one mid level lens for less than $3k - again a better move than a 5Dmk4 at this point in time.

scubadoc Loc: Sarasota, FL

The R3 is designed for the sport photographer and megapixel specs are not that important. The more pixels on the sensor the harder it is to achieve the sharpest image that has no motion blur (camera shake). These guys are shooting with the lens supported by a monopod and do not use a remote shutter release. They do need a very high burst rate to capture the right moment in time. Given the limitations of the locale there is always the chance of camera shake. A 24MP camera will have less camera shake degradation than will a 45 or 50MP sensor. If you are going for extreme dynamic range, than the higher MP sensor will likely be your camera of choice.

Canisdirus

Your kidding yourself if you think the difference in MP doesn't matter for sports.
It's all about tight cropping with sports...so MP is part of the must have things on their menu.
The Sony has the superior buffer besides... it can take more images before hitting the buffer at 50MP than the Canon can at 24!

scubadoc Loc: Sarasota, FL

So I guess all those pro sport photogs using the Canon 1DX MKIII with its lowly 20.1MP sensor should have been using a different camera if they wanted superior results. The R3 is basically the mirrorless version of that DSLR workhorse. BTW, I don’t think cropping counted for too much when shooting with a 600mm lens. As someone else pointed out, most of these cameras are setup to transmit images via Wi-Fi to their editor. Time constraints didn’t allow for much post-processing, and I doubt they would ever crop by more than 20%, surely within the capability of a 20.1MP sensor.

joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA

🆒🆒🆒🆒

letmedance Loc: Walnut, Ca.

The Fuji takes fantastic pictures but lacks a lot of the goodies and has a slow continuous shutter rate, 3 or 4 per second as I recall.

scubadoc Loc: Sarasota, FL

The Canon specs on buffer capacity are the following: Compressed C-RAW file type or just a JPEG or HEIF image will have a burst capacity, while using the 30fps electronic shutter mode, of approximately 500 frames before stalling. That’s over 15 seconds of continuous shooting. The R3, as with the R5, uses a CF express card in slot 1. I didn’t bother to look up the Sony buffer capacity, but I’m sure you can quickly look it up and educate me.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Sony is a worthy competitor, now, just like Nikon used to be. Canon has been the overwhelming dominant player for more than 30 years based on their EOS technology. The market will decide, and in a sense, the market has already have decided about interchangeable lens-cameras with their total market size in units sold is now down more than 80% since 2011.

In this drastically smaller market, we still need competition or the dominant company won't release new technology and price it competitively. Nikon pushed Canon and now Sony has pushed Nikon aside. With Canon's recent and ongoing responses, we'll see how / if Sony can move up from their 20% of the overall market by either taking share from Canon at 45% or Nikon at 18%.