Canon EOS R3 vs Canon EOS R5 Mark II

In terms of image quality, the Canon EOS R5 Mark II boasts a substantial advantage with its 45 megapixels, allowing for highly detailed images suitable for large prints and cropping. The higher resolution is especially beneficial for landscape and studio photographers who prioritize detail and flexibility in post-processing. The R3, while featuring a lower resolution of 24 megapixels, still delivers exceptional image quality, particularly in low-light situations due to its broader ISO range that stretches up to 204800, compared to the R5 Mark II's maximum of 51200. This means that for scenarios requiring steep ISO adjustments, such as indoor sports events or concerts, the R3 will likely provide cleaner images with less noise.

However, the color depth and dynamic range of both cameras are commendable, making them capable of producing stunning images. Photographers who shoot JPEGs may find the R3's color rendering appealing, especially under varied lighting conditions, while those favoring RAW formats will enjoy the greater flexibility of the R5 Mark II for high-resolution edits.

Overall, both cameras provide excellent image quality but cater to different needs based on resolution versus performance in challenging conditions.

The Canon EOS R3 excels in its autofocus system with an impressive 1053 autofocus points, allowing for incredibly precise tracking of fast-moving subjects - a crucial feature for sports and wildlife photographers. It also includes Canon's Dual Pixel CMOS AF technology and advanced subject recognition, which ensures that focus is maintained on subjects even amidst challenging scenarios.

On the other hand, the R5 Mark II offers a whopping 5850 autofocus points, which aids in achieving accuracy and reliability. While it provides solid performance, especially in a still-life or landscape setting, the R3's system is specifically engineered for rapid tracking, giving it an edge during fast-paced shoots. The R3's autofocus system is incredibly responsive with features like eye detection, which is vital for portrait and wildlife photography.

In conclusion, while both autofocus systems are designed to meet high expectations, the R3 clearly dominates with its out-of-this-world capabilities tailored for high-speed photography.

The Canon EOS R5 Mark II is a powerhouse when it comes to video capabilities, offering 8K footage at 30p and 4K at up to 120p, allowing videographers to experiment with high-resolution video and slow-motion effects. Its advanced heat management system further ensures extended filming times in high-resolution formats, making it favorable for filmmakers engaging in serious video work. In addition, the R5 Mark II supports Canon Log 3, which provides extended dynamic range, essential for color grading in post-production.

The R3, while it can also shoot 4K at a maximum of 120p, lacks 8K video capabilities, making it less adaptable to filmmakers looking for the highest resolutions. However, professionals focused on high-speed sports videos will appreciate the R3's ability to record continuously at 30 fps and its impressive autofocus during video recording, which ensures subjects remain sharp and in focus.

Ultimately, the R5 Mark II stands out as the superior choice for video professionals, while the R3 provides excellent specifications for those prioritizing high-speed, action-oriented footage.

Both the Canon EOS R3 and R5 Mark II are built to withstand tough conditions, featuring weather sealing that ensures durability in adverse weather. However, the R3 is heftier at 1015 grams compared to the more lightweight R5 Mark II at 746 grams, which may impact portability when carrying for extended periods. Despite its heavier weight, the R3 offers a larger grip that many professionals find comfortable during long shoots, especially in portrait orientation.

The dimensions of the R3 (150 x 143 x 87 mm) contribute to its robust feel, while the R5 Mark II is more compact (138 x 98 x 88 mm), making it easier to handle in tight spaces. Both cameras feature a fully articulating touchscreen; however, the R3 has a higher resolution screen with 4,150,000 dots compared to the R5 Mark II's 2,100,000 dots. This difference allows for clearer previews and better usability, particularly when shooting in bright conditions.

In terms of ergonomics, the R3 may suit professionals who prioritize grip and usability during extended sessions, while the R5 Mark II appeals to those who favor a lighter, more compact design.

Battery life is an important feature for both models, and the Canon EOS R3 leads in this aspect with a rated capacity of approximately 760 shots. This extended battery life makes the R3 particularly appealing for photographers venturing into long events, such as weddings or multi-day fieldwork. The R5 Mark II, while still respectable, has a lower capacity at 540 shots, which may necessitate carrying extra batteries for extended use, especially in precarious situations.

Both cameras utilize the Canon RF mount and support dual card slots, which allow for high-speed storage and redundancy, essential for professional workflows. The R3 supports CFexpress Type B cards, optimizing it for high-speed continuous shooting, while the R5 Mark II also caters to fast storage solutions, although users should ensure compatibility based on the card used.

Overall, the R3 is a better choice for endurance in the field, while the R5 Mark II's battery life may be adequate for more casual shooters who don't require extensive shooting sessions.

In terms of price, the Canon EOS R5 Mark II appeals to those on a tighter budget at $4299, while the R3 is positioned at $5999, reflecting its professional-grade features tailored for high-speed photography. This price difference makes the R5 Mark II an attractive option for hobbyists and those more interested in high-resolution imaging combined with solid performance.