Did Canon See the Writing on the Wall with the RF Mount?

[John Wilde]

The last figure I could find is that 1.6 lenses shipped for every camera body shipped, so it's not like everyone has a huge collection of lenses.

 

[Richard CR]

The last figure I could find is that 1.6 lenses shipped for every camera body shipped, so it's not like everyone has a huge collection of lenses.

it should be noted that CIPA only counts Japanese manufacturers.

Korean and Chinese are not included in those numbers. So we really don't know that much on how that is going.

 

[Richard CR]

And what happens when a Chinese company brings out a MILC camera that is compatible with (say) the Sigma/Panasonic mount that's open and deliver similar IQ to the R5II but at half the price?

I think this story covers half the problem seen by Canon - they don't want Canon lenses being used on other bodies.also (is the other half of the equation.)

Then the Japanese manufacturers are literally _____ked.

it would just be the sensors and patent porfolios that would keep them at bay for a while - but given the massive amount of experience a DJI, Xiaomi or Huawei could bring to the table in terms of image processing and software. Xiaomi and Redmi are already experimenting with ILC attachments for their smartphones, it's just a matter of time.

Japanese manufacturers, let's face it - suck with software and connectivity is horrid. Apps appear as if they were done in 2010. It wouldn't take long before a Huewai could offer seamless image transmission experience of dragging and drop from your ILC all the way to your ipad and seamless into social media by simply using gestures.

I think i wrote something about this a while back and didn't post it up, i have to dust off that opinion piece and take a revisit on it.

 

[LCDVS00]

Laowa and Viltrox have been making some great prime lenses lately, but as far as I know, they still struggle with zooms.

Additionally , the overall quality of Chinese lenses may still be a concern. A common rumor on Chinese photography forums is that high-end coating technology hasn’t been fully mastered yet, and assembly precision also needs further improvement.

As for DJI, most Chinese people think it’s not interested in entering the MILC market under its own brand (than Hasselblad).

 

[Dragon]

Over time, the Chinese manufacturers will have to add real support if they are going to produce high-end lenses. If you buy a lens for $150 with no support, no big deal, but if you cough up 2 grand and still have no support, it is a big deal. Adding in that support will add cost and raise the prices. Canon is number one largely because they offer the best aftermarket support. There are examples in other industries. Haier bought the GE appliance brand (which had pretty poor support in the first place) and they are doing OK, but don't seem to be putting Whirlpool, Samsung, and LG out of business. Harbor Freight got started selling cheap Chinese stuff with little or no support. Now they have competitive quality products with reasonable support, and, not surprisingly, they are now not that much cheaper than the competition on most stuff. The Chinese have a labor cost advantage, but that is not the whole story. Time will tell.

 

[PinholeR5]

Tired of Canon's RF closed mount policy last week I bought a SONY A1 II along with a 50-150mm f/2 and a Sigma 28-45mm f/1.8 Art.

I'm not switching systems, but I'm not going to renounce to unique lenses like the Sigma 15mm f/1.4 fisheye, Sigma 35mm f/1.2, Sigma 28-45 f/1.8, Sigma 135mm f/1.4, SONY 50-150mm f/2, Sigma 200mm f/2, Sigma 300-600mm f/4, etc., or cheap and nice chinese lenses like what Viltrox offers to play with.

For me, adding a SONY camera to my arsenal is adding a powerful toolkit to get the job done and differentiate myself from other photographers even more.

I don't believe in brand loyalty. Being married to a brand is so stupid.

I'm seriously considering going the same.

 

[ctk]

My gripe with Chinese glass is the same as it is with the Chinese bicycle frames I use for builds. No support, no resale. For a frameset built around standard parts, I can deal. For a lens that basically becomes a paperweight w/o support, even for a couple hundred bucks, no thanks.

 

[scyrene]

The "RF" 600 just being the EF with an adapter hard-mounted *really* irritated me.

The way I viewed that one was, they brought out the EF mark IIIs not long before RF emerged, and thwy were probably designed with that in mind. If anything their mistake was to bring them out as EF first.

 

[m4ndr4ke]

they don't want Canon lenses being used on other bodies.also (is the other half of the equation.)

Canon clearly never had an issue with that. Blackmagic and RED use/used EF mount, and RED uses/used RF.

The cooperation between IBIS and IS seems to be not optimal in some adapted EF-Lenses.

As far as I know, there’s no coordinated stabilisation on adapted EF lenses.

 

[AlanF]

Over time, the Chinese manufacturers will have to add real support if they are going to produce high-end lenses. If you buy a lens for $150 with no support, no big deal, but if you cough up 2 grand and still have no support, it is a big deal. Adding in that support will add cost and raise the prices. Canon is number one largely because they offer the best aftermarket support. There are examples in other industries. Haier bought the GE appliance brand (which had pretty poor support in the first place) and they are doing OK, but don't seem to be putting Whirlpool, Samsung, and LG out of business. Harbor Freight got started selling cheap Chinese stuff with little or no support. Now they have competitive quality products with reasonable support, and, not surprisingly, they are now not that much cheaper than the competition on most stuff. The Chinese have a labor cost advantage, but that is not the whole story. Time will tell.

What after sales support will you get when your 2 grand RF 200-800mm breaks in two? Quite a few complaints posted here about having to pay for the repairs.

 

[rombe3jr]

I'm big into the automotive world, and when Jim Farley took over as CEO at Ford. He said their competition was no longer GM, Toyota.. VW. It was Chinese manufacturers. I can't go 2 minutes without seeing a BYD downtown.

This decision by Canon is some kind of long game that they aren't going to tell us about.

Canon had something like 45% of total lenses shipped in 2024. I think a lot of companies like to sell how amazing they're doing.... really, how many lenses does Sigma actually sell?

How many of those Canon lenses are variable aperture "kit" lenses though? Like BYD, it is fascinating to see how many fast aperture, high quality lenses are coming out of China right now now.

 

[rombe3jr]

"If you are on a limited budget, such as a budding professional, it's becoming extremely painful to say that Canon is the right decision." Bold italics my own. The price gap is getting wider with every lens release. The only help Canon has had of late are the high prices Sony has had on the price of its camera bodies. Over the last month the R6II was approximately $1k (USD) cheaper than the Sony A7IV. But today Sony put a rebate on it and is charging $1,998 (USD) so it's actually $100 cheaper than the Canon. If you are a budding professional and staring at a Tamron zoom trinity for $3k (total) and something like the Sirui 35 + 85 Aurora f1.4... $500 or $600? Canon cost $1,000 (USD) more per lens! About the only thing Canon thought of was their own STM "trinity" with the 16-28 f2.8 only $1,150, 28-70 f2.8 $1,150 so only $350 more than Canon (each). Then the 70-180 f2.8 patent just filed... Canon can't come out with this lens fast enough! But Canon is definitely hurting the most with those fast primes and the furious pace that Chinese manufacturers are releasing new lenses.

 

[scyrene]

maintenance, performance, etc., will ever compete with Boeing

a low bar *ducks*

 

[blackcoffee17]

So the thing is everything is so much more expensive in life atm but the issue I have with Canon is that upgrading to the newest lenes is a significant cost increase over the EF line. Often a lot of these lenses perform similar to the EF lenses they replace. For example the RF 24-70 IS F2.8 actually performs worse than the EF24-70MKII it replaces, sun flare is awful. RF600 is a repackaged EF600MKIII etc etc but they are significantly more expensive. Yet the EF lenses perform incredibly well.

I am not one that wants to use 3rd party lenses but I havent adopted the RF lenses because honestly they are too expensive. I bought the RF24-70 2.8 IS as I use that a lot and the RF35 F2 for video. Instead of replacing the rest of my lenses im using adapting my old ones because in most cases they work better than on my DSLRs.

Im sure im not the only one.

I think this strategy of compensating for lower sales with higher prices is wrong - it just makes even less people to buy cameras.

 

[blackcoffee17]

The "RF" 600 just being the EF with an adapter hard-mounted *really* irritated me.

I don't see why is that a problem. The EF design was already a new design, fully redesigning the optics would not have made much sense for minimal gains. BUT the price should have been the same, not more expensive.

 

[MythPlayer]

It's looks like Design Patent
https://www.j-platpat.inpit.go.jp/c1801/DE/JP-2018-010536/30/ja

 

[Quackator]

.... really, how many lenses does Sigma actually sell?

They sold me the 1.8/18-35mm ART, the 1.4/35mm ART, the 1.4/50mm ART,
the 1.8/135mm ART.
They couldn't sell me the 2.0/200mm ART yet, because it isn't available
in either EF or RF. Otherwise......
And I am still on the fence for a reasonably priced pre-owned 2.8/120-300mm SPORTS.

My main point is that few other lenses perform as free of CA wide open
as the Sigma ARTs do. And damn sharp they are as well wide open.
This is a point that many Canon lenses don't achieve, even *IF* Canon has
an equivalent focal length

All of them perform wonderful with the drop-in filter adapter, I use them
on 1D-X, 5D MkIV, RP, R5C, C70, BMPCC 6k PRO. Since video is by now
a significant part of my work, the V-ND drop-in filter is indispensable
for those cameras that don't have a built-in ND.

 

[MStrathmore]

We've long believed Canon has been holding back the RF mount for profit, but what if that isn't the only reason? Did Canon look at the trends out of China's optical companies and realize that their greatest threat wasn't Sony, Nikon, or Panasonic, but the likes of Laowa, Sirui, and other Chinese manufacturers that were […]

See full article...

I can see both sides of this issue. On the one hand, Canon is trying to survive as one of the last manufacturers who still manufacture most of their own products. On the other hand, the costs and economies of scale are not stacking up in 2025. Where have I landed? I’ve arrived at the decision that Canon, in 2025, has two equally valid lens mounts: EF *and* RF. There is a massive base of EF lenses that represent incredible value on the second hand market, along with many EF lenses still being available new and currently manufactured, if new is what you’re after. Increasingly, we’re also seeing 3rd party manufacturers producing EF glass.

Ultimately, for me (and views may differ here), it is more important that Canon survives for the good of the ecosystem rather than putting themselves out of business trying to compete with the Chinese manufacturers.

Let’s be honest: if Canon opened the RF mount to all, even if RF glass was priced exactly the same as EF, it would still be a race to the bottom competing with the Chinese manufacturers and Canon would lose that battle.

Point in case: I recently bought a Meike EF-RF adapter with drop in variable ND filter for $200 Australian: what an excellent piece of kit, and literally about a third the price of the Canon equivalent (in fact it looks and feels identical). I would make a similar choice every time, given the opportunity, and that would put Canon out of business.

Canon may be price gouging on RF; I think we can all agree that they are, but equally there needs to be guardrails in place that protect Canon from us consumers!

 

[BFG9000]

Canon may be price gouging on RF; I think we can all agree that they are, but equally there needs to be guardrails in place that protect Canon from us consumers!

A brand who needs to protect itself from consumers is a brand that maybe should go out of business.

 

[rbr]

I don't see why is that a problem. The EF design was already a new design, fully redesigning the optics would not have made much sense for minimal gains. BUT the price should have been the same, not more expensive.

The EF III and the RF 600 f4 are the same price and always have been. The EF III sells for less on the used market, though. The RF 1.4x and especially 2x are definitely better than the EF TCs for the EF lenses. The RF 600f4 is definitely a worthy upgrade, especially coming from an EF version 2 or the EF 800L. The only people I notice complaining about it don't own and use one.