Canon executives address third-party RF future

[Skux]

People here are really waiting on a 50mm f/1.4 as if two thirds of a stop will make them a better photographer lol

 

[Deleted member 383640]

This is what I thought when I originally chose the EOS R over Sony A7III. But it's disappointing 5 years into the RF mount there are still huge gaps in the lens lineup. New lenses are coming out at a very slow pace.

And I think Canon dropped the ball with their latest extra slow lenses like 15-30 f/4.5-6.3. My only adapted EF lens is the Tamron 17-35 f/2.8-4 Di OSD, which wipes the floor with the 15-30 at a similar price point. For ultra-wide, I would also prefer what Sigma and Tamron have for Sony rather than the RF 14-35 f/4 L or it's bulkier 2.8 brother.

I don't regret for a second that I was among the early adopters of the R system (and even before switching to R I was on Canon) - almost all my experiences have been positive. There is currently only one lens that I envy those on Sony E-mount - the Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD. But it's not a lens that I can't live without or that would be such a big gain for me that I'd give up the countless advantages of the Canon system over the Sony system.

 

[kafala]

Only offering expensive bulky 1.2 or cheap plasticky non-weather sealed STM lenses for 24/35/50/85 mm simply doesn't cut it. What I'm supposed to splash 3k on a 50mm 1.2 and go shoot street with a massive 950g lens? Not happening. The 50mm 1.8 IQ, build or STM motor are just not good enough.

These focal lengths need midrange primes that are: lighter and smaller than the 1.2's but sturdier than the flimsy STM lenses, and weather sealed. Precisely what the Sigma 50mm 1.4 is for Sony.

If Canon can't make these lenses or upgrade their STM lineup for higher build and AF quality, license the mount to someone who can.

Also, stubbornly refusing to use old EF lenses. I bought into mirrorless for smaller lenses and better IQ with new tech. Not same old lenses plus adapter for an even heavier set up.

100% agree with everything you said. Nikon, Panasonic, and Sony have a great line of 1.8 primes but canon gave us kid toys with the crap stm motor, with no weather sealing, focus breathing, no lens, hood, slow and loud auto focus.

 

[Snapster]

People here are really waiting on a 50mm f/1.4 as if two thirds of a stop will make them a better photographer lol

Weather sealing would make it possible to take any photos at all in a drizzle. There's more to lenses than f stops.

 

[Loswr]

It is strange to me that a company that has shown a willingness to come out with multiple bodies with modified filtering optimized to be used for astrophotography (even though obviously a niche market) has not seen any need to put out any lenses that would also be optimized for that same usage.

Agreed. It’s possible that it’s simply because the camera design and lens design teams don’t communicate. I’ve been at large companies where two different teams of >30 people were working on the exact same project without knowing it, not because of a strategic management decision for two independent shots on goal, just for a total lack of communication. When the two teams got to the point of needing to engage a central resource, there was a lot of WTFing at the senior management level.

Regardless, it seems that Canon has never really prioritized correction of coma and astigmatism in their fast/wide lenses.

 

[EricN]

Weather sealing would make it possible to take any photos at all in a drizzle. There's more to lenses than f stops.

A plastic bag can do it too

 

[Loswr]

A plastic bag can do it too

Indeed. It's amusing when people in one breath complain that they want cheaper high-spec lenses because they can't afford Canon's L-series lenses, then in the next breath say they plan to rely on the weather sealing to shoot in wet conditions. I admit I have shot in the rain, and I've done so with both L-series lenses and non-L lenses (e.g. the EF-S 17-55/2.8 on a 7D). But I know I'm taking a risk, and I can afford to replace lenses damaged by moisture. For those whom the cost of L-series lenses is a barrier, taking a risk by relying on weather sealing (Canon's or a 3rd party manufacturer's) is foolish. Use a dedicated rain cover, or minimally a plastic bag with a hole stretched over just the front of the lens. Or try one of these thingamabobs...

 

[Old Sarge]

Indeed. It's amusing when people in one breath complain that they want cheaper high-spec lenses because they can't afford Canon's L-series lenses, then in the next breath say they plan to rely on the weather sealing to shoot in wet conditions. I admit I have shot in the rain, and I've done so with both L-series lenses and non-L lenses (e.g. the EF-S 17-55/2.8 on a 7D). But I know I'm taking a risk, and I can afford to replace lenses damaged by moisture. For those whom the cost of L-series lenses is a barrier, taking a risk by relying on weather sealing (Canon's or a 3rd party manufacturer's) is foolish. Use a dedicated rain cover, or minimally a plastic bag with a hole stretched over just the front of the lens. Or try one of these thingamabobs...

View attachment 210854

And that might keep my bald head from burning. I've use plastic bags and rubber bands and I have some plastic bags designed for rainy day shooting as well as more expensive, but probably not more effective rain gear for my lenses.

 

[Snapster]

A plastic bag can do it too

So they should just stop making weather sealed lenses?

 

[Loswr]

So they should just stop making weather sealed lenses?

Weather sealed ≠ waterproof. There's no IP rating for the weather sealing on lenses or bodies. Weather sealing is great...until water gets into your gear, and at that point you're on your own.

From Canon:

This warranty only covers defective materials or workmanship encountered in normal use and service of a Product and does not apply in the following cases:
b) If a Product is defective as a result of leaking batteries or liquid damage.

If there was moisture in a lens or camera (and there are indicators inside to detect moisture ingress), Canon will not repair it regardless of warranty status. My advice is to trust the weather sealing only to the extent that you can afford to replace the gear (on your own or via an insurance claim).

 

[SUNDOG04]

No longer bothers me, my next lens will be Nikkor Z 100-400 S to go my my Nikon body. Future lenses will be Nikkors as well. Not forsaking Canon...severed me extremely well and willl keep one body and a macro lens. For primarily landscape use, the R5 is no better, but much, much more expensive tan a Z7II, but it is really the Nikon line of lenses that are much more to my liking.

 

[Loswr]

For primarily landscape use, the R5 is no better, but much, much more expensive tan a Z7II, but it is really the Nikon line of lenses that are much more to my liking.

I don’t shoot many landscapes, but when I do I find the TS-E 17L and 24L II to be unmatched. Nikon’s PC-E lenses aren’t as good (or as wide), and Sony never bothered with that type of lens.

 

[Scottboarding]

People here are really waiting on a 50mm f/1.4 as if two thirds of a stop will make them a better photographer lol

It’s not just the two thirds of a stop, it’s the desire for a lens better than the 1.8 STM but not as expensive and massive as the 1.2. I own both and the 1.8 is very disappointing optically. I feel I have to stop down to f2.8 in order to get any actual sharpness in the center of the frame. It’s annoying that if I want a native 50mm that’s sharp at f2 I have to carry the 1.2L just to achieve that. The 1.4 doesn’t have to be as good as the 1.2, but I don’t think it’s unrealistic to ask for something between the current options.

 

[TonyG]

All I know is for the low price of $4250 USD someone can get for another camera mount that shall not be named Brand New Sigma Art DG DN:
24mm 1.4 ($800)
35mm 1.4 ($800)
50mm 1.4 ($850)
85mm 1.4 ($1000)
105mm 2.8 Macro ($800)

Not too shabby for any photographer who wants to shoot primes or a beginner who wants to start their career in photography and doesn't want to invest 9k+ on what the RF 1.4 L Primes (Let alone the 1.2 L's) are going to cost.

All they are missing is a 135 and they have an entire mirrorless native prime set, and yet I am still here waiting for RF L Wide Primes....

 

[Ronny Wertelaers]

All we have now is heavy expensive 1.2 RF primes and cheap craps 1.8 primes which are all terrible for video. Can we get a set of 1.8 primes with fast auto focus and no focus breathing like Sony, Nikon, and Panasonic. Also can we get some light 1.4 L primes. Canon has great bodies but lack of lenses.

I totally agree on this. I don't use video, but this is also true for photography.

 

[Loswr]

All I know is for the low price of $4250 USD someone can get for another camera mount that shall not be named

Would that be a mount was around and open to 3rd parties six years before the RF mount launched?

 

[Del Paso]

So they should just stop making weather sealed lenses?

Just take a look at the description of used lenses on the web pages of honest used-gear dealers.
You may be surprised finding so many so-called "wheather sealed" lenses with "humidity inside".
Most lenses are sealed more by marketing than by design. (Except some IP rated Leica and Olympus lenses).

 

[TonyG]

Would that be a mount was around and open to 3rd parties six years before the RF mount launched?

No, the mount that was created around the same time as when the RF mount came to be.

 

[KokopelliRocks]

Me too in the past. And I did regret it !
Edit: and an alarm clock (still very satisfied with that one)

I bought Sony TVs in the past I would not consider one today. I had planned to move to Sony for Photography until Canon released the R5 and R6 with new sensors and decent dynamic range. The lens situation is frustrating. seems like Canon is more interested in producing 10K+ lenses. I wonder if their licensing fees will make it not profitable for SIgma and Tamron.

 

[EricN]

So they should just stop making weather sealed lenses?

It's something you should consider if you want to shoot in wet weather - whether your lenses are weather sealed or not