6 Reasons 1DX Shooters NEED the EOS R3
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 มิ.ย. 2024
- Now that we've had time to shoot around with the EOS R3, Canon's first flagship mirrorless body, we can't put it down! It's fast, intelligent, and much more lightweight than its DSLR flagship cousin, the EOS 1DXiii. So for this video, we are offering 6 reasons that users of Canon's DSLR flagship line, the 1DX, need to switch to Canon's new mirrorless flagship the R3. Join us!
2:05 Size & Weight
3:25 Sensor, ISO, AF, IBIS
5:13 30fps Burst Shooting
6:35 Eye Control AF
8:03 Articulating Screen
8:38 Video Recording
You can rent the gear featured in this video at our website below!
Canon EOS R3 ► bit.ly/3Mhm7NS
Canon EOS 1DX Mark III ► bit.ly/3ssJcDG
Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS ►bit.ly/3aEeHER
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III ► bit.ly/3gchIMz
Instagram ► / lensprotogo
Facebook ► / lensprotogo
Twitter ► / lensprotogo
LensProToGo ► www.lensprotogo.com
As a professional musician for decades, I've seen the concept of "planned obsolescence" first hand. To my mind, gear is NEVER obsolete as long as it serves your purposes. My all-time favorite synthesizer was the Ensoniq TS-12 (which was made in Malvern, Pennsylvania, of all places), and mine lasted me some 26 years. When it finally gave up the ghost, it was like losing a family member. As fellow posters have said about cameras, buying the latest, top-of-the-line, all-the-bells-and-whistles Roland or Korg or Yamaha or whatever will NOT make you a better musician. That "obsolete" synth, made by a company that long ago ceased to exist, was a great tool for me. I don't need the latest and greatest; in music as with all creative disciplines, the art must come from within you. The hardware can certainly make things easier, but it can't stand in for actual talent. Cut my electrical power and take away my gear and put me in front of a normal piano; I can still make good music for you.
Regarding photography, as a hobbyist, I used my 300D for nearly 20 years without ever taking it out of full auto. I finally decided it was time to learn about how to take pictures rather than let the camera do the thinking for me. On the advice of a friend in the UK who is an excellent photographer, I picked up a used 20D and 7D and some reasonably decent glass, and then set myself the task of learning about the triangle. After a short while, I felt comfortable enough to justify the purchase of a used 1DX Mark III as a 60th birthday present to myself. Granted, that camera is complete overkill for someone like me, but I've enjoyed working with it immensely. I'm more than happy to stay with the gear I have, with plans to add a few more good lenses. The move to mirrorless would involve an expense that I really can't justify.
The Canon EOS R3 is a great camera and in many ways can be seen as a RF replacement for the 1DX Mark III. However, Canon has gone to great pains to emphasize that it is NOT their flagship body. The much anticipated R1 is expected to be the Canon flagship.
yes, but way more expensive and mid 2023 by all rumours...and it'll be probably overkill for all but the most demanding of professional sports and wildlife photographers...
The 1DX is still an incredibly capable machine. It would be nice but not necessary to change to a mirrorless system if you already have an established gear loadout with dslrs. Only fools think a better rig will make them a better photographer.
1 DX m III is the best camera I ever had. Only 1 thing I’m missing is IBIS . The best body and controls ever .
So your telling me your 70-200 at 200 F2.8 will create as nice an image as a 200mm L 2.0. I don’t think so. And if you don’t think equipment can separate to equal photographers you would be mistaken.
@@robertmenzies4884 I wasn't even talking about lenses but yeah totally. Not only are the vast majority of lenses made since the 70's super-sharp, also no one gives a shit about what lens you used to take a picture lmao. What they will remember however is how your picture made them feel. There is nothing wrong with wanting to use the best lenses but it won't automatically teach you compositional or creative skills. You can't buy experience.
I am still using my 5d Mark II but will upgrade to the mighty 1DX Mark III soon.
Only upgrading will potentially improve your work if you’ve maxed out your current gear. Certain features matter to a small portion of enthusiasts and pros. If they need it, they need it.
The 1DX3 is sufficient until the R1 is released, in my opinion. Thanks for the video!
Right
1DX Mk3 is still the king. I won't be moving from it.
I purchased recently a 1Dx Mark III. Upgrading from my first gen 1dx. I like the workflow and handling of the body and it works so well for me. In 10 years maybe I will look at upgrading to a mirrorless 1 series. been shooting DSLR since 2003 :) I actually disabled the touch screen feature LOL.
I went from a 1Dx1, to 2, and now considering the 3. From the 1 to 2 was a huge step... I can only imagine how your mind must have been blown when you went from the 1 to 3! 😂👍🏾
Pathetic... 💩
I went from Canon EOS R (mirrorless) back DLSR 1Dx Mark III. MSRL is a joke. Not fun at all.
@@SketchTurnerZero Could you elaborate a bit more on why? I shoot 1DXii.
Kind regards.
I tested out the R3 a few months ago during a Canon Road Show. I was truly impressed.
Even though I am a Nikon shooter, I enjoy this video very much, I like the design and what’s the R3 have to offer..
I have the EOS 3 film camera from way back, which has the eye tracking AF too! It’s really the grandfather of the R3
well, the EOS5 was the actual grandfather. The 3 was the 2nd attempt by Canon at eye focus tracking. Glad to see someone else remembers these older techs and people today aren't just going "wow, this new tech" lol.
@@davepastern haha yes.. I was thinking the same... the youth of today too... :D I feel really old now :D
@@KartPhoto-com me too lol. I had a mate who had a eos5 and got to play with the eye tracking.
Excellent video, cheers.
Looking forward to the R1..... There's gonna be an R1 one day, right?
the buttons for quick settings change on the top right of the 1dx series is a must have for events. Sad they did not make them on the R3. 30 fps is great but the 150 pics buffer limit also does not provide the same reliability, speed and endurance that the 1dx gives for any unpredictable situations. Imagine shooting one action shot in the olympics with 30fps and immediately something great happens after and you end up waiting with the camera buffering! unlimited shots across an extended duration of time still gets more great pictures than more fps of one moment while sacrificing everything else after :(
Doesn't the new dial button replace that. And maybe even improve upon?
What's more worrying, especially at this price point, is that it's only weather proof (in 2022, at least the R6 should have that, making the iPhone in that respect more pro...). So not rugged at all, the card door is a joke and the Flippy screen is scary as hell with all that weight. Do we really need it to flip 🙃 into selfy-position?! Besides that you get the best position if you actually lie down on the floor and get yourself INTO the scene, but that's maybe just my thing...)
You're comments are Absolutely Correct the 1DX III is still the top Performer not the EOS R3 .
A discussion on the low light sports capabilities of the two would have been beneficial. 1DX is a pretty good in low light sports. How does the R3 measure up?
The EOS 3 also did eye detection, how long ago was that... still got mine.
One reason to cancel out R3 - the EVF lag. It is quite fast but not the same as the speed of light/OVF. Most possibly, it won't ever be.
Mirrorless is NOT as efficient as DSLR for speed photography. Sorry.
I don't know why this topic is always swept under the rug in all reviews. For someone that shoots extremely fast paced ball sports and motorsports, that could be a deal breaker.
@@keithkreatives because manufacturers don't want users to know this. Likewise, paid promoters strictly avoid mentioning it. But experienced photographers know this very well.
My Canon EOS ElanII E film 35 mm camera had eye af - but is was sketchy, so it’s been around a while.
the eye detection isn't new - it was on the original eos5 film camera many years ago, late 90s. Canon dropped it after the 5, don't know why, cos it was pretty cool. Glad to see it back imho.
Yup, still have my EOS 3, although I never ended up using that feature much.
@@matthewcullen7106 Ah yes, I realise the eos r3 had it. I said this on another comment on another video lol.
Was about to say the same. Also on Elan 7E.
Eye control AF is old, I used to have a canon, Film camera 50e with Eye Control and worked really well
Also I'm still in favor of a heavier camera for stability. IBIS and VR doesn't help when shooting high speed. Also with weight you'll need do a full kit weight. The lenses definitely make the R3 a better option.
If you decide to move into the R3 you can either use adapter with EF lenses which don't work very good with your R3 or you have to spend MORE MONEY on all new RF lenses .
@@garymeredith2441 You don't need EF glass. The initial investment into an R3 is the only hurdle. But as always, you just write off the equipment on your business taxes.
I personally still would go with Nikon. I was a graphic designer for a very long time and while I still love doing it. For work, I want to reduce the amount of time I spend editing vs working. Nikon is the only brand currently with a color profile straight out of camera, that has been for me anyway, acceptable for my clients.
I'm all about using my time smart.
For most shooters that know what their niche is, they don't need a lot of lenses.
Interesting. Still deciding if I should continue to wait for the R3
Don't waste your time or your money on the EOS R3 I've tried one and it absolutely sucked , I'm now using the 1DX III and I'll never look back .
This review says it all. The R3 is at least an equal to the marklll 1DX. I have two 1dx’s and they are great, but, when the R1 comes out the 1DX is over. The EF glass is some of the greatest. And if you see how other great cameras use older lenses I think like a lens such as the EF 200mm F2.0 will move with the R3 and future R1. That is one of several lenses that has so much character that with adapter the old glass will still be current. Yes speed and IS will improve but that is a fraction of the need for many compositional opportunities. The reality is we have to move forward and it is going to be painful for many us that have in the tens and tens of EF glass price wise but we have to accept. The deniers that say it’s manipulation have only need to look back at the guys in the late 90’s early 2000’s that said digital will never match photo quality. And now what, we try to plan for noise to put a little grain back in a photo. Jajaja!
Point being - Mirrorless is as good and will absolutely only get better.
Just bought second R3 as R1 will not hit the shelves until summer of 24 at earliest and that will be for the first ups. If your not connected plan till the end of 24. The reason no hurry is Canon will time for the Olympics for the Pros and they need more time to generate RF glass. The RF glass that is out is incredible but it is a fraction of the EF L glass plus specialty as tilt varied Macros. And current Rf designs will need to be improved especially when you look at the poor flexibility of the new Converters for the new glass. They are paper weights in my opinion. You can only use partial range of the 200-500 RF with the converter and you pay so much for the RF 70-200 and the converter cannot be used at all. I guess the geometry prevents the use of converters but if they don’t come up with a way to correct that is a huge loss in x converters.
Bottom line enjoy the new MILC ride. I will have some DX’s to sell shortly. Grrrrr!
I have been shooting with the 1DX iii since it first can me out - having previously owned (and continued to own a 1DX MK ii. I have recently sold my 1DXii and my new R3 arrives on Tuesday. I will wait and see how it performs as I will be very reluctant to give up on my 1DX iii as it is just such. A reliable workhorse in every situation I have encountered. I am hoping the R3 and future firmware upgrades will solve the buffer issue 30 FPS and a buffer of 150 frames only gives 5 seconds …. But much time in sport or wildlife …. So we will see
Hey Shaun, curious to know how things turned out with the R3. I'm sitting here ready to make the jump from my 1DXM2. Worth it?
@@danglassphoto hi, I have been extremely pleased with it so far. The additional frame rate is a real
Bonus and it works perfectly with EF L primes - any questions please just ask and I will be happy to help if I can
@@shaunclee7399 what is more fun to shoot with for you, EVF or OVF?
@@mdbedelsohn4307 without a doubt the mirrorless viewfinder
@@shaunclee7399 oh wow, surprising! Could you elaborate what makes it more fun for you?
The Canon 1Dx III can shoot mechanical 20fps in live view mode and not just electronic.
It can actually matter quite a bit, as a birder this is huge and distorts BIF shots in a big way because the panning motion exacerbates it a lot.
Does it really make a big difference to pro or amateur photographers? Are mirrorless that much better? Imo they can't be.
Please show me 10 pictures you shot with the R3 that you can not shoot with a 1DX iii.. I have shot a lot with both.. Yes there is a difference but worth selling my gear and start over with R3.. in no 100 years
The eye controlled AF works better if there is less light leaking from the outside into the evf. So unfortunately people wearing glasses can't bring their eye totally against the cup so potentially eye controlled AF works less well for them
you can change the dioptre I think on the EVF though can't you? That way, you can forgo your glasses and just use the EVF sans glasses and voila, eye tracking should work OK again.
If i wanted to go down the root of going from my 1DX3 to the R3, then i would also have to "upgrade" ALL my EF lenses as well. As the older EF glass are NOT compatible with any of the mirrorless cameras. like my MKI 500f4 Prime for example is AWESOME on the 1DX3 but is REALLY bad on the R5(so would be on the R3 as well). Which is going to be very expensive!. So the question i would ask myself, IF I wanted to "start again" and go mirrorless, would I stick with Canon or would I have a change(Nikon, Sony etc etc) hmmmm!
I am sure you know but in case others don’t, Canon makes an adapter (actually 2 different ) that allows you to use the EF glass. I use the R3 and EF glass daily…even when I use RF glass, I see zero quality difference. As a sports shooter with multiple bodies, I have to say the R3 is a breathe of fresh air with 30fps and gorgeous image quality….the 1DX line is equally impressive but being lighter and faster is a game changer!
@@keithlucas1191 Yeah i am well aware of the adaptors!. What i was on about was the "older" EF lenses are not that good with the R cameras(slow focusing, smaller focus area, very low FPS etc etc). So as I said, I would have to start all over again!!!
@@wot-not How about considering it a transition period? Meaning....I'm also married to Canon glass but I plan to start with the adapter and slowly sell off my old glass for new RF glass. I'm a devout DSLR shooter but this new technology just has me hooked. Going on 60 years old, what the hell right? I just gotta have it while I can still shoot. :)
16 fps mechanical shutter, unlimited buffer, no banding issues, no jello warping of straight lines due to electronic shutter issues - pretty sure the 1dxIII is the obvious choice for a pro sports shooter. 150 shots at 20fps is about 7 seconds before the buffer is full if your shooting multiple subjects in fast moving sports thats not great. How long to clear the buffer shooting raw to two cards simultaniously?
You can shoot 15fps mechanical with the R3 with no warping...yes, the buffer is weak vs the 1Dx, quite surprised at how bad it is in comparison to be honest. edit: I'd say the CanonCrippleHammer™ has hit the R3 to make the R1 look better when it is released. It is rather odd that the buffer is so slow, given CFAST support and a stacked BMI sensor too which has a much faster readout speed. I can't remember if the R3 uses a single digic X IC or double like the 1Dx III...that may be part of the reason.
AEF is not The beginning of technology to R3. Už hory back to dárky 90 and I love this function on canon film cameras.
Well, to me even Canon 1D Mark IV holds more value than R3. Three important features say it all:
OVF. Viewing subjects at the speed of light helps capture decisive moments instantly.
30% more reach that is highly important for wildlife photography.
Double battery life.
I would love to see Canon develop a modern RF APS-H sensor camera that would replace the 1D Mark IV! In many ways it would be an ideal camera for Wildlife Photographers striking a nice balance between the effective reach of a crop sensor and the light gathering capability and better low light sensitivity of a larger sensor. I would love to see the R3 body with a stacked BSI fast APS-H sensor retaining the AF and much of the video capabilities of the R3!
@@VABrowneMDPhD, in full agreement. Though R7 is here now however; as we saw, 7D was never the same as 1DIV. Even 7DII had issues that 1DIV didn't.
1.3x crop vs full frame, not so big a difference, even with wildlife photography imho. APS-C vs FF is nice, yes. 390mm vs 480mm for 1.3x vs 1.6 crop and a 300mm lens.
High ISO performance - the R3 will be 2 to 3 stops better at higher ISO than the older IV camera. This is pretty important in wildlife photography.
Battery life is limited due to the EVF. Not much can be done, but by all accounts, you can get a good 1000 shots from a single battery with the R3. Take a few spare batteries with you and it's a moot point. The EVF lets you see the histogram in real time too - making it easier to adjust exposure on the fly.
AF performance - the R3 (any mirrorless body with IBIS and dual pixel AF and bird eye/animal tracking will mutilate the older IV's AF system. Not even a fair competition. IBIS + lens IS is also a large improvement over just lens IS. You can also AF past f8 with these mirrorless cameras. On all AF points. That's HUGE.
Lighter and smaller - no competition here either, especially if you're carrying a large telephoto lens such as a 500mm F4 IS L or even larger.
As much as I have been stubbornly sticking to DSLRs, I am now grudgingly admitting that mirrorless is a far better option now. In nearly every way. And, that gap is only going to continue to get larger as time goes by. There's a reason why Canon will not be making any further DSLRs. EVER.
@@VABrowneMDPhD Noise is the issue. Many wildlife photographers are regularly shooting at ISO3200 to 12800. A crop sensor is never going to perform as good as a FF sensor. It's just the laws of physics. I had a look at the R7, and at ISO1600, I'd honestly say that the R5 is 2 stops better. The R6 even more so with its FF sensor and only 24mp.
There's no end to development. Sony now says, smartphone cameras will outperform ILCs by 2024. If so, what will Canon do then?
Can the R3 be placed on Silent Shutter, For the Wedding Tog??
The R3 can be completely silent in electronic shutter mode. The mechanical shutter still has a sound but it's dampened. However the "silent shutter" mode does not reduce the mechanical shutter slap sound further. It just turns off all the speaker sounds and indicators etc.
4 more Megapixels is just NOT enough for me to give up my 1DXMK3…plus the R3 being smaller is a bad thing (for me) because in my hands, my 1DXMK3 is SMALL 😮
Autofocus eye tracking is not at all new. I had an analog Canon camera with this feature some 15 years ago, don't remember the type.
6:45 Eye Control AF is twenty four year old tech (introduced in the Canon EOS 3 in 1998) they FINALLY brought to mirrorless from the film days. You lose credibility by saying this is just the beginning of this tech for not knowing that.
To each his own, I personally think these new camera's and lenses image output looks flat but that's just me and I'm talking most cameras released after 2008.
Both have limitations, if your goal is to shoot video mainly go with the R3, stills go with the 1Dx. The R3 and other mirrorless cameras have reduced the flash sync speed and more megapixels doesn't mean better images especially if you plan to print which is more perceptual than technical.
A 12mp Nikon D700 will still produce better prints than most modern cameras, same for the Canon 5D Mark I & II.
It depends on what you're willing to lose for what you will gain in mirrorless.
Battery consumption
Memory card type and availability
Flash sync speeds
Front curtain sync
EVF vs OVF
Frame rates
Quieter
A bunch of AF points that still can't out* do less on a DSLR at least not yet. Honestly I think the manufacturers are sand bagging on purpose.
Weight is a big one for people these days but they could just carry less stuff.
Mechanical shutter vs Electronic shutter
Sensor cleanliness (the R3 specifically attracts a lot of dust, dirt and debris) so stopping down just shows all the gunk.
AF systems. Mirrorless still hasn't surpassed DSLR in AF however they make up for it by shooting higher frame rates. Mirrorless still struggle in some situations including Sony, Canon and Nikon. As much hate that the Nikon D6 got, it's literally the only camera with usable images at 102k iso, meaning you can shoot at least 2 stops faster than the Z9 and pretty any other camera on the market in low light.
You think the 1dxiii's IQ is flat?! (Could agree with you upon the R6 on that tough..)
@@mdbedelsohn4307 The 1Dx III has about the same pixel pitch as my D200 from 2005 but uses a CMOS sensor instead of CCD.
The D200 jpegs edit like raw files but are like 1mb. CMOS wasn't an upgrade in image quality. Lenses matter, look at Leica, and old Nikkor glass. If you prefer squeaky clean, clinical no character glass get the current new stuff.
@@dct124 should be around the dame pixel pitch as the 5d2. Both are 20mp. As for glass, a agree it's getting too sharp/ clinical. But still love some of the older EF glass
@@dct124 equally important is how you develop the RAW files. Both LR and C1 turns them to crap... Only DPP brings out the full colors and "depth".
@@mdbedelsohn4307 When I shoot raw I use the Nikon NX software, save as TIFF then move to other software. I don't shoot professionally anymore so I don't need Raw at all. My old friend still uses jpeg for his business only and turns out $5k-$12k per website. I think a lot photographers just like playing with sliders 🤣
When he was doing apps, he'd used 700kb-1mb jpegs and made around $20k off 1 job. It depends on use case for many things in photo/video. His sister we'd given her my original D200 with nearly 1mil clicks and she uses it for real estate photos as a real estate agent still to this day.
Happy I got the 1DX lll
Yes myself as well. It is the final Pro DSLR and decades of refinement. It fits like a glove and it just works so well.
My main issue with the R3 is the absence of GPS.
I will never go mirrorless. Optical viewfinder>Electric Viewfinder
No thanks. I shoot sports, don't really care about video. My 1DX and 400mm f2/8 is going to stay my workhorse for some time to come.
That eye viewfinder is a old bit of tech Canon created a very long time ago on film. It's not practical.
No matter how many bells and whistles you throw into the new canon mirrorless cameras, it’s always going to come down to “is the image actually good?“ And sadly the R3 falls short of that.
The Images themselves look extremely flat, the colors look dull and lifeless, and it’s pretty consistent in every single R3 image I’ve seen
The bottom line is no one‘s gonna look at those photos at any point in time and say “the eye control auto focus was great right there!”
whatever canon did to their sensors past the 1DX mark ii, it took a turn for the worst in terms of image quality
I agree a million percent Canon has just gone down the toilet as far as I'm concerned , if somebody wants to move into a Mirrorless system the obvious choice is Sony .
How do I know this I've tried it , with both the R3 and the R7 Canon system sucked and I got rid of them both of these mirrorless cameras .
@Spartanshaq777 would you include 1DX 3 sensor in that camp? I’m looking to upgrade & my biggest priority is image quality from sensor.. I
@@louisepaige9461 no. they gave the 1dx 3 a mirrorless sensor to give it better autofocusing capabilities and no anti-aliasing filtering which means more sharpness in the images.
but it's not the same image quality as it once was. The image doesn't have to be the sharpest to enjoy the beauty of it. And the color science took a nose dive too, because that is more on par with canon's newer cameras.
So no, the 1dx III does not count.
@@Spartanshaq777 thanks for your insight.. i completely get it, when i upgraded from my 5D2 to 5D3 i hated it, i still use the 5D2 for so many shoots. The sensor colors, and results completely different. Got old 1DIV body but was thinking of upgrading. Because i do need something better at autofocus, but losing that quality not sure worth it
@@louisepaige9461 yeah, I mean I keep looking at the canon R3 to try to give it a chance because I do want another shooter that can hit 30+ frames. But for some particular reason, I'm not impressed.
Lol. I'll stick to my 1dx mark III pal
It's not a Flagship...
what, cos it doesn't have the `1" on it? wow...how about judging a camera on its performance not the number on it?
@@davepastern because canon said it's not their flagship you dummy
@@davepastern Have you owned a Canon 1DX MK III ?
Not sure if smaller size and weight are a benefit. When I bought the original 1D X, the large size and weight was one of the main reasons for me to buy it. The alternative would have been the 5D Mark III, which almost was the same camera in a smaller body for half the price. So I basically paid 3000 Euros more just to have a larger and heavier body. For me a professional camera that costs a lot of money has to be large and heavy. The Sony A1 might also be a professional camera, but it looks and feels like a toy. If a camera is so small, it has to be much cheaper in my opinion. As the R3 is much smaller than the 1D X III, it should also be a third or so cheaper. Otherwise it costs much more per kilo.
WTF? Smaller/lighter, so it should be cheaper? You're not paying for the size, you're paying for the tech inside. I think you're overcompensating for something else ;-)
Film cameras from the heyday were 2x times smaller than the 1Dx, but photo journalists got it done. Hell, leicas are tiny and some journalists swear by leica.
It's crazy that you paid for the 1dx just because it was bigger, you got ripped off mate
@@xxGravyBabyxx Of course the size also made it sturdier and if someone would grab my camera and run, I would be more likely to catch him, because carrying a 1D X slows you down.
What angers me about the 1D X though is the problem with broken main boards. Mine stopped working last year and I had to pay more than 600 Euros to get it replaced by Canon. I learned that the same happened to many 1D X owners. I wonder if the new main board will also stop working after a few years.
The new wave of mirrorless cameras are way too fragile they cannot take the abuse of a good old Canon 1DX or a good old Nikon D5 these cameras are built like Sherman tanks , the new Mirrorless Cameras that Nikon , Canon and Sony build today are not built to take abuse .
@@garymeredith2441 That's also my fear. The electronic viewfinder might break sooner or later and IBIS might also be very fragile. However the 1D X cameras had a serious flaw. After a few years many of them had a broken main board. I had to replace mine for more that 600 Euros. One guy even wrote that it already happened to him twice on the same camera. So the replacement board seems to be the same fragile one that came with the original camera.
For now I will stick to the 1D X at least until it breaks again. It does everything I want. There is no killer feature that I am missing. I even took it on a trip around the world last year.
Never trust someone who wears a hat indoors.
The R3 is not good for shooting in hot weather...... specially in areas like Arizona, Nevada, and some areas in California where it gets 115 degrees....... I attempted it and shooting 4k or raw with the R3 in the desert=overheating and shutdown ......
The R3 can't take the abuse of hot weather like the 1DX III which is true workhorse and it's truly built like a Sherman Tank .
hi
hey
how you doin
There's no Need for any camera..especially 6 reasons. stop all the push
marketing please. There's more involved than just the camera, there's discussions
on what lens what speed what aperture ect, then what photo software to use,
then what editing screen then do you know how to correctly use the image software
sharpening ect...Then there's AI programs you can purchase to fix noise, ect ect..
So the point is it's a whole learning curve to photography, not 6 reasons to purchase just a new camera.
Most people purchasing these cameras can hardly find where to turn the darn thing on..😵💫
Cheers Mike
In 2024 the R3 is $4,499 and the 1DX3 is still $6,499
Are you Logan Pauls brother?
Nah… why spend the money on the R3 when the R1 is due next year… just seems like a waste of $6000
It seems kind of soon...to have an R1 come out next year. Did you read that somewhere? I would hate to buy the R3 now if that is the case.
@@mndane - just rumored all over the place that it’ll be announced 2nd quarter 2024…
1dx is game over (dslr)
No one can afford a r3