Canon Lens News

Canon Germany addresses recent Viltrox RF mount lens demands, and it’s a case of patent infrigement

This site contains affiliate links to products and services. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.

Last week a bunch of reports hit the web about Viltrox being told to stop producing lenses for the RF mount by Canon. In an exclusive report, German magazine Photografix has received word from Canon Germany about the issue.

It looks like it affects autofocus lenses being made for the RF mount and patent infringement. What the exactly Viltrox was infringing on is unknown. Rokinon continues to sell AF lenses for the RF mount.

From Canon Germany (Google Translated)

“SHENZHEN JUEYING TECHNOLOGY CO.LTD, manufactures auto focus lenses for Canon RF mount under the brand name “Viltrox”. Canon believes that these products infringe their patent and design rights and has therefore requested the company to stop all activities infringing on Canon’s intellectual property rights.”

So what does this mean for the likes of SIGMA and Tamron producing RF mount lesnes? We don’t think this clears much up at all.  Until we hear from the “big two” third-party brands or more from Canon themselves, we’re all left wondering.

 

[tdp_random_reviews reviewstoshow=”5″]

BC

Oct 8, 2015
5
11
Working pro in the field. I have a blend of Canon and third-party lenses, all great performers, even adapting my EF lenses to RF. Unfortunately, as Canon ages out its lineup it will no longer be worth it for me to stay with them. If I don't at least have that choice, my next camera won't be a Canon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 10 users

dolina

millennial
Dec 27, 2011
2,604
1,076
32
34109
www.facebook.com
Edit: I created this table for easier comparison

Edit 2: For context on manufacturing plant output I added dSLR full frame body & lens SKUs listed on BH Photo. Added Pentax who sees dSLR as the future.

I googled this timeline so everyone's on the same page.
Brand​
Canon​
Sony​
Nikon​
Full Frame Mirrorless Mount announced​
2018
2010
2018
3rd party lens license​
N/A​
2021
Last dSLR body announced​
Feb 2020​
Sep 2016​
Jan 2020​
Last dSLR body model​
2019 Brand ranking​
#1​
#2​
#3​
End of dSLR manufacturing​
2026(?)​
2021
2026(?)​
As of Today on BHPhoto

BrandCanonSonyNikonPentax
Age of Full Frame Mirrorless Mount4124N/A
Mirrorless Full Frame Lens-only SKU with USA warranty306329N/A
Mirrorless Full Frame Body-only SKU with USA warranty594N/A
Future mirrorless lens roadmap by 202632N/A3N/A
dSLR Full Frame Lens-only SKU with USA warranty3445923
dSLR Full Frame Body-only SKU with USA warranty5031

It has been reported that Canon Japan's CEO committed to 32 new lenses by year 2026.

https://www.canonrumors.com/canons-roadmap-includes-32-new-lenses-by-2026-according-to-canons-ceo/

30 current Canon-branded RF lenses + 32 future lenses = 62 unique lens SKUs before year 2027

vs

63 current Sony-branded E lenses + unknown future lenses.

It is guaranteed Sony/everyone else will release new lens SKUs that are

- updates to ~10 year old E mount lenses
- equivalent counterpart lenses of their 1st party & 3rd party competitors
- unique focal lengths & apertures that Sony pioneered

From 2018-2022 Canon & Nikon have both put out key focal lengths that photo news agencies & journalists need in their work.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 13 users
Oct 31, 2020
328
417
I googled this timeline so everyone's on the same page.

Sony

- 2010: E mount introduced
- 2011: E mount is licensed to 3rd parties
- 2016: Last dSLR (SLT) was announced
- 2019: Sony becomes #2 player displacing Nikon
- 2021: End of dSLR (SLT) manufacturing

As of today on BHPHoto from 2010-2022 there are

- 63 Sony-branded E mount lens-only SKUs with USA warranty
- 9 Sony-branded E mount full frame body-only SKUs with USA warranty

Canon

- 2018: RF mount introduced
- 2020: Last dSLR was announced
- 2026(?): End of dSLR manufacturing

As of today on BHPHoto from 2018-2022 there are

- 30 Canon-branded RF mount lens-only SKUs with USA warranty
- 5 Canon-branded RF mount full frame body-only SKUs with USA warranty

Nikon

- 2018: Z mount introduced
- 2019: Sony becomes #2 player displacing Nikon
- 2020: last dSLR was announced
- 2021: Z mount is licensed to 3rd parties
- 2026(?): End of dSLR manufacturing

As of today on BHPHoto from 2018-2022 there are

- 29 Nikon-branded Z mount lens-only SKUs with USA warranty
- 4 Nikon-branded Z mount full frame body-only SKUs with USA warranty


It has been reported that Canon Japan's CEO committed to 32 new lenses by year 2026.

https://www.canonrumors.com/canons-roadmap-includes-32-new-lenses-by-2026-according-to-canons-ceo/

30 current Canon-branded RF lenses + 32 future lenses = 62 unique lens SKUs before year 2027

vs

63 current Sony-branded E lenses + unknown future lenses.

It is guaranteed Sony/everyone else will release new lens SKUs that are

- updates to ~10 year old E mount lenses
- equivalent counterpart lenses of their 1st party & 3rd party competitors
- unique focal lengths & apertures that Sony pioneered

From 2018-2022 Canon Japan has put out key focal lengths that photo news agencies & journalists need in their work.
Woow, that's a lot of research. Thx for the effort!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

dolina

millennial
Dec 27, 2011
2,604
1,076
32
34109
www.facebook.com
Woow, that's a lot of research. Thx for the effort!
This is a rumor site! Someone needs to substantiate it! :LOL:

If anyone's in the market for 3rd party lenses then get any EF lens and use an EF to RF adapter with it.

I read on this forum that pharma companies have a monopoly on pharma products they R&Ded for 6 years(?) then it becomes generic?

Canon deserve to recoup whatever money they spent on R&D and make a tidy profit as an incentive to innovate.

It takes a shorter time to buy a new system than to wait and complain online. :ROFLMAO:

Digital still camera market has been shrinking YoY for over the past decade.

From all all time high of 121,463,234 in 2012 to 7,850,000 for year 2022 forecast.

All time low was 5,088,207 back in 1999 which doubled to 10,342,084 in 2000.

Last thing I want to happen is for Canon digital still camera division to go bankrupt because 3rd party lenses outsell RF L lenses on the 1st 6 years of the mount's introduction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Oct 31, 2020
328
417
As some users on CR and other forums have noticed, the Viltrox lens has been identify as EF 85mm F1.4 in post-production, so I guess the company might have copied Canons firmware.

The absence of a press release on behalf of Sigma, Tamron on third party lenses leaves us unknowing. I expect that "behind the curtains" they are negotiating terms about how and when Sigma etc. will come out with RF lenses. At least, that's what most people hope.
The more cameras and lenses Canon sells, the more they'll demand in return to let them sell RF lenses. Sigma is probably betting on Canon sales to decline and Canon "needing" Sigma lenses in order to compete. It will be really interesting to see, how it turns out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

dolina

millennial
Dec 27, 2011
2,604
1,076
32
34109
www.facebook.com
Sigma is probably betting on Canon sales to decline and Canon "needing" Sigma lenses in order to compete. It will be really interesting to see, how it turns out.
It appears in 2021 that Nikon licensed Cosina the Z mount for a Voigtlander 35/1.2 MF lens.

There are business reasons why Sony & Nikon licensed their 2010's E & 2018's Z mounts.

They do not want or do not have the R&D and manufacturing resources to develop thin margin lenses.

They both at one point were #2 players to Canon's #1 position.

To my understanding Sony's licensing the E mount in 2011 was at a symbolic fee. This is to get them to 2nd largest camera brand by 2018 without spending much R&D money.

Is Canon in that business position? They aint. They're the largest camera brand.

https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/news/camera-market-share-canon-owns-48-sony-22-nikon-drops-to-14

If you're a leading player in your market what incentives do they have to share? Any 1st party manufacturer makes a better margin than licensing it out per unit sold.

This is why Apple stopped licensing macOS to 3rd parties nearly a quarter century ago.

Typically companies outsource when they cannot do it themselves or they do not want to do it themselves.

If my primary purpose for wanting 3rd party lenses to work on the RF mount was because of financial reasons then I'd stick to EF or F mount. There are thousands of perfectly functional used bodies, lenses and gear to buy at a discount because many are migrating to mirrorless. If the used goods breaks then you can easily find out one on eBay or FM's Buy-Sell for the same SKU for even less in the near future.

If you want 3rd party products because ABC lens on MNO mount is not available on XZY mount then buy the MNO body. Saves the photographer time and gets them shooting yesterday.

What I dislike about going multisystem is the down time away from shooting because you have to relearn how to use a camera's physical button placements and menu system.

So being system-neutral may sound progressive on paper but at the cost your time & money.

Not to mention smaller player's after sales service level does not exceed or much less match Canon's.

 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
27,532
7,278
To my understanding Sony's licensing the E mount in 2011 was at a symbolic fee. This is to get them to 2nd largest camera brand by 2018 without spending much R&D money.

Is Canon in that business position? They aint. They're the largest camera brand.
Exactly. I’m really not sure why this is so difficult for some people on this form to comprehend, but sadly that seems to be the case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

wockawocka

EOS R
Sep 13, 2011
870
183
Why not make an RF mount lens with EF contacts and protocols?

It's not using the RF chatter, you don't need the control ring. There must be a way around the patents.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
10,115
16,148
Not another thread on this. It's being going on for far too long in other current threads, and posts and myths are being repeated over and over again.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 3 users

dolina

millennial
Dec 27, 2011
2,604
1,076
32
34109
www.facebook.com
Why not make an RF mount lens with EF contacts and protocols?

It's not using the RF chatter, you don't need the control ring. There must be a way around the patents.

In the past 3rd party lens makers

- reverse engineer the tech in-house
- develop IPs that are legally different enough but functionally near identical to EF mount
- hired ex-Canon engineers or moonlighting Canon engineers to create work rounds of Canon IPs
 
  • Wow
Reactions: 1 user

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
1,191
1,433
UK
Canon have a long history of thousands of patents protecting their designs and concepts, all published and available for third parties to browse.

Did Viltrox fail to look at the patents, or did they realise they were infringing, but hope to get away with it?

I assume Canon threatened a lawsuit if Viltrox failed to stop production.
 

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
1,191
1,433
UK
Why not make an RF mount lens with EF contacts and protocols?

It's not using the RF chatter, you don't need the control ring. There must be a way around the patents.
If you don't want to buy genuine Canon RF lenses, why not just use Canon or third-party EF glass via the EF-RF adaptor?

That would provide you with an incredible amount of choice of AF glass.

If you want the advantages of genuine Canon RF glass, you have a choice between state-of-art L exotica, or very affordable Canon "budget" glass (although unfortunately not a third tier of middle-of-the-road lenses). Canon's RF range covers almost every need, and anything that isn't available in RF mount will be available in EF mount.
 

Chaitanya

EOS 5D Mark IV
Jun 27, 2013
1,641
900
36
Pune
As some users on CR and other forums have noticed, the Viltrox lens has been identify as EF 85mm F1.4 in post-production, so I guess the company might have copied Canons firmware.

The absence of a press release on behalf of Sigma, Tamron on third party lenses leaves us unknowing. I expect that "behind the curtains" they are negotiating terms about how and when Sigma etc. will come out with RF lenses. At least, that's what most people hope.
The more cameras and lenses Canon sells, the more they'll demand in return to let them sell RF lenses. Sigma is probably betting on Canon sales to decline and Canon "needing" Sigma lenses in order to compete. It will be really interesting to see, how it turns out.
I had Sigma 50mm Macro which would be detected as Canon EF 50mm Compact macro for corrections in camera and on Pc. Canon didnt chase 3rd party manufacturers during EF era(Nikon did sue and win against Sigma during DSLR days) for misidententifying lenses to Canon equivalents.
 

Avenger 2.0

EOS M6 Mark II
Jul 30, 2017
79
67
Last thing I want to happen is for Canon digital still camera division to go bankrupt because 3rd party lenses outsell RF L lenses on the 1st 6 years of the mount's introduction.

Guess people that buy expensive camera's today will do some research beforehand. If they can't afford the RF lenses, they will just go to Sony, Nikon, etc were 3rd party lenses are available. So Canon might be sacrificing market share in the long run and still go bankrupt...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
1,191
1,433
UK
Similarly, a third party lens maker should be able to use a mount without license fee, until and unless the mount maker makes a lens of similar spec.
On that point, I have to disagree.

Canon has spent a vast amount of money developing RF cameras and RF lenses, and IMO they have absolutely every right to stop third parties from cashing in.

If photographers want access to third party AF glass, they can choose Sony, or they can use EF glass via an adaptor, on RF bodies.

No one is forcing anyone to buy Canon, but those who *choose* Canon RF cameras do so with the full knowledge that that they are restricted to Canon's own RF glass (plus any third party or Canon glass in EF mount, via an adaptor).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 2 users
Aug 7, 2018
458
406
Canon really needs to clear that up, because otherwise many photographers - including me - will be hesitant to invest $6,000 into an RF body. It is very annoying when Tamron or Sigma announce new lenses for Nikon and Sony mirrorless cameras, but not for Canon. In the EF area the record breaking lens formulas for the EF mount mostly came from Tamron or Sigma. For example the fastest zooms in a specific range or the widest stabilized lenses. For the EF mount Canon NEVER developed an 24-70 f/2.8 with image stabilization. You has to either buy the non stabilized f/2.8 version or a stabilized f/4 version. The same was true for the 16-35, if I remember it right. Of course with the RF mount Canon finally offered at stabilized 24-70 f/2.8, but I am sure Tamron and Sigma would top that again with a stabilized 24-70 f/2 or 24-105 f/2.8. Sigma and Tamron always went a step futher than Canon. Also the idea of a Tamron 35-150 f/2.8-f/4 was great or the stabilized Tamron 45mm f/1.8. Both are EF lenses and I expect the RF version to even top that.

For most use cases glass is more important than the body. So any limit on third party glass limits what a photographer can do with his expensive Canon body.

Next month I will likely visit Germany's largest remaining photo fair "Photopia" (unfortunately Photokina is dead) and there Canon, Sigma and Tamron will all show their latest glass. I will ask the Tamron and Sigma people why there is not third party RF glass yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
27,532
7,278
...bought my first third-party lens ever last month, but yesterday for the first time I advised someone not to buy Canon because of this issue. I think Canon is a 100% excellent choice for wildlife, sports, and high-end reportage with trinity zooms. If you want to do street, budget, or art photography, go with someone else.
Well, that'll show 'em! :ROFLMAO:

Incidentally, I’ve advised several people to go with brands other than Canon. Somehow, and I’m really, truly, incredibly puzzled and mystified by this, Canon’s business doesn’t seem to have suffered as a result of my actions.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users