The cheapest lens you listed there costs $2700. Are they innovative? Sure. But where are the lenses for normal people that don't have unlimited funds? Where are the wide primes that have been "on the way" for years now? Why no 1.4s? Why no full frame, video focused camera under $5k? My problem is not that the lenses are bad, they are not, my issue is that you have to choose between spending $3k for a limited selection of RF L glass or $1.5k on a 20-30 year old Canon EF glass that can't keep up with the modern cameras capabilities. I would love to buy Sigmas EF glass, but the autofocus noise makes them unusable for video. The Tamron EFs, like Canon's own EF glass, can't keep up with the autofocus speeds. I think Canon has done a great job of filling out the bottom end of the lineup- the R7 and R8 are nice, and the lower end lenses are fine for those who want budget options as a trade off for image quality, performance and weather sealing. I think they have done a good job of filling out the premium end of the lineup- the C70, R5c and R3 are great cameras, and the 15-35, 50, both 85 primes, 135 and "big whites" are all great lenses, at an enormous cost. It is just frustrating that those are the only price points they seem to care about. What I want is something in the middle, that's all. I have been using Canon cameras for over 20 years, since I was a very young kid. I want them to give me a reason not to leave, because I really do like their products.