You're mostly right. There are also some indications that future RF dual-motor lenses (like the 100-300 f2.8) will focus faster with the R3's higher-voltage batteries, that the R3 batteries maintain performance while the R5 autofocus and frame rate are reduced as the battery gets below 50% discharge (per Canon spec sheets), and that the R3 is more weatherproof and damage-resistant (priceless when you're travelling). I've compared shots taken with both cameras, and for some reason the R5 sometimes shows more detail and other shots it does not. I think there's more to it than just the number of pixels, that the camera software sometimes works better and rendering a "prettier image". This isn't true of studio shots, but when shooting bursts of a moving subject and mixed light, some pictures render more detail than others. Having shot millions of frames on a variety of cameras, I still don't understand what's happening :-(. Regardless, you made a great comparison of a couple of excellent cameras. I'll stick with the R3 for the next few years.
Great video indeed and you covered so many great points. For me, one of the nice features of the R3 over the R5 is the subject tracking with spot AF capability. Keep up the good work!
Great video with useful insights! IMO R3 is most suited for shooting sports and wildlife at controlled distances. I owned R5 previously and TBH never fell for it (comparing with my Sony A7R4 & A1 at the time). I mainly shoot birds from hide at close distances (4m to 10m) so R3 does an excellent job for me. The most important feature (that I think is a must for fast action shooters) is R3’s stacked CMOS sensor of which R5 lacks.
Thanks for an excellent video with intelligent observations. Even before the R1, I'm eager to see what the R5 Mark II will offer. It may make the R3 even less appealing in comparison.
I calibrated the eye tracking once. It works perfectly right away. Only if the eye is not exactly centered when it is used does the AF point move, which is logical.
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography So ist es, obgleich mit Brille. Der Tracking Point wandert ja - wie sollte es anders sein - mit der Pupille, so daß dieser, sobald das Auge nicht zentral am Okular ruht (was selten der Fall ist) verschiebt sich auch der Fokuspunkt. Der AF unterscheidet nicht ob sich die Pupille oder der Kopf, mit gerader/starrer Pupille, bewegt. Ein Phänomen welches ich am Sonntag bei einem Handballspiel feststellen mußte.
I think the r3 price should be somewhere between 5000-5500$usd. While I love and really want that stacked sensor, it is just too low res and with only one CF card, it is hard to justify against the z9. For high iso needs, most would be equally well served with the r6m2. I agree that having two identical bodies is great, all the current bodies have too many compromises. While I love my r5, that rolling shutter just spoils my mood. The rolling shutter on the r7 is terrible and the MS is too noisy. So what is Canon even doing? Trying to make a buck, no,doubt, but they aren’t currently making me happy. It’s like the camera companies really want to avoid releasing the perfect camera. That whacky camera conspiracy guy might be onto something. Enjoyed the vid!
Because of 24 mp, I decided not to get the R3. I love my R5. Come on Canon, give us the R1 that has 45 mp or more and the speed of the R3 with minimal or even zero rolling shutter.
Hello, when you talk about difference between a7IV and r5 in focusing against busy background you didn't mention which was better or faster. Can I assume r5 performed better? Thank you for nice and honest video,👍
Nice comparison. I have the R5 and am considering picking up the R3 before heading to Botswana. (It looks like you're on one of the Pangolin photo boats?) Right now my second body is a 5DmkII, and I really don't want to carry all my RF & EF lenses, right.
I felt similar when using R3. AF felt good/good body design/not tooo heavy. But, I was so used to 7DII pixel density. I went to a 1DX and just felt like I was not getting the same detail/having to crop all the time/use extenders. I like shooting bare lens if I can, so R5 + even a 500MM can work quite well. Where a 1dx / R3, I felt like I'd need 600-840mm to get the detail I want.
hello fabian I am reaching out trying to find people interested in being part of a livestream I wish to run at the end of the month would you be interested in taking part I must admit its hard to get youtubers willing to take part. I do think it will benefit both channels and you would be free to upload it to your channel after the event. Hope you have a good day.
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography I try to arange a group livestream once every few months for my channel and the facebook group. I have 2 mods join in. one is a film maker and the other is a equestrian photographer. If you check my live shows out their are a few episodes up if you would like to see what has been done in the past. I test telephoto lenses myself such as the 150-600 lenses. I am trying to get some youtubers involved sadly some see themselves to be to important and dont seem very willing to be involved. These live streams are fun and enjoyable mainly talking about camera gear. But other topics do get covered. I try to structure the show with topics and questions that have been asked on the facebook group. I try to run it on a sunday but it can be difficult to arrange as my other guests are based in america. Im based in the UK. Hope to here from you regards Paul.
I just sent mine in to CPS to take care of a shutter error message, she simply froze and nothing works and shows that shutter error message ..... so I'm using my 1DX MK III for now ......
Great review! A very useful comparison on-the-field, thanks a lot Fabian! I'm surprised by the superiority of R5 in terms of image quality at low ISOs. This passage of your video really shocked me: ruclips.net/video/3_PBD32q7ec/видео.html. It's seems there are big limits in R3 if you need to crop/frame. Have you experienced this huge difference in other similar shots?
Thanks! To be honest, most subjects were not so stationary, so I just shot them with one camera, then switched to the other. Often the distance changed in between (flying birds or the boat moving), so I don’t feel comfortable with too many comparisons here. But I really had the feeling that you can benefit from the extra resolution of the R5 when you crop or zoom in
You can buy the Canon R5 here (Affiliate Link): amzn.to/3zzwlWs
Loving the R3 ! Thanks for a great well thought through video 👍
Thanks! Enjoy the camera 😊
You're mostly right. There are also some indications that future RF dual-motor lenses (like the 100-300 f2.8) will focus faster with the R3's higher-voltage batteries, that the R3 batteries maintain performance while the R5 autofocus and frame rate are reduced as the battery gets below 50% discharge (per Canon spec sheets), and that the R3 is more weatherproof and damage-resistant (priceless when you're travelling).
I've compared shots taken with both cameras, and for some reason the R5 sometimes shows more detail and other shots it does not. I think there's more to it than just the number of pixels, that the camera software sometimes works better and rendering a "prettier image". This isn't true of studio shots, but when shooting bursts of a moving subject and mixed light, some pictures render more detail than others. Having shot millions of frames on a variety of cameras, I still don't understand what's happening :-(.
Regardless, you made a great comparison of a couple of excellent cameras. I'll stick with the R3 for the next few years.
Thanks for your comment! Enjoy the R3
Great video indeed and you covered so many great points. For me, one of the nice features of the R3 over the R5 is the subject tracking with spot AF capability. Keep up the good work!
Good point! I mainly used the subject tracking over the whole area
Great summary, thanks
Thanks
I agree with your findings. I have an R3, R5 and R6 with R5 primary and R3 secondary, but the different button layouts do slow me down.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
Great video with useful insights! IMO R3 is most suited for shooting sports and wildlife at controlled distances. I owned R5 previously and TBH never fell for it (comparing with my Sony A7R4 & A1 at the time). I mainly shoot birds from hide at close distances (4m to 10m) so R3 does an excellent job for me. The most important feature (that I think is a must for fast action shooters) is R3’s stacked CMOS sensor of which R5 lacks.
Thanks. Yes, for that scenario the R3 makes perfect sense, especially if you also want to take some action photos (birds landing, fighting)
Thanks for an excellent video with intelligent observations. Even before the R1, I'm eager to see what the R5 Mark II will offer. It may make the R3 even less appealing in comparison.
Thanks! Yes, also very excited R5 ii
I calibrated the eye tracking once. It works perfectly right away. Only if the eye is not exactly centered when it is used does the AF point move, which is logical.
Nice to hear that it works well for you!
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography So ist es, obgleich mit Brille. Der Tracking Point wandert ja - wie sollte es anders sein - mit der Pupille, so daß dieser, sobald das Auge nicht zentral am Okular ruht (was selten der Fall ist) verschiebt sich auch der Fokuspunkt. Der AF unterscheidet nicht ob sich die Pupille oder der Kopf, mit gerader/starrer Pupille, bewegt. Ein Phänomen welches ich am Sonntag bei einem Handballspiel feststellen mußte.
I think the r3 price should be somewhere between 5000-5500$usd. While I love and really want that stacked sensor, it is just too low res and with only one CF card, it is hard to justify against the z9. For high iso needs, most would be equally well served with the r6m2. I agree that having two identical bodies is great, all the current bodies have too many compromises. While I love my r5, that rolling shutter just spoils my mood. The rolling shutter on the r7 is terrible and the MS is too noisy. So what is Canon even doing? Trying to make a buck, no,doubt, but they aren’t currently making me happy. It’s like the camera companies really want to avoid releasing the perfect camera. That whacky camera conspiracy guy might be onto something. Enjoyed the vid!
I hear you. An R3 with 36 MP, 2x CFE for the same price would have been amazing
Because of 24 mp, I decided not to get the R3. I love my R5. Come on Canon, give us the R1 that has 45 mp or more and the speed of the R3 with minimal or even zero rolling shutter.
I‘m sure this will come sooner or later. But I would highly prefer if they would stick to the 45 MP
Hello, when you talk about difference between a7IV and r5 in focusing against busy background you didn't mention which was better or faster. Can I assume r5 performed better? Thank you for nice and honest video,👍
Sorry! The R5 was doing a lot better, at least in my limited testing
Nice comparison. I have the R5 and am considering picking up the R3 before heading to Botswana. (It looks like you're on one of the Pangolin photo boats?) Right now my second body is a 5DmkII, and I really don't want to carry all my RF & EF lenses, right.
Thanks! Yes, exactly 😊 Have fun there
hi nice review, which lense are u using, is it the canon 600 mm f4 iii ef
Thanks! It’s the 600m ef ii
100% agree on two CFExpress card slots. I hope Canon listens! Based on your review, I will wait for the R1. I will stick with my R5 for now. Thanks!
Glad if it was helpful 😊
Fabian, did you buy the R3? Will you buy the R3? or if not; excited to see what the R5ii or R1 will be like?
No, I didn’t buy it. But I might be very interested in an R5 II or R1 😊
I felt similar when using R3. AF felt good/good body design/not tooo heavy.
But, I was so used to 7DII pixel density. I went to a 1DX and just felt like I was not getting the same detail/having to crop all the time/use extenders.
I like shooting bare lens if I can, so R5 + even a 500MM can work quite well. Where a 1dx / R3, I felt like I'd need 600-840mm to get the detail I want.
Thanks for sharing your experiences
hello fabian I am reaching out trying to find people interested in being part of a livestream I wish to run at the end of the month would you be interested in taking part I must admit its hard to get youtubers willing to take part. I do think it will benefit both channels and you would be free to upload it to your channel after the event. Hope you have a good day.
Hi!
Thanks for contacting me! Can you give me some more details of what you planned? This would help me to decide 😊
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography I try to arange a group livestream once every few months for my channel and the facebook group. I have 2 mods join in. one is a film maker and the other is a equestrian photographer. If you check my live shows out their are a few episodes up if you would like to see what has been done in the past. I test telephoto lenses myself such as the 150-600 lenses. I am trying to get some youtubers involved sadly some see themselves to be to important and dont seem very willing to be involved. These live streams are fun and enjoyable mainly talking about camera gear. But other topics do get covered. I try to structure the show with topics and questions that have been asked on the facebook group. I try to run it on a sunday but it can be difficult to arrange as my other guests are based in america. Im based in the UK. Hope to here from you regards Paul.
I just sent mine in to CPS to take care of a shutter error message, she simply froze and nothing works and shows that shutter error message ..... so I'm using my 1DX MK III for now ......
Oh, that’s unfortunate. Luckily you had a backup camera
Great review! A very useful comparison on-the-field, thanks a lot Fabian! I'm surprised by the superiority of R5 in terms of image quality at low ISOs. This passage of your video really shocked me: ruclips.net/video/3_PBD32q7ec/видео.html. It's seems there are big limits in R3 if you need to crop/frame. Have you experienced this huge difference in other similar shots?
Thanks! To be honest, most subjects were not so stationary, so I just shot them with one camera, then switched to the other. Often the distance changed in between (flying birds or the boat moving), so I don’t feel comfortable with too many comparisons here. But I really had the feeling that you can benefit from the extra resolution of the R5 when you crop or zoom in
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography thanks a lot.
That some just buy the R5 and R3 like their cheap or something.
Not cheap, but reliable tools so far
Very strange question... cause we all know the answer
Hmm, I heard people having different opinions on that one. What do you think?