Canon Will Continue to Expand the RF Lens Lineup at 6 to 8 Lenses a Year

[roby17269]

It sounds better in press and interviews when journalists ask about it. So instead of saying "we not allow it", they can just say they negotiating or something.

Sure it does. Canon can say they're not technically lying so no suing them (as if one would).
But the bottom line does not change: however they do it, they are still preventing 3rd part FF AF lenses for RF.
It's their mount so they are absolutely free to do as they please with it. As I, as insignificant as I am, am free to be sour about it.

 

[roby17269]

Canon has recently thrown everything into the 14/1.4 to the extent that it is an expensive but wonderful lens. I fear that they may do the same with the TS-E lenses.

Laowe have 2 lenses for tilt/shift or shift only to differentiate from a 25% price difference. This makes sense to me as I would only use shift if I was to get one and AF wouldn't be a critical issue. To line up the vertical elements would be manual/tripod. Not sure how AF could also shift automatically for composition.

I can't imagine Canon having 4 options for one focal length: shift/tilt-shift, AF or manual so Canon is likely to add everything in and then be a marvellous technological creation but with a $$$$$ price ("The Homer"?).... especially for a 14mm TS-R
Not even sure what the nomenclature would be for a shift only lens "S-R"?

I have the Laowa 35mm TS for my X2D II. It is a good lens in terms of IQ, but it is also quite a bit heavier than the 2 TS-E lenses I used to have (24mm II and 17mm)... so much so that I cannot use it without tripod, while I was comfortable to hand hold the TS-E lenses. Tilt is actually doable hand held, but shift, especially vertical, is a problem. for me at least

 

[Bob Howland]

Lol, yeah Canon has a team of PR flaks working around the clock to deflect, defer and diffuse the massive public outcry over this huge issue. The burning resentment raging through the camera market is killing Canon’s camera sales, leaving them in the embarrassing position of being #1 in ILC sales for the 23rd year in a row.

If Canon doesn’t stem this massive tide of customer angst, what will happen to their market leadership?

Spoiler: This…

Nothing, of course. The minuscule number of people who gripe about this non-issue on the internet might switch brands. But probably most of them will just keep whining and do nothing.

Sometimes I wonder if you aren't paid by Canon to post here.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Sometimes I wonder if you aren't paid by Canon to post here.

Sometimes I wonder how some of the people posting here function in their daily lives, when the statements they make here show a clear disconnection from objective reality.

 

[roby17269]

Canon Russia publicly stated that there was more chance of a new model than not.
That logically tells us they were considering to NOT make another one.
Even when they cancelled DSLRs, we know that a 5D V was under development and later cancelled.
With Powershots, the G7X and SX only went back into production because market demand was so strong.
You are free to infer whatever you want from the information available.
I am free to consider other possibilities.

Just saying that Canon (and all the other manufacturers) will tell us whatever is they think will keep us buying their gear.
I believe they (like all others) have been less than forthcoming with the truth is a few occasions. They are corporations beholden to their stakeholders, not to us.
You are indeed free to think differently from me.

 

[scyrene]

Sometimes I wonder how some of the people posting here function in their daily lives, when the statements they make here show a clear disconnection from objective reality.

The world's in the state it is for a reason.

 

[Uneternal]

Why these vague statements instead of saying "we are still in the middle of contract negotiations"?
I'm pretty sure there is plenty of interest from third-party manufacturers to produce full-frame lenses (which they already have; they would just have to convert the mount). It would be silly to believe a third-party manufacturer would not be interested in converting lenses for the most popular brand.

This can only mean that Canon either wants excessive licensing fees or some other form of assurances (like exclusive rights).

 

[GirlsAreBeautiful]

He pretty much wrote the opposite.

Iphones dropped 28mm as their main focal length back in 2019, almost seven years ago.
Samsung Galaxy S series dropped 28mm in 2016, even before the RF system existed.
ASUS Zenfone, back when they were a thing, never had 28mm as their main lens.

It’s been a long time since “smartphones used 28mm on their main cameras”, and Canon never invested seriously in this focal length, as there has never been a 28mm L lens in their history. Nikon did invest seriously, Leica does, Sony doesn’t, Canon doesn’t.

As much as I like 28mm, I have to recognise it is not the most common focal length.

Not everybody change their iphone every 3 years. But I do agree that there is a variety of reasons for why it is not a popular focal lenght in serious cameras, and surely they overlap.
Also the fact that the only 28mm RF Canon produced is a pancake is pretty telling in my opinion in how the lens is marketed. And there is no new 28mm from Sigma, despite having done a huge Art one previously. For me it's just sad.

 

[DocInfoSci]

Not everybody change their iphone every 3 years. But I do agree that there is a variety of reasons for why it is not a popular focal lenght in serious cameras, and surely they overlap.
Also the fact that the only 28mm RF Canon produced is a pancake is pretty telling in my opinion in how the lens is marketed.

28mm or the equivalent has a rather long history in photography, especially for reportage where it still gives a decently natural looking wide view for situational context. Much better than 35mm. Tired smart phone looks for the 28mm perspective aside, I think that (in the backdrop of zooms) for primes 24mm simply took off and is “close enough” — similar to how 50mm is generally accepted as the natural perspective lens but really a high 40s is closer to that goal. I think 28mm will live a long, long life as a consumer grade lens but for the limited manufacturing and sales space 24 has too much gravity and will remain king across the quality / robustness tiers. Just like the 50mm.

 

[GirlsAreBeautiful]

28mm or the equivalent has a rather long history in photography, especially for reportage where it still gives a decently natural looking wide view for situational context. Much better than 35mm. Tired smart phone looks for the 28mm perspective aside, I think that (in the backdrop of zooms) for primes 24mm simply took off and is “close enough” — similar to how 50mm is generally accepted as the natural perspective lens but really a high 40s is closer to that goal. I think 28mm will live a long, long life as a consumer grade lens but for the limited manufacturing and sales space 24 has too much gravity and will remain king across the quality / robustness tiers. Just like the 50mm.

Absolutelly.
And I hope that STM focusing will keep improving if that's the road for future less expensive lenses. I don't know how it is on the 24mm, but when I tried it on the 28mm I hated it, that's the main reason I didn't buy it.

 

[m4ndr4ke]

Iphones dropped 28mm as their main focal length back in 2019, almost seven years ago.
Samsung Galaxy S series dropped 28mm in 2016, even before the RF system existed.
ASUS Zenfone, back when they were a thing, never had 28mm as their main lens.

Not everybody change their iphone every 3 years.

No doubt, I actually own a phone that is over 5 years old, but 2019 was 7 years ago, and 2016 was 13 years ago.

Also the fact that the only 28mm RF Canon produced is a pancake is pretty telling in my opinion in how the lens is marketed. And there is no new 28mm from Sigma, despite having done a huge Art one previously. For me it's just sad.

I'd say it's not a new phenomenon, the market seems to demand 24mm, and Canon just seems to acknowledge that. After 1995, they have released just two 28mm full-frame lenses, but five 24mm full-frame lenses. I think that says a lot.

I doubt I'll ever get that faster RF 28mm I wish for.

 

[DocInfoSci]

but 2019 was 7 years ago, and 2016 was 13 years ago.

I like to think we get to subtract 3 years for the pandemic. 4 years if you were involved in the work tracking the virus pre-North America awareness. All of my lenses are much fresher that way. And movies. And my own age, to be honest.

 

[DocInfoSci]

Absolutelly.
And I hope that STM focusing will keep improving if that's the road for future less expensive lenses. I don't know how it is on the 24mm, but when I tried it on the 28mm I hated it, that's the main reason I didn't buy it.

Yeah, my only STM lens is the EF 40mm f/2.8 STM pancake, and I have such a mixed relationship with it: on one hand, I love the compact nature for casual walk-around — but on the other the AF drive and manual interaction really irks me. I won't say I hate it, but I will say the only reason it remains in my kit is the compactness. If that's how STM lenses in general are being done I wouldn't vote for them with my cash. It's been such a turn off I haven't even made time to try the RF editions, but I suppose I should to see if they've improved.

But it's not the tech itself per say that bothers me, it's the implementation. If the speed picked up to be more like my USM lenses (I mean more like that, doesn't need to be perfect) and the FTM interaction had a smidge more resistance (physically dampened control ring?) then I might be won over.

I do appreciate that my 40mm doesn't break when I spin the control ring powered off — I bought an EF lens way back in the day that had a drive that could break when unpowered, but I didn't know that at the time I bought it. Immediately sold it the second I found out. I read horror stories.

I did have the EF 28mm f/1.8 USM, which my kiddo now has. It was only B grade for colour work less than 2.8, but actually pretty awesome for black and white work. Landscapes at 5.6+ were solid with excellent colour. DLO on my R6 improved the overall character at open apertures considerably. Overall feel for use was excellent, very zen. Not pancake compact with an adapter, but fun to use if you find one on the cheap.

 

[GirlsAreBeautiful]

STM is also noisy, at least from what I can remember when I tried it.

 

[m4ndr4ke]

Yeah, my only STM lens is the EF 40mm f/2.8 STM pancake, and I have such a mixed relationship with it: on one hand, I love the compact nature for casual walk-around — but on the other the AF drive and manual interaction really irks me. I won't say I hate it, but I will say the only reason it remains in my kit is the compactness. If that's how STM lenses in general are being done I wouldn't vote for them with my cash. It's been such a turn off I haven't even made time to try the RF editions, but I suppose I should to see if they've improved.

STM is also noisy, at least from what I can remember when I tried it.

This is not to say that Canon completely reinvented them, but the latest iterations of STM motors are more enjoyable to use. It really depends on the lens, though.

The EF 40mm was the first or second STM lens ever, its autofocus is pretty slow and somewhat noisy. There's still a few lenses that I'd say are about as noisy as the 40, such as the RF 50mm f/1.8 and the RF 35mm f/1.8, but some others are different.

There's not a lot of lenses with the newest STM motors yet, as far as I know it's just the RF 7-14mm L, 10-20mm f/4 L (I think), 16-28mm f/2.8, 28-70mm f/2.8 and the 45mm f/1.2, but they are provide a significantly better user experience, being quiet and smooth. Some of them are pretty fast, and that includes the 28-70mm f/2.8, which seems to be about as fast as the EF 24-70mm f/2.8 II.

Additionally, it's important to distinguish the two types of STM motors. Lenses driven by gear type STM motors tend to be a little noisier and jerky (RF 16, 28, 35, 50,...), while lead-screw tends to be quieter and smoother (RF 24, 85, 10-20, 7-14, 16-28, 28-70,...).
The 45mm uses a new gear-type STM, being an exception, that feels to me like a slow but modern USM, it's pleasant, it's smooth and quiet.

Gear type STM are the smallest motors, being the only choice to equip the smallest lenses.

 

[candyman]

STM is also noisy, at least from what I can remember when I tried it.

I don't believe that technology stands still. The STM of the present is not the STM of the past. The STM on my RF 10-20 is fast and silent.

 

[DocInfoSci]

Thanks, I’ll venture a try.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

I know you like your old-ish lenses, but you should inform yourself about Sigma lenses... they've come a long way since a decade ago.
In any case, even if the lens was "horrendous" (which it isn't)... why would this be a problem? People can simply not buy it. It's called free market. Not that Canon shooters have the trouble of taking this horrendous risk...

What’s the point in me “educating myself” in the world of Sigma’s “not very sharp at the long end” zooms when they don’t fit on any current Canon body? So you want me to rent / buy a Sony camera, just to satisfy your curiosity? An anathema logic for sure.

Meanwhile, I’m heading out with my delightful R6ii and R5, ef 400mm f2.8 LIS II and teleconverters and a ef 100-400mm f5.6 LIS II to shoot some sharp wildlife, because it’s gear I have and the gear I have chosen and selected over many years of shooting.
This gear is dependable, sharp, AF is amazing and there is nothing in the 3rd party lens catalogue that can compete with these lenses from Canon. Even Canon’s finest from 15 years ago are vastly superior to the newest 3rd party offerings.

Trend setters marques lead the way and leave the others in their wake to play catch up, when they eventually catch up with where the trend setter once was, they only find that the trend setter has moved the game on again and are still far back down the road again in their wake.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

I am pretty sure it's canon blocking 3rd party FF RF lenses... with Sigma Art capabilities shown in the Sony E mount I can't believe they just not capable to port their art lineup to RF mount except some financial issues with Canon

With the advent of the new RF VCM L range, the new RF 45mm f1.2 STM and the new budget friendly and light weight silver ring f2.8 STM zooms...one wonders what 3rd party lenses could actually offer competitvely? Canon have created their own closed loop eco-system and they are bashing out 6-8 lenses per year at all price points, rather effectively. For example, the UWA offerings. The RF 7-14L, RF 10-20L are both spectacular. The RF 14-35/f4 L and RF 15-35 f2.8 are also amazing top tier lenses. Then the RF 16-28 f2.8 is an amazingly light and great performer. At the budget end, the RF 16mm f2.8 is cheap, small and optically excellent. Heck even the super budget friendly RF 24-50 puts in a strong performance. I've not even mentioned the strong RF-s lenses.
What could the 3rd party lenses offer Canon users that aren't already well catered for at keep price points?

 

[GMCPhotographics]

Sometimes I wonder if you aren't paid by Canon to post here.

Hahaha....although this wasn't directed at me, I'll comment on my behalf:
It's a daily battle wth the AI mantra fed bot infused trolling we see here. However, I for one am a life long unpaid fanboy who belives in the Canon coolaid. As to others....well, they have their own voices.
Just the other day I was watching a youtube effluencer grinding on about the wonders some obsure Chinease manual focus prime lens, made from ancient and inferior optics. Only to put it on a R5ii and by pass it's amazing AF system...honestly??? At least when Canon decides to pander to this crowd, they punt out a fiscally orientated 45mm f1.2 lens which has an excellent AF system.