Canon executives address third-party RF future

[EOS 4 Life]

You greatly underestimate how little people want to adapt lenses.

Maybe, because I do not mind at all,

 

[EOS 4 Life]

"Absolute contempt"?
My goodness, are you really so sensitive to feel despised by a profit company not producing what you want?

Yeah, I find this hold trend strange.
None of these companies love us or hate us.
They only rely on our money.
The way capitalism works is that if you do not have enough money to pay them to make what you want on consignment then you are stuck choosing from what they choose to make.
It sucks when they do not make what you want but that is how it works.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

In a way you’d hope this that means Canon will only the more reputable brands like Tamron and Sigma to license their mount and not so much brands like Yongnuo, but if they want to continue their greed at the detriment of their users they could do the opposite and only work with brands like Viltrox.

What is so great about Tamron and Sigma and what is so bad about Viltrox?
In fact, it was Canon sending notice to Viltrox which started the entire controversy,

 

[Del Paso]

I'm afraid this whining about big bad Canon not (yet?) allowing 3rd party lens makers to copy the RF technology could go on for a very long time. Most eyes aren't dry yet ...

 

[dbcooper]

Almost 40 years a loyal canon shooter, from hobbyist to full time professional.
Happily switched from FD to EF and never had anything to complain about. Never bought any third party lenses or accessories.

Now with RF I have never been so frustrated and disappointed. New hotshoe. Missing lenses. Weird gimmicks on lenses. Every rungs is so expensive. For the first time looking for 3rd party lenses , and they are banned.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Almost 40 years a loyal canon shooter, from hobbyist to full time professional.
Happily switched from FD to EF and never had anything to complain about. Never bought any third party lenses or accessories.

Were all your FD lenses available as EF within 5 years of the switch? Did your FD lenses all work on EF bodies with a simple, optically neutral adapter?

Now with RF I have never been so frustrated and disappointed. New hotshoe. Missing lenses. Weird gimmicks on lenses. Every rungs is so expensive. For the first time looking for 3rd party lenses , and they are banned.

A new hotshoe that works with all the old flashes, and offers new capabilities for new ones.

What ‘weird gimmicks’? An extra control dial? IS on a 24-70/2.8? An extra 1-2mm on the wide end of UWA zooms? A 70-200/2.8 that is smaller and lighter? A standard zoom with an f/2 aperture?

Personally, I’m quite happy with the RF lineup. And quite happy with the EF lenses that I can seamlessly adapt to my R bodies. The only negative is that the RF mount caps are a PITA compared to EF. I’m used to it now, but if it really bothered me there’s a company that makes rear caps that go on just like EF.

Yes, RF L lenses are expensive. OTOH, the non-L RF lenses offer capabilities at prices far lower than with EF. The 15-30, 100-400 and 600/800 lenses all offer focal lengths that were reserved for L-series lenses at prices that are comparatively cheap.

Regardless, your 40 years of loyalty is totally meaningless to Canon. If you want 3rd party lenses, both Nikon and Sony have them and both make great cameras. Stop being frustrated and disappointed, just switch.

 

[Snapster]

I'm afraid this whining about big bad Canon not (yet?) allowing 3rd party lens makers to copy the RF technology could go on for a very long time. Most eyes aren't dry yet ...

They also don't need you to defend their business plan.

 

[jvillain]

I think that part of the issue here is that Canon spent a ton on R&D to develop a new mount with communications, autofocus, etc, and I don't believe that they want some third party reverse-engineering and stealing that technology. Once Canon has filled out its lens lineup, then it will start letting third party entities share.

Canon did not spend a ton of money making a new mount that is the old mount just a couple of mm larger. Every thing about the mount is incremental not revolutionary. The lens designs themselves they spent some money on and the bodies they spent some money on. But the 3rd parties don't want to sell Canon knock off bodies and would bringing their own lens designs.

 

[Brikna]

Personally, I’m quite happy with the RF lineup. And quite happy with the EF lenses that I can seamlessly adapt to my R bodies. The only negative is that the RF mount caps are a PITA compared to EF. I’m used to it now, but if it really bothered me there’s a company that makes rear caps that go on just like EF.

Please share the link for the rear RF caps that mount as easily as the EF caps.

 

[Del Paso]

Please share the link for the rear RF caps that mount as easily as the EF caps.

[email protected] I bought a few from them, it works! Price is a bit excessive, but I guess they are a small scale production. You'll find them under "Objektivzubehör". 15 Euro a piece. Achatzi is (self-declared) "Europe's Canon Shop Nr.1"

 

[Del Paso]

They also don't need you to defend their business plan.

But I'm still allowed to express my opinion...

 

[Snapster]

But I'm still allowed to express my opinion...

Calling people whiners is not an opinion on Canon or lenses.

People asking for third party lens support are getting a lot of comments like "tough luck", "people are stupid", "people think 1.4 makes them better lol" or "get a plastic bag". That gets in the way of constructive discussion.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Calling people whiners is not an opinion on Canon or lenses.

How about these?

Opinion:

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.

Fact:
Canon has steadily gained mirrorless market share, becoming the #1 MILC brand in Japan last year. Clearly what Canon offers is cutting it just fine for plenty of buyers.

Opinion:

Weather sealing would make it possible to take any photos at all in a drizzle.

Fact:
It’s quite possible to take photos in a drizzle without weather sealed lenses.

People asking for third party lens support are getting a lot of comments like "tough luck", "people are stupid", "people think 1.4 makes them better lol" or "get a plastic bag". That gets in the way of constructive discussion.

Some people have trouble dealing with reality. Exaggerating also gets in the way…or maybe I missed the post(s) where people asking for 3rd party lens support were called stupid.

“Tough luck,” may be hard to swallow, but it’s honest. No one who is asking for 3rd party lens support from Canon has any control over what Canon does. You can complain on the internet, where some will agree and some won’t. But Canon doesn’t care. You can vote with your wallet and switch to a brand that does offer 3rd party lens support, but if Canon continues to increase MILC market share (as they’ve done steadily) or even maintains it as #1, odds are they won’t see any place for 3rd party lenses. So…tough luck.

 

[jam05]

Because professionals and users are simply not complaining enough via Canon support feedback etc. Can't just complain on blogs. People simply use EF lenses and the adapters. They work just fine for me LOL. Canon wants to drag its feet, ok. I'm not buying those slow RF lenses. I have one RF lens. 100mm f 2.8. I refuse to buy the RF slow stuff.

 

[jam05]

Because professionals and users are simply not complaining enough via Canon support feedback etc. Can't just complain on blogs. People simply use EF lenses and the adapters. They work just fine for me LOL. Canon wants to drag its feet, ok. I'm not buying those slow RF lenses. I have one RF lens. 100mm f 2.8. I refuse to buy the RF slow stuff. I'll use my other cameras.

 

[Walrus]

Please share the link for the rear RF caps that mount as easily as the EF caps.

You can cut the RF caps you already have and make them universal: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4640776

OTOH I just bought a set of 5 Blackrapid Lensbling EF caps (those: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/867683-REG/BlackRapid_RAA2C_1A3_LensBling_for_Canon_50mm.html ) for 2€ each on eBay, and when they came I also found out they nicely fit RF lenses; so if in the future I'll swap my EF lenses for an RF alternative (hopefully Sigma's, if Canon would allow, otherwise I'll stick to EF lenses I have) I'll have perfectly working caps, that yes, goes on in all positions, they're not limited to the single forced position of the original RF caps.

 

[dlee13]

What is so great about Tamron and Sigma and what is so bad about Viltrox?
In fact, it was Canon sending notice to Viltrox which started the entire controversy,

Just my guess but likely Canon view their design/production to not be as good since Viltrox are a Chinese brand. Canon did try to buy Sigma all those years ago so they know their value.

 

[EricN]

Calling people whiners is not an opinion on Canon or lenses.

People asking for third party lens support are getting a lot of comments like "tough luck", "people are stupid", "people think 1.4 makes them better lol" or "get a plastic bag". That gets in the way of constructive discussion.

Calling people whiners must be an opinion about the attitude some people have.

Is ignoring a tried and true solution to a problem in lieu of a more expensive option that doesn't exist yet constructive? Let's not forget part of the complaint about 3rd party lenses is about money...

 

[Rockauthor]

I'm very fortunate that I can own exactly the lenses that I need for work and want to have for fun. But I look at someone like my cousin who is 10 years younger than me and trying to get his feet wet in photography (still not making that much on the side with it) and he's hit a fork in the road. He has all the lenses he can afford and then he looks over at Sony and sees that he can sell all of his current lenses and camera bodies to get a much better full f/2.8 system. I don't blame him and I wont discourage him. He looks at the Tamron and Sigma options for Sony and can't get over their value.

This is a hill I will die on. Not allowing for affordable options will prevent amateur photographers from entering the Canon system. I didn't always have a bag full of L-series lenses - I had to work my way up to that over the past 20 years. No, I started with a mixture of Canon and Sigma lenses. Eventually, I wound up with nothing but Canon L-series glass and I'm very happy. However, would I have been able to get here without the help of Sigma's 70-200 f/2.8 when I was laid off of my magazine job and had to buy a new lens? Would I have been able to shoot all those low light events/weddings back in the day without the Sigma Art lenses that allowed me to get some really awesome shallow DOF images that looked great in my portfolio? I couldn't buy the EF 50mm f/1.2 or EF 35mm f/1.4 back then....

Those are serious questions I have for all the people that think blocking third-party lenses isn't an issue at all. I view it as a major hurdle for up-and-coming photographers. At this point, I have to tell my cousin that it's probably a good idea for him to switch systems. As much as we Canon fans love to trash on Sony, it's also pretty ignorant to do so. Sony's cameras and lenses are all pretty fantastic at this point and to ignore that is stubborn.

 

[Rockauthor]

Well said. I don't know a single photographer under 25 shooting canon. They're all Sony. And for exactly the reasons you describe.