Canon
EOS R6 Mark III
Hybrid 32.5MP full-frame RF body with 7K RAW video, 40fps electronic burst, 8.5-stop IBIS, and Dual Pixel CMOS AF II.
$2,799
Launch priceReleased Nov 2025
Sony
PXW-Z200
AI-powered XDCAM with 1-inch Exmor RS sensor, 20x G Lens zoom, 4K60/120p, 12G-SDI, XAVC MXF, variable ND, and RTMP/SRT streaming.
$3,999
Launch priceReleased Sep 2024
EOS R6 Mark III is 1.2 years newer.
Affiliate disclosure: As an Amazon Associate, Cameraegg earns from qualifying purchases. Cameraegg may also earn commission from B&H links, at no extra cost to you.
Wins
EOS R6 Mark III
Wins
PXW-Z200
4 categories tied
Which would you choose?
TL;DR — Key differences
- AEOS R6 Mark III has higher Max video bit rate (2600 Mbps vs 200 Mbps)
- AEOS R6 Mark III has lower Weight (699 g vs 1960 g)
- AEOS R6 Mark III has higher ISO max (native) (64,000 vs 25,600)
- AEOS R6 Mark III has higher Resolution (32.5 MP vs 14 MP)
- AEOS R6 Mark III has higher Burst (electronic) (40 fps vs 20 fps)
Key specs at a glance
Size and weight, to scale
📸 Snap this size diff to share
EOS R6 Mark III
138 × 98 × 88 mm
699 g (1.54 lb / 24.66 oz)
Credit card
85.6 × 54 mm
for scale
PXW-Z200
176 × 201 × 371 mm
1960 g (4.32 lb / 69.14 oz)
EOS R6 Mark III is 37mm narrower, 103mm shorter, and 283mm thinner than PXW-Z200.
EOS R6 Mark III is 1261 g lighter than PXW-Z200.
Depth (front-to-back): 88mm EOS R6 Mark III · 371mm PXW-Z200
Back view, to scale
Width × Height — same proportions as the front of the body.
EOS R6 Mark III
138 × 98 mm
Credit card
85.6 × 54 mm
PXW-Z200
176 × 201 mm
Top view, to scale
Width × Depth (front-to-back) — see which body is chunkier on the table.
EOS R6 Mark III
138 × 88 mm
Credit card
85.6 × 54 mm
PXW-Z200
176 × 371 mm
Sensor size, to scale
EOS R6 Mark III
35.9 × 23.9 mm · Full Frame
858 mm² area
PXW-Z200
13.2 × 8.8 mm · 1″
116 mm² area
7.4× larger sensor area = shallower depth of field and better low-light performance.
Lens ecosystem
Native lens selection
EOS R6 Mark III
✓ more lensesCanon RF
105+
native lenses available
PXW-Z200: mount data unavailable
Counts include current first-party and major third-party native autofocus lenses.
Use-case scoring
Which one for what?
Algorithmic scores from verified specs · 10 = best in class
Why pick one over the other
Reasons to choose
EOS R6 Mark III
AF low-light limit
-6.5 EV vs -4 EV — lower is better
Subject recognition
Adds People, Dogs, Cats…
Codecs
Adds CRM, XF-HEVC S, XF-AVC S…
Dimensions (W×H×D mm)
Adds 138.4, 98.4, 88.4
Card types
Adds CFexpress Type B, SD UHS-II
Max video bit rate
2600 Mbps vs 200 Mbps — higher is better
Weight
699 g vs 1960 g — lower is better
ISO max (native)
64,000 vs 25,600 — higher is better
Reasons to choose
PXW-Z200
Subject recognition
Adds Human, Animal, Bird…
Codecs
Adds XAVC MXF, XAVC S-I, XAVC HS…
Dimensions (W×H×D mm)
Adds 175.6, 201.3, 371.1
Card types
Adds SD, SDHC, SDXC
EVF magnification
0.78 × vs 0.76 × — higher is better
Both cameras share
- ✓AA filter — Both support aa filter
- ✓ISO min (native) — Both 100
- ✓Eye AF — Both support eye af
- ✓Animal / bird AF — Both support animal / bird af
- ✓Pre-Capture / Pre-Release — Both support pre-capture / pre-release
- ✓Battery life (CIPA) — Both 640 shots
Pros & cons at a glance
Editorially curated highlights and trade-offs.
EOS R6 Mark III
Pros
- ✓32.5MP full-frame sensor
- ✓7K RAW video & 4K 120p
- ✓40fps electronic burst with Pre-Continuous
- ✓8.5-stop IBIS
Cons
- –Single CFexpress Type B + SD slot
- –Smaller LCD than R5 II
- –LP-E6P required for full features
PXW-Z200
Pros
- ✓12G-SDI + timecode in/out for broadcast
- ✓XAVC MXF / XAVC S-I / XAVC HS codecs
- ✓AI subject recognition AF + auto framing
- ✓4K up to 60p / 120p slow motion
- ✓Variable ND (1/4–1/128) + S-Cinetone
Cons
- –Premium over HXR-NX800
- –Heavy at 1.96 kg body-only
- –Some MXF features require firmware 2.0+
- –C3 Portal streaming is paid add-on
Decided which one is right for you?
Compare live prices for the EOS R6 Mark III and PXW-Z200 at major authorized retailers.
Canon EOS R6 Mark III
Sony PXW-Z200
Affiliate disclosure: As an Amazon Associate, Cameraegg earns from qualifying purchases. Cameraegg may also earn commission from B&H links, at no extra cost to you.
Full specifications
✓ = category winner
Frequently asked
Quick answers generated from verified specs.
Which is better for landscape, EOS R6 Mark III or PXW-Z200?
EOS R6 Mark III scores 7.5/10 versus 1.0/10 for PXW-Z200 — 32.5MP — ample resolution.
What's the resolution difference between the EOS R6 Mark III and PXW-Z200?
EOS R6 Mark III is 32.5 MP and PXW-Z200 is 14 MP, so the EOS R6 Mark III captures more detail for cropping and large prints.
Do the EOS R6 Mark III and PXW-Z200 have in-body image stabilization?
EOS R6 Mark III has 8.5-stop in-body image stabilization, while PXW-Z200 does not have IBIS.
Which shoots faster bursts — the EOS R6 Mark III or the PXW-Z200?
EOS R6 Mark III reaches 40 fps electronic. PXW-Z200 reaches 20 fps electronic.
What's the weight difference between the EOS R6 Mark III and PXW-Z200?
EOS R6 Mark III weighs 699 g and PXW-Z200 weighs 1960 g, so the EOS R6 Mark III is 1261 g lighter.
Do the EOS R6 Mark III and PXW-Z200 record 4K video?
EOS R6 Mark III: 4K up to 120p. PXW-Z200: 4K up to 60p.
Are the EOS R6 Mark III and PXW-Z200 weather sealed?
EOS R6 Mark III: Yes. PXW-Z200: No.
Which has better battery life?
Rated battery life is 640 shots (CIPA) for the EOS R6 Mark III and 640 shots for the PXW-Z200, giving the PXW-Z200 the edge.
How much does each cost?
EOS R6 Mark III launched at $2,799 and PXW-Z200 at $3,999. The EOS R6 Mark III is $1,200 less.
Can't decide between two? Compare a third camera.
Add any camera to get a three-way EOS R6 Mark III vs PXW-Z200 vs X comparison.
Specs sourced from manufacturer data. Use-case scores algorithmically derived. Last reviewed June 2026.
Product images courtesy of Canon and Sony press materials.