It's possible, but I find that unlikely considering it hasn't even been mentioned.
Upvote
0
Exploring Canon’s 1 Series Digital Legacy
- Thread starter Richard CR
- Start date
Did anybody ever find or see the proposed third White Paper in the series on the 1DX III 'Communications'.
Upvote
0
Sorry, PBD, I have no clue, but it sure is nice to hear your voice again!
Upvote
0
Good to see you’re back Private. I do hope you haven’t been naughty during your absence and dabbled with Nikon or Sony.
Upvote
0
no Sporgon, not Nikon or Sony, I did dabble with a FujiFilm GFX 100 II but couldn’t get the very short supply GF 30 T/S and have ended up moving to 1DX III’s, yes I am old fashioned and can’t get used to the EVF when used hour after hour or even several days at a time.
Really like the 1DX III, all the little improvements added up and the AF in both live view and OVF are the best I will ever get in an optical viewfinder camera.
The WiFi communications are vastly improved too, much easier to get basic connections and a lot more stable than the MkII’s even with the WFT, but still a bit of a rats nest hence my search for the mythical third white paper.
Upvote
0
Thanks for reminding me how much cash I have given to Canon for pro cameras.
What are the chances, when the dust settles in a year from now, and Sony and Nikon come out with more new bodies that we see a R3II with high megapixel count of at least 45 megapixels? Not a pro body (lol) but one that looks really close to a pro body like the R3 does...
What are the chances, when the dust settles in a year from now, and Sony and Nikon come out with more new bodies that we see a R3II with high megapixel count of at least 45 megapixels? Not a pro body (lol) but one that looks really close to a pro body like the R3 does...
Upvote
0
The rumors guys may have a reasonable idea, and part of this is just naming strategy, but my guess is the chances for a high MP R3II are low. A few reasons: 1) Canon just released the R5 II with 3 grips...that is your 45 MP larger bodied camera; 2) If you look at what Canon does, they do create very nice niches for each body, differentiating via price point and features. A 45 MP R3 II isn't really its own niche, it is basically stealing from the R1 and R5 II. 3) The R3 was not high MP before. 4) I suspect the larger market for high MP is not at the $6k price point...which means you are getting a smaller body than the R3.What are the chances, when the dust settles in a year from now, and Sony and Nikon come out with more new bodies that we see a R3II with high megapixel count of at least 45 megapixels? Not a pro body (lol) but one that looks really close to a pro body like the R3 does...
I could be wrong. I do suspect we'll see a high MP camera. But by high MP, it is 80-100 MP. Will they call it an R3? I do not see why. Depending on where they see it in the market, R6-s or R5-s are the most likely. Which do you think would sell more/have higher profit margin: 1) A $3500 R6-S, 2) a $4700 R5-S, or a 3) $6000 R3 II?
Just looking at this, Canon has left a huge gap in their price points, $2k for the R6II to $4.2K for the R5 II. I expect to fill it with a $3k-3.5k camera.
Upvote
0
But the grips are not at the same level of water resistance as a built-in grip. not the same functionality or buttons. They don't even have the finger-touch button on the R5 and no real GPS. It's just not the same. Landscape people, Birders, Sports, Journalists, etc, want to tag their location these days, want weather sealing, but also want high MP.
The rumors guys may have a reasonable idea, and part of this is just naming strategy, but my guess is the chances for a high MP R3II are low. A few reasons: 1) Canon just released the R5 II with 3 grips...that is your 45 MP larger bodied camera; 2) If you look at what Canon does, they do create very nice niches for each body, differentiating via price point and features. A 45 MP R3 II isn't really its own niche, it is basically stealing from the R1 and R5 II. 3) The R3 was not high MP before. 4) I suspect the larger market for high MP is not at the $6k price point...which means you are getting a smaller body than the R3.
I could be wrong. I do suspect we'll see a high MP camera. But by high MP, it is 80-100 MP. Will they call it an R3? I do not see why. Depending on where they see it in the market, R6-s or R5-s are the most likely. Which do you think would sell more/have higher profit margin: 1) A $3500 R6-S, 2) a $4700 R5-S, or a 3) $6000 R3 II?
Just looking at this, Canon has left a huge gap in their price points, $2k for the R6II to $4.2K for the R5 II. I expect to fill it with a $3k-3.5k camera.
I do agree, I think we'll see something. Whether it's an R1s/x or R3, or heck an R2? The jump from $4,000 to $6,000 really isn't as big a leap as the 5D mk II was ($2,500) from the 1Dx ($6,000) when they had such a difference in high MP from the 5 to 1 series. So I think a lot more people would jump to the $6,000. That's less than the cost of one photo gig for the difference. I'm broke AF but I was fully prepared to buy the R1 if it were in the 38mp-58mp range. I won't even buy the R5 mk II because it lacks even stuff the "ancient" 5D mk IV has. I do think they will be forced to come out with an "answer" to the negative press they've been getting. I hope so anyway.
Upvote
0
If Canon made a R5ii within a R1 body (dual CFe, nipple AF controller, etc) would that suffice most people's needs for their "flagship of dreams?
I get that some want everything a R1 has/does with a 45+MP sensor but is it the body ergonomics or higher res that is the predominate issue?
I get that some want everything a R1 has/does with a 45+MP sensor but is it the body ergonomics or higher res that is the predominate issue?
Upvote
0
Only 45 MP? But...but...but...Sony has 61.
Plus the R3 has a 4.1 million dot LCD and the R1 and R5II only have a 2.1 million dot LCD so neither of them can really be called a flagship now, can they?
Upvote
0
For me it’s both.
I think that would suffice, it’s not one or the other it’s both. Ultimately people were upset they couldn’t get the 1 series in higher resolution. If they didn’t care about the body they would just get the R5 and be done.
There’s a few blemishes on the R1 body. Lower screen resolution (less important), poor / old / janky articulating screen (vs one that easily pivots to angles photographers actually need, instead of the selfie blogging screen. Like no one is spending $6k for a blogging camera. Why does the screen flip out but not angle up or down from the back directly? It’s an extra 3 movements (which in a high-speed atmosphere is 3 extra movements too much).
I forget what else. The back screen and the low MP were my two major complaints (and the reason I didn’t buy one).
Personally I distain the new top info display, it’s not big enough to give me the info I want like the older LCD screens and I also disdain the reverse color. I do not understand why I can’t reverse it, it’s awful and I can’t read it as easily. I’m sure I’d get used to it, but why not give us the option to make it “normal”. Sure us pros can read a negative but it’s not the best. I do miss the 3 button switching on the left, but I’d get used to the 2 buttons. I liked that vertical grip mini LCD but I’ll survive without it.
I’m tired and on a rant.
TLDR: yes it’s the ergonomics and additional “hardiness” combined with a higher resolution. (And like the other guy said in jest but I’m serious), 60mp would be better. Then you get 30mp at mRAW and 15 at sRAW which is pretty nice for less important stuff.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Sound reasoning. Rumor is that the next R6 get’s the sensor of the R3, so I think it is unlikely that the high mp camera (if coming at all) will be a 6 series camera. My guesstimate is that a high mp camera will be a 5 series camera with a price similar to the R5 Mk II (IIRC same as the 5Ds price was to the 5D Mk III in 2015).
The rumors guys may have a reasonable idea, and part of this is just naming strategy, but my guess is the chances for a high MP R3II are low. A few reasons: 1) Canon just released the R5 II with 3 grips...that is your 45 MP larger bodied camera; 2) If you look at what Canon does, they do create very nice niches for each body, differentiating via price point and features. A 45 MP R3 II isn't really its own niche, it is basically stealing from the R1 and R5 II. 3) The R3 was not high MP before. 4) I suspect the larger market for high MP is not at the $6k price point...which means you are getting a smaller body than the R3.
I could be wrong. I do suspect we'll see a high MP camera. But by high MP, it is 80-100 MP. Will they call it an R3? I do not see why. Depending on where they see it in the market, R6-s or R5-s are the most likely. Which do you think would sell more/have higher profit margin: 1) A $3500 R6-S, 2) a $4700 R5-S, or a 3) $6000 R3 II?
Just looking at this, Canon has left a huge gap in their price points, $2k for the R6II to $4.2K for the R5 II. I expect to fill it with a $3k-3.5k camera.
Upvote
0
No it's the form factor and the legacy button placement, such as the flash compensation button that goes back to at least the EOS 1n, that makes the R3 an honorary member of the lineage. If you've ever operated a camera via muscle memory you will appreciate this. My kid still has my 1n.
Upvote
0
Yea, except they changed it and got rid of the 3rd button, I get why, but I don't like it, I'm constantly fiddling with that new top rotating mode button and I miss being able to just click to switch. I'll get used to it. There's this minor things that are huge annoyances, like why can't my iso switch to "Auto" with the wheel, why does it only work on the back screen? (that I have set to off for my normal working).
But yea it's both things, the hearty body, and the button placement.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
