Canon executives address third-party RF future

[neuroanatomist]

With Canon's full entry into the R mount ecosystem with 12 bodies and 35+ RF lenses with more to come, there are less reasons for Sony to takeover Canon as #1... let's see the CIPA figures when they are released and we can discuss further

CIPA reports industry production and shipment data in aggregate, they do not report any data by manufacturer. So we'll have to wait for the reports from the market analysis firms, in this case most likely Techno Systems Research – they publish the global ILC market share data by manufacturer.

 

[EricN]

Because...that would be a very, very stupid, feelings-first decision that often screws oneself over. Most don't have those resources either..so should they just keep quiet? Pff.

So would investing in a new mount before it had the lenses they want. Nobody has to keep quiet, but there are solutions to almost every complaint and ignoring those solutions is ok, if that's the kind of person you want to be.

 

[koenkooi]

So would investing in a new mount before it had the lenses they want. Nobody has to keep quiet, but there are solutions to almost every complaint and ignoring those solutions is ok, if that's the kind of person you want to be.

In real life I can ask my conversation partner "Do you just want to vent or do you want help with finding a solution?", which greatly reduces frustration on both ends. On the internet that's a lot harder to do without looking like a jerk

 

[EricN]

It's ok with me if you want to think I'm a jerk.

 

[Brikna]

The shelf price was 2,50€ if I recall, but they accepted proposals, so wanting to buy 5 of them, I just sent proposal for 2€ and they kindly accepted it.

I'm pretty sure everything will work out for you as well, my RF 50 send its regards

View attachment 210929

I finally received the caps you recommended, but they still don't fit the RF mount, unfortunately.

These are the same caps as in your example (BlackRapid Lensbling), the only difference is in the graphics on the cap label, so I don't know how it is that mine can't be mounted on the RF, but what can we do... I've also had missed investments which were significantly more expensive than this one, but which didn't look as good as this one. Now the lenses to which these caps fit (only EF mount) look much more cool - an evil group of EF lenses

 

[Walrus]

I finally received the caps you recommended, but they still don't fit the RF mount, unfortunately.

These are the same caps as in your example (BlackRapid Lensbling), the only difference is in the graphics on the cap label, so I don't know how it is that mine can't be mounted on the RF, but what can we do...

After reding your message I checked better, as I bought all caps with focal lengths numbers, except one, with a skull graphic, which went to the 40 Art (as there was no 40mm cap in the lineup); I tried it on my other "free" RF lens the 16 STM (the 50 STM as you saw got a 50mm cap that was fitting)...and surprise! My skull cap doesn't fit, too! I tried all my other "focal lengths"caps (85, 24-70 and 70-200, that were only installed on my EF) on the RF lenses, and they all perfectly fit both on RF 16 and RF 50.

So it's just the non-focal-length that doesn't fit RF...but you have bought just that type of cap unfortunately; I'm sorry I didn't do the extended test before, but after I mounted the 50mm cap on the RF 50, and it was fitting, I imagined all of them were fitting; looking inside the two caps, the three screw "spacers" are exactly in the same positions, but the skull cap has all spacers which looks a bit thicker, while all the other caps have the three spacers that looks way thinner, so they probably slips on the RF mount for a fraction of a millimetre better.

I'm so sorry for that, misguiding you; but from what I've tested, the "focal lengths" caps were, and are, working.

 

[Brikna]

After reding your message I checked better, as I bought all caps with focal lengths numbers, except one, with a skull graphic, which went to the 40 Art (as there was no 40mm cap in the lineup); I tried it on my other "free" RF lens the 16 STM (the 50 STM as you saw got a 50mm cap that was fitting)...and surprise! My skull cap doesn't fit, too! I tried all my other "focal lengths"caps (85, 24-70 and 70-200, that were only installed on my EF) on the RF lenses, and they all perfectly fit both on RF 16 and RF 50.

So it's just the non-focal-length that doesn't fit RF...but you have bought just that type of cap unfortunately; I'm sorry I didn't do the extended test before, but after I mounted the 50mm cap on the RF 50, and it was fitting, I imagined all of them were fitting; looking inside the two caps, the three screw "spacers" are exactly in the same positions, but the skull cap has all spacers which looks a bit thicker, while all the other caps have the three spacers that looks way thinner, so they probably slips on the RF mount for a fraction of a millimetre better.

I'm so sorry for that, misguiding you; but from what I've tested, the "focal lengths" caps were, and are, working.

View attachment 211450 View attachment 211451

Thank you for your comment and sincere apology. I accept the apology even though it wasn't really necessary - these things are too small to be taken too seriously. Nowhere in the ebay listings did it even state that any of those caps (either with the focal length marking, or the ones with the skull symbol) fit the RF mount - the risk was entirely mine. Since I often mix caps, I actually find it unnecessary and even counterproductive to have caps with focal length markings on them, so I opted for the neutral version - clearly the wrong decision.

Maybe later I'll decide on an additional order of these with focal length markings.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Since I often mix caps, I actually find it unnecessary and even counterproductive to have caps with focal length markings on them...

I guess if you only had a couple of lenses it would be fine, but with the number of lenses I have and the frequency with which I change them, I would find it counterproductive, as well. That would be a fun experiment – start with a labeled cap on the matching lens, and see how long it takes to get back to that lens. Or start with a whole set of labeled caps and see how long it takes until they're all correctly associated again with normal use. Probability statistics is cool!

 

[Walrus]

Nowhere in the ebay listings did it even state that any of those caps (either with the focal length marking, or the ones with the skull symbol) fit the RF mount

In fact I originally bought them just for EF, never thinking about RF; the 40 Art would have gotten the 50mm cap, and the skull cap was meant for my emergency backup EF 28-105.
Then I tried, just for fun, the 50mm cap on the RF 50, I saw it fitted, and so I went that way, and the skull cap went on the 40 Art; for me the 50mm cap fitting the RF was automatically "cool! these caps can fir both EF and RF! so now I'll use them on old lenses, and the day, if it will ever happen, I'll switch EF lenses to an RF counterpart, I already will have caps, and caps that can be freely twisted in from all three angles...two birds with a stone!", and that's actually true, after testing them all, for all caps except for the skull.
Maybe with a slight work of a thin file, and a good amount op patience, you can thin the three "ears" inside your caps.

 

[EricN]

In fact I originally bought them just for EF, never thinking about RF; the 40 Art would have gotten the 50mm cap, and the skull cap was meant for my emergency backup EF 28-105.
Then I tried, just for fun, the 50mm cap on the RF 50, I saw it fitted, and so I went that way, and the skull cap went on the 40 Art; for me the 50mm cap fitting the RF was automatically "cool! these caps can fir both EF and RF! so now I'll use them on old lenses, and the day, if it will ever happen, I'll switch EF lenses to an RF counterpart, I already will have caps, and caps that can be freely twisted in from all three angles...two birds with a stone!", and that's actually true, after testing them all, for all caps except for the skull.
Maybe with a slight work of a thin file, and a good amount op patience, you can thin the three "ears" inside your caps.

probably better to return it and get the numbered ones

 

[Brikna]

I guess if you only had a couple of lenses it would be fine, but with the number of lenses I have and the frequency with which I change them, I would find it counterproductive, as well. That would be a fun experiment – start with a labeled cap on the matching lens, and see how long it takes to get back to that lens. Or start with a whole set of labeled caps and see how long it takes until they're all correctly associated again with normal use. Probability statistics is cool!

Yes, that's exactly the situation with me, although I don't think that even "wrong" labels would bother me too much. However, I often work with my colleagues and my assistant, and it would be a very strange situation for them - please, throw me a 50mm, and I get a 35mm.

 

[Brikna]

probably better to return it and get the numbered ones

Returning is not worth the fuss in this case. Youtubers keep saying that such small amounts of money are like treating them to a cup of coffee - well, I'll imagine that I drank a few cups of coffee and got new caps for a few of my EF lenses. In addition, we all managed to learn something together.

 

[Brikna]

In fact I originally bought them just for EF, never thinking about RF; the 40 Art would have gotten the 50mm cap, and the skull cap was meant for my emergency backup EF 28-105.
Then I tried, just for fun, the 50mm cap on the RF 50, I saw it fitted, and so I went that way, and the skull cap went on the 40 Art; for me the 50mm cap fitting the RF was automatically "cool! these caps can fir both EF and RF! so now I'll use them on old lenses, and the day, if it will ever happen, I'll switch EF lenses to an RF counterpart, I already will have caps, and caps that can be freely twisted in from all three angles...two birds with a stone!", and that's actually true, after testing them all, for all caps except for the skull.
Maybe with a slight work of a thin file, and a good amount op patience, you can thin the three "ears" inside your caps.

Maybe it's not about the markings (stickers) on the caps at all. Maybe it's the production batch in which they were made. It's a shame I can't find anyone else making caps like this that fit both EF and RF and can be mounted from all angles - I think it could become a hit with those like me who like to be able to "blind" mount caps on lenses .

 

[Walrus]

I think it could become a hit with those like me who like to be able to "blind" mount caps on lenses .

Well, I think "like you" is "all of us"; when I first bought the first RF lens (the 35 STM), and realized how the cap worked, I was astonished of how they could do it that way.

 

[Brikna]

Well, I think "like you" is "all of us"; when I first bought the first RF lens (the 35 STM), and realized how the cap worked, I was astonished of how they could do it that way.

I'm surprised that Canon still hasn't offered some kind of solution for that glitch, and apparently, according to your personal experience, something can be done about it and make some money along the way.

 

[Brikna]

After reding your message I checked better, as I bought all caps with focal lengths numbers, except one, with a skull graphic, which went to the 40 Art (as there was no 40mm cap in the lineup); I tried it on my other "free" RF lens the 16 STM (the 50 STM as you saw got a 50mm cap that was fitting)...and surprise! My skull cap doesn't fit, too! I tried all my other "focal lengths"caps (85, 24-70 and 70-200, that were only installed on my EF) on the RF lenses, and they all perfectly fit both on RF 16 and RF 50.

So it's just the non-focal-length that doesn't fit RF...but you have bought just that type of cap unfortunately; I'm sorry I didn't do the extended test before, but after I mounted the 50mm cap on the RF 50, and it was fitting, I imagined all of them were fitting; looking inside the two caps, the three screw "spacers" are exactly in the same positions, but the skull cap has all spacers which looks a bit thicker, while all the other caps have the three spacers that looks way thinner, so they probably slips on the RF mount for a fraction of a millimetre better.

I'm so sorry for that, misguiding you; but from what I've tested, the "focal lengths" caps were, and are, working.

View attachment 211450 View attachment 211451

Just an update about caps...

I just received a shipment of 4 more BlackRapid Lensbling caps, this time all 4 are labeled 50.

And here's a miracle, just as you said, it's an EF cap that also fits RF lenses in all 3 positions!

Once again, many thanks for the suggestion, this means a lot to me - now maybe I'll get another RF lens.

It's a shame that BlackRapid no longer makes them.

 

[Walrus]

Just an update about caps...

I just received a shipment of 4 more BlackRapid Lensbling caps, this time all 4 are labeled 50.

And here's a miracle, just as you said, it's an EF cap that also fits RF lenses in all 3 positions!

Once again, many thanks for the suggestion, this means a lot to me - now maybe I'll get another RF lens.

It's a shame that BlackRapid no longer makes them.

Happy I could help ...and watch out for the videographers at weddings!

 

[Brikna]

Happy I could help ...and watch out for the videographers at weddings!

My wife is mostly also my videographer, so I keep a strict eye on her throughout the wedding. When my colleague replaces her, then my attention relaxes a little, but I watch him a little too.

 

[Walrus]

My wife is mostly also my videographer, so I keep a strict eye on her throughout the wedding. When my colleague replaces her, then my attention relaxes a little, but I watch him a little too.

I answered you on the other thread; I think we both went a little further

 

[Vilacom]

Canon continues to prioritize something else over customers! Guess I'll keep using my EF lenses and not invest in new glass for now. Good job Canon.

How is this a slam against canon? Your old EF still do an amazing job adapted so you get all the new features of a new body without needing to invest in new glass. GOTCHA CANON!

If there wasn’t any backwards support I would understand this argument, but being able to keep using your old stuff perfectly is something people in other tech spaces would give a kidney for.