Canon EOS R3 Mark II planned for 2025

koenkooi said:

Personally, I would be annoyed if the more-than-45-MP body only comes in gripped form, but it would save me a lot of money if it did

Click to expand...

lol, same!

Something I should have patented in 2000 is the idea of a 42x42mm sensor, from which you would get a circular image from the fullframe lenses of 42mm diameter. From that you can crop a horizontal 36x24mm image, but also 24x36mm vertical image, a 30x30mm square, any 3:4, 4:5 or 6:7 composition you want, and have lots of spare pixels so you don't lose resolution if you find your camera was tilted a few degrees (or many degrees) or you need to correct keystone distortion from the camera not being level, etc. etc. You MIGHT even find yourself using the full circle, and getting 1.7x more pixels than the 36x24mm shot, and 3.25x more pixels than a circle snipped out of the center of a 36x24mm.

But anyway, the point salient to the discussion is that such a camera wouldn't need the second grip nor the doubling of all the controls.

neuroanatomist said:

Maybe you believe everything you read on the internet? If so, this may interest you <<flat earth society link>>

Click to expand...

You often have an excellent point, but you also often come across as needlessly abrasive while you're doing it. Can you not make your point without making someone feel bad? If you can, why do you choose not to? If you can't, is making your point more important than fellow forum members' feelings? I've seen you attack a half-dozen people like this over the years.

I'd agree that Canon's absolutely the best there is at running their business: huge market share, especially since 1987, and they maintain that even without the magic USM category-killer feature that let them steal the pro market from Nikon in the early 90s. In fact, they've maintained or grown share even while falling behind in features (e.g., IBIS, MILFF system).

Any "rando from the internet," you, me, the guy you're mocking publicly, probably is not OFTEN going to have a suggestion that would make their business MORE of a success.

But, first, you're conflating "success" with "perfection." There certainly CAN be ideas that Canon didn't come up with that would have made their business more of a success. I'd doubt even product planners at Canon are 100.000% positive that an R1s wouldn't be a good business at this point. Good product planners KNOW they don't know everything. You seem surer of their planning ability than they probably are themselves.

Second, the guy you're mocking seems to be saying, if I remember his phrasing, that an R1s would sell like hotcakes, not necessarily that it'd be a killer business move. For instance, if it draws their limited talent and production facilities away from other products that might have a higher profit margin, or even a SURER profit margin, then we square the circle: perhaps you're BOTH right. Or it might involve buying sensors from a rival, etc. etc., and other options that might be short-term good and long-term bad.

And whether or not "randos from the internet" are correct or not, we're on a forum just to have fun. It's fun being CEO for a day. Maybe you have that same amount of fun raining on the parade.

SwissFrank said:

You often have an excellent point, but you also often come across as needlessly abrasive while you're doing it. Can you not make your point without making someone feel bad? If you can, why do you choose not to? If you can't, is making your point more important than fellow forum members' feelings? I've seen you attack a half-dozen people like this over the years.

I'd agree that Canon's absolutely the best there is at running their business: huge market share, especially since 1987, and they maintain that even without the magic USM category-killer feature that let them steal the pro market from Nikon in the early 90s. In fact, they've maintained or grown share even while falling behind in features (e.g., IBIS, MILFF system).

Any "rando from the internet," you, me, the guy you're mocking publicly, probably is not OFTEN going to have a suggestion that would make their business MORE of a success.

But, first, you're conflating "success" with "perfection." There certainly CAN be ideas that Canon didn't come up with that would have made their business more of a success. I'd doubt even product planners at Canon are 100.000% positive that an R1s wouldn't be a good business at this point. Good product planners KNOW they don't know everything. You seem surer of their planning ability than they probably are themselves.

Second, the guy you're mocking seems to be saying, if I remember his phrasing, that an R1s would sell like hotcakes, not necessarily that it'd be a killer business move. For instance, if it draws their limited talent and production facilities away from other products that might have a higher profit margin, or even a SURER profit margin, then we square the circle: perhaps you're BOTH right. Or it might involve buying sensors from a rival, etc. etc., and other options that might be short-term good and long-term bad.

And whether or not "randos from the internet" are correct or not, we're on a forum just to have fun. It's fun being CEO for a day. Maybe you have that same amount of fun raining on the parade.

Click to expand...

You are welcome to your opinion. If someone posts a ridiculous statement, I have no compunctions about delivering the ridicule it deserves.

One point – I do not conflate success with perfection. I just think it's asinine when people conflate Canon not delivering the product/feature/whatever they personally want with a lack of success for Canon, all evidence to the contrary. I mean, the word 'doomed' was censored here for a while because of overuse.

@Robert Stone feels personally let down by Canon not giving him what he wants, and that's perfectly reasonable. But that's not where he stopped. Instead, he claimed the R1 is already a flop and that the Z9 sold like hotcakes and Nikon is 'leaving Canon in the dust'. Evidence for those claims? Who needs that, we're having fun, right?

neuroanatomist said:

You are welcome to your opinion. If someone posts a ridiculous statement, I have no compunctions about delivering the ridicule it deserves.

One point – I do not conflate success with perfection. I just think it's asinine when people conflate Canon not delivering the product/feature/whatever they personally want with a lack of success for Canon, all evidence to the contrary. I mean, the word 'doomed' was censored here for a while because of overuse.

@Robert Stone feels personally let down by Canon not giving him what he wants, and that's perfectly reasonable. But that's not where he stopped. Instead, he claimed the R1 is already a flop and that the Z9 sold like hotcakes and Nikon is 'leaving Canon in the dust'. Evidence for those claims? Who needs that, we're having fun, right?

Click to expand...

It would be really nice if we could see the actual sales numbers data on each camera.

This would have to correlate with the proportional customer base. To get an accurate picture of things.

We don’t have that info unfortunately. Or I don’t at least.

I have a ton of Nikon Photographer, friends, and they all talk about how amazingly wonderful both the Z8 and Z9R, and they’ve been talking about it for several years now.

The R5 is fantastic. But the R1 did let me down, and every single YouTube person who reviews the gear has mentioned that unlike one series of the past, this one they had hoped would be a larger sensor, and most of them basically said it wasn’t flagship worthy when compared to competitors.

From a usable standpoint, my R3 is fantastic, I had been a 5D IV user but Cannon also loaned me a R5 to test out so when I got the R3 when the sales made it a better buy than the R5 II, I got it.

Going down to 24 megapixels from 30 definitely was a compromise. I do notice a difference in my ability to crop, despite it not being that many megapixels indifference, it does affect my options.

The files I have from the R5 are just ridiculously fantastic, and that camera was able to shoot in fairly low light levels at high ISO’s and still give really great images. Yes, the R3 does that better. But it’s a marginal improvement compared to the almost double megapixel of the R5.

I don’t think I could ever go back to not having the smart controller, it totally changed my workflow. I can’t believe they didn’t add it to the R5 II, and the only reason I can think of is that they do plan to make a higher resolution body with the V grip. Whether that’s the R3 II, or some R1 variant.

Cannon has already stated that they are continuing the R3 line. If that’s true, there isn’t that much of a difference between the R3 and the R1, which is why I bought the R3. At 2/3 the price. So the only logical direction they could go in to make that camera flyable is to increase the megapixel count. Or keep the megapixel count the same, and make the R1 the new high megapixel camera. But I doubt they’re going to do that. So my guess is that the R3 will become the high MP v-grip body.

They COULD make an R4 which would be the 5 series with a V grip but historically they haven’t really gone in using that number, and I think from superstition standpoint four is a number that the Japanese manufacturer would steer clear of, so I’m guessing that the R3, is going to be the one to get the high megapixel sensor.

To them 3 might also mean more than 1 and be the true flagship “for the masses”. Who knows for sure. We can only wait and see.

Robert Stone said:

It would be really nice if we could see the actual sales numbers data on each camera.
This would have to correlate with the proportional customer base. To get an accurate picture of things.
We don’t have that info unfortunately. Or I don’t at least.

Click to expand...

It would be nice. Interesting that without that information, you still claimed that, "The Z9 sold like hotcakes," and, "...the R1 pre-sale numbers are BAD. They look disastrous for Canon."

Even though we don't have access to that information, obviously each manufacturer knows exactly how many of each model they've sold, and I strongly suspect (based on experience with competitive intelligence for large corporations) that each manufacturer also knows with good accuracy how many of each model their competitors have sold. Those types of data are one of the factors influencing product development decisions, e.g. how many MP to make the sensor of the R1.

Robert Stone said:

Going down to 24 megapixels from 30 definitely was a compromise. I do notice a difference in my ability to crop, despite it not being that many megapixels indifference, it does affect my options.

Click to expand...

FWIW, the 24 MP sensor in the R3 delivers more actual spatial resolution than the 30 MP sensor in the 5DIV. Canon has stated this explicitly, and I found it to be true when comparing the R3 with the R (the latter re-used the 5DIV sensor). So you may be able to crop the 30 MP image more, but the actual level of detail from the 30 MP image is lower, if that matters to you.

Robert Stone said:

I don’t think I could ever go back to not having the smart controller, it totally changed my workflow. I can’t believe they didn’t add it to the R5 II, and the only reason I can think of is that they do plan to make a higher resolution body with the V grip. Whether that’s the R3 II, or some R1 variant.

Click to expand...

I also love the Smart Controller. I can think of several reasons they didn't put it in the R5II, the simplest one is product differentiation. No DSLR outside the 1-series ever got AF point-linked spot metering, though clearly it was possible from a technical standpoint. I get that you want an R1s, but I'd recommend against rationalizing the likelihood of them doing so with little things like this. It will be a marketing decision, mainly, and as suggested above Canon has the underlying data to drive such a decision while we do not.

Robert Stone said:

Cannon has already stated that they are continuing the R3 line.

Click to expand...

No, they have not. Canon RUMORS stated that they were told an R3II was in the works for 2025 (that's the topic of this thread). A few weeks before that, they were told an R3II was on a roadmap for 2026 (which was the topic of another thread). All Canon has actually stated (in an interview with the French magazine, Phototrend) was that they are still receiving orders for and selling the R3. Canon Rumors has been told many things over the years, some of which turned out to be true and some not.

Robert Stone said:

To them 3 might also mean more than 1 and be the true flagship “for the masses”. Who knows for sure. We can only wait and see.

Click to expand...

Lol. We know for sure. Canon stated, "Furthermore, in November, we plan to launch the EOS R1, which will be our flagship mirrorless camera model." There is no mystery here, the 1-series represents Canon's flagship cameras, and the R1 will be their flagship.

You can disagree with them, and call the R1 a pink bunny and the R100 the flagship for the masses of you want. People on YouTube can dispute that the R1 is a flagship. It's all asinine. Canon makes the cameras, they designate the flagship, which they have explicitly done. You don't want the R1 to be your camera, fine. But to suggest that it's not Canon's flagship is ridiculous. And I've made clear how I respond to ridiculous statements...people make them all the time, evidently they don't mind looking like fools.

neuroanatomist said:

You are welcome to your opinion. If someone posts a ridiculous statement, I have no compunctions about delivering the ridicule it deserves.

Click to expand...

You are probably the only member that seems to see ridicule as a net plus in the group. I certainly don't come here to see ridicule. And there certainly have been times in the past where you've thought something "deserved" ridicule, and dished it out, but you were quite wrong. That was doubly sad to see.

neuroanatomist said:

It would be nice. Interesting that without that information, you still claimed that, "The Z9 sold like hotcakes," and, "...the R1 pre-sale numbers are BAD. They look disastrous for Canon."

Even though we don't have access to that information, obviously each manufacturer knows exactly how many of each model they've sold, and I strongly suspect (based on experience with competitive intelligence for large corporations) that each manufacturer also knows with good accuracy how many of each model their competitors have sold. Those types of data are one of the factors influencing product development decisions, e.g. how many MP to make the sensor of the R1.


FWIW, the 24 MP sensor in the R3 delivers more actual spatial resolution than the 30 MP sensor in the 5DIV. Canon has stated this explicitly, and I found it to be true when comparing the R3 with the R (the latter re-used the 5DIV sensor). So you may be able to crop the 30 MP image more, but the actual level of detail from the 30 MP image is lower, if that matters to you.


I also love the Smart Controller. I can think of several reasons they didn't put it in the R5II, the simplest one is product differentiation. No DSLR outside the 1-series ever got AF point-linked spot metering, though clearly it was possible from a technical standpoint. I get that you want an R1s, but I'd recommend against rationalizing the likelihood of them doing so with little things like this. It will be a marketing decision, mainly, and as suggested above Canon has the underlying data to drive such a decision while we do not.


No, they have not. Canon RUMORS stated that they were told an R3II was in the works for 2025 (that's the topic of this thread). A few weeks before that, they were told an R3II was on a roadmap for 2026 (which was the topic of another thread). All Canon has actually stated (in an interview with the French magazine, Phototrend) was that they are still receiving orders for and selling the R3. Canon Rumors has been told many things over the years, some of which turned out to be true and some not.


Lol. We know for sure. Canon stated, "Furthermore, in November, we plan to launch the EOS R1, which will be our flagship mirrorless camera model." There is no mystery here, the 1-series represents Canon's flagship cameras, and the R1 will be their flagship.

You can disagree with them, and call the R1 a pink bunny and the R100 the flagship for the masses of you want. People on YouTube can dispute that the R1 is a flagship. It's all asinine. Canon makes the cameras, they designate the flagship, which they have explicitly done. You don't want the R1 to be your camera, fine. But to suggest that it's not Canon's flagship is ridiculous. And I've made clear how I respond to ridiculous statements...people make them all the time, evidently they don't mind looking like fools.

Click to expand...

I’ve given this some thought.

1). There was an article early on from someone who did speak with a larger reseller that the R1 numbers were smaller than pas 1 series. I was working off of that info.

2). My R3’s 24mp is sharper than my 5D IV’s 30mp but I print large and especially if I crop then the sharpness gets lost in the interpolation since the image needs upscaling almost always, which makes the 24mp less sharp as the interpolation is happening in more multiples (copy of a copy) than the higher MP file.

3). The makers designate the name, but the users (buyers) designate what value it holds through their purchase or non-purchase of an item. But the critics are almost always a powerful force that sway the masses. And collectively most critics said “meh, is it REALLY a flagship?…” so there was a question, I’m not the only one.

Anyway most people have opinions, ours differ, that’s fine. GL out there.

Robert Stone said:

I’ve given this some thought.

Click to expand...

Thanks, I wish more people did that before posting!

Robert Stone said:

1). There was an article early on from someone who did speak with a larger reseller that the R1 numbers were smaller than pas 1 series. I was working off of that info.

Click to expand...

Yes, there was. There was some follow-up discussion on this forum where CRguy indicated that the preorder volume he was seeing was good, and similar to prior 1-series launches. Anecdotal on both sides.

Now that the camera has started shipping, at least in the US it's not in stock anywhere. So it seems preorders were sufficient for some to remain unfulfilled (at least one retailer had it 'in stock' for a couple of hours, which is pretty common with releases lately because people now place multiple preorders and cancel the others after receiving the first shipping notice; that 'blip' happened with the R3, the 100-300/2.8, etc.).

Robert Stone said:

2). My R3’s 24mp is sharper than my 5D IV’s 30mp but I print large and especially if I crop then the sharpness gets lost in the interpolation since the image needs upscaling almost always, which makes the 24mp less sharp as the interpolation is happening in more multiples (copy of a copy) than the higher MP file.

Click to expand...

IMO, it's always about picking the right tool for the job. If I made large prints, I'd be shooting with at least an R5 (or an R5II, now), more likely with a Fuji GFX. 24 MP is sufficient for my needs, obviously not for everyone's.

Robert Stone said:

3). The makers designate the name, but the users (buyers) designate what value it holds through their purchase or non-purchase of an item. But the critics are almost always a powerful force that sway the masses. And collectively most critics said “meh, is it REALLY a flagship?…” so there was a question, I’m not the only one.

Click to expand...

In 2021 a properly-conducted poll suggested that 10% of people in the US believe the earth is flat. Other surveys have put that at 3-5%. Either way, there's a lot of stuff out there that people will believe, even if it's patently false. Particularly in today's clickbait world, posting a review questioning the flagship status of the R1 will garner more hits (and thus more revenue) than a review that says 'yes, Canon released another flagship 1-series like previous ones but without the mirror, and it's a good camera, ho-hum'. Controversy sells clicks. Good cameras sell cameras. As pointed out above, there is not a lack of buyers for R1 leaving inventory on the shelves.

Robert Stone said:

Anyway most people have opinions, ours differ, that’s fine. GL out there.

Click to expand...

Same back at ya.

neuroanatomist said:

1. Yes, there was. There was some follow-up discussion on this forum where CRguy indicated that the preorder volume he was seeing was good, and similar to prior 1-series launches. Anecdotal on both sides.

2. Now that the camera has started shipping, at least in the US it's not in stock anywhere. So it seems preorders were sufficient for some to remain unfulfilled (at least one retailer had it 'in stock' for a couple of hours, which is pretty common with releases lately because people now place multiple preorders and cancel the others after receiving the first shipping notice; that 'blip' happened with the R3, the 100-300/2.8, etc.).


3. IMO, it's always about picking the right tool for the job. If I made large prints, I'd be shooting with at least an R5 (or an R5II, now), more likely with a Fuji GFX. 24 MP is sufficient for my needs, obviously not for everyone's.


4. In 2021 a properly-conducted poll suggested that 10% of people in the US believe the earth is flat. Other surveys have put that at 3-5%. Either way, there's a lot of stuff out there that people will believe, even if it's patently false. Particularly in today's clickbait world, posting a review questioning the flagship status of the R1 will garner more hits (and thus more revenue) than a review that says 'yes, Canon released another flagship 1-series like previous ones but without the mirror, and it's a good camera, ho-hum'. Controversy sells clicks. Good cameras sell cameras. As pointed out above, there is not a lack of buyers for R1 leaving inventory on the shelves.


Same back at ya.

Click to expand...

1. agreed, anecdotal at best.

2. & 4. (last part about stock): it is a well-known strategy to manipulate stock levels to drive up demand and interest, Apple, and many other vendors/sellers (looking at you Amazon) has been known to do this by withholding stock to give the allure of scarcity, which is a well-known social engineering strategy. "Act now, supplies are running out!!!". This strategy can influence people that may be on the fence into buying it, "wow it is sold out everywhere, it must be awesome, I HAVE TO HAVE IT BECAUSE IT IS POPULAR!!!11". I am not specifically saying Canon is doing this, simply implying that it is not impossible for this to be the case. I am unfamiliar with past camera rollouts beyond the r5m2, which was the first camera I pre-ordered, along with the R1, and had to wait till release day to get.

3. agreed, completely. one tool does not fit all needs, choice is good.

4. (first part) There are lies, damn lies, and statistics. Polls can be manipulated easily, depending on the intent of the outcome; I look to the bi-annual s%^tshow that happens in the US that we are all WAY too familiar with. On the point of the flat earth example you gave, you call it patently false, I say cite your sources! (this last statement is purely in jest and should be taken that way)

OldDudePhotog said:

There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.

Click to expand...

Lies, Damn Lies, Statistics, and Supercomputer benchmarks.