They are on top, no doubt. I started a switch to Sony and bailed out and went back to Canon. While I dislike management very much, I love what they do make, but I do not think I am alone in being disappointed by their choices and the delays for the "basics". They are basics for a reason after all. Canon plays to big flash items that generate buzz while leaving the core out in the cold. And refusing to allow Sigma to make RF mounts, and their explanation is contemptuous. I can love the gear and still shit on the company for short comings justly.
Shortcomings as you perceive them, of course. For the poster above, the want not being met is DO supertele primes. The point is that everyone wants what they want. Canon’s management needs to drive revenue and profit, and that means lenses that meet the needs of
the majority of buyers.
Considering the lenses Canon prioritized for the RF lineup (and keeping in mind they’re still building it), Canon seems to believe the majority driver of their profit comprises two segments, those wanting (relatively) inexpensive lenses who will accept narrower apertures, slower focusing, and a need for software correction and those wanting high-end L-series lenses.
I think they’ve done a very good job meeting the wants of both segments. One can build a 3-zoom kit covering 15-400mm for $1450, or swap the 15-30 for the 16/2.8 and get 16-400mm coverage for $1150. There are 7 primes from 16 to 800mm, all under $1000 and most under $500.
On the high end, there are many excellent zooms and primes. If that’s not enough, there are ample EF lenses that can be simply and effectively adapted (in some cases with improved convenience thanks to the drop-in filter adapter, which is great for lenses that don’t take front filters easily, for fast primes used for outdoor portraits, etc.).
The bottom line is that what you consider ‘the basics’ are lenses that Canon has chosen to not prioritize. Given that it’s in Canon’s best interest to meet the needs of the majority, certainly as far as the consumer-level lenses you’re talking about, it seems their assessment of lenses comprising ‘the basics’ differs from yours. I am certain that Canon has a much better understanding of what lenses meet the needs of the majority of buyers than you do.
The fact that Canon isn’t making the lenses you want doesn’t mean their management is flawed, it means your personal wants aren’t aligned with the majority, or at least aren’t aligned with major profit drivers for Canon.
Canon’s market position is solid evidence that their management is effective. You can shit on it if you want, but that only makes you look petulant because you’re not getting what you want.
