Canon EOS R vs Canon EOS 5D Mark III

Winner
Placeholder

97

Canon EOS 5D Mark III

65

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Canon EOS R

High resolution screen
Screen resolution
2,100k dots
Touch screen
Touch screen
Fewer buttons
Flip-out screen
Screen flips out
Great for movies
Large sensor
Sensor size
Full frame 36x24mm
 

Reasons to buy the Canon EOS 5D Mark III

Shutter lag
Barely any delay taking photos
120 ms shutter lag
Lens availability
Slightly more lenses available
165 lenses
Battery life
Great battery life
950 shots
Interchangeable lenses
Interchangeable lenses
Many lenses to choose from

galleries

Explore our gallery of 49 sample photos taken by the Canon EOS 5D Mark III.

competitors

Canon EOS R Competitors

Placeholder

Nikon Z6

Boutique

$1,997 - $2,597

Light sensitivity Better maximum light sensitivity
Size Smaller
Focus points Many fewer focus points
Placeholder

Nikon Z7

Boutique

$3,322 - $3,997

True resolution Significantly higher true resolution
Size Smaller
Focus points Many fewer focus points
Placeholder

Sony Alpha a7 III

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$1,898 - $2,167 body only

$1,998 - $2,226 with 28-70mm lens

Battery life Much longer battery life
Interchangeable lenses Has interchangeable lenses
Screen resolution Much lower resolution screen

Canon EOS 5D Mark III Competitors

Nikon D750

Nikon D750

Pro DSLR

$1,240 - $1,397 body only

$1,719 - $1,897 with 24-120mm lens

Built-in focus motor Has a built-in focus motor
Battery life Much longer battery life
Light sensitivity Worse maximum light sensitivity
Canon EOS 6D

Canon EOS 6D

Pro DSLR

$999 - $1,022 body only

$1,412 - $1,999 with 24-105mm lens

GPS Has a GPS
Size Smaller
Shutter lag Much more shutter lag
Placeholder

Fujifilm X-T3

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$1,499 body only

$1,879 - $1,899 with 18-55mm lens

Continuous shooting Shoots much faster
Touch screen Has a touch screen
Battery life Much shorter battery life

discussion

Placeholder
EOS R
Canon

Report a correction
Canon EOS 5D Mark III
EOS 5D Mark III
Canon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments