Don’t expect any third-party autofocus lenses in the near future

[Chaitanya]

Perhaps @Chaitanya means something along the lines of an RF-S 55-200/250mm zoom? The RF-S 18-150 is a straight repackaging of the optics from the EF-M 18-150, the could easily do the same with the EF-M 55-200mm, or design one going to 250mm like the EF-S version.

Certainly it's true that longer focal lengths gain nothing in terms of design from the smaller image circle.

yes, something to replace EF-S 55-250mm but with slightly longer end(similar to RF 100-400 replacing 70-300mm) and/or some other improvement made to lens. That 55-250mm even though came as a part of 2 lens kit many bird and wildlife photographers used it as 1st step before buying longer lenses(300mm f4 +TC, 400 f5.6, 100-400, etc...)

 

[navastronia]

Personally, I'd describe it as pragmatic and realistic individuals who actually understand that Canon is a for-profit business and delusional whiners who think that Canon exists solely to fulfil their personal desires.

But then, that's just me.

Are Sony and Nikon not for-profit businesses?

 

[unfocused]

Are Sony and Nikon not for-profit businesses?

And I would not presume to tell them how to run their businesses either.

 

[David - Sydney]

Well, personally I find the RF 5.2mm f/2.8L Dual Fisheye lens to be a bit weird. I could dress that up as ‘esoteric’ if you prefer.

Very true! Unique as it is only possible with the R5's high mp sensor.
I wonder how long it has been designed and just waiting to be released after the R5. I don't recall a patent for it.

 

[navastronia]

And I would not presume to tell them how to run their businesses either.

This is a rumors and speculation website - we talk about what the camera makers are doing, and why (in addition to new releases, etc).

If you're not interested, then what are you doing here?

 

[SnowMiku]

Even doing photography for living I'm very discouraged to pull the trigger on RF lenses, I am still on EF glass (16-35 2.8LII, 24-70 2.8LII, and 70-200 2.8L (no IS)). It's insane the prices of the new lenses. OBS: All the new lenses have IS, it's just one more thing to break inside the lens.

I'm also happy to pay less for a lens without IS, there are lots of situations where you just don't need it.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Very true! Unique as it is only possible with the R5's high mp sensor.
I wonder how long it has been designed and just waiting to be released after the R5. I don't recall a patent for it.

There was one, Japan Patent Application 2020-139984.

 

[AlanF]

Are Sony and Nikon not for-profit businesses?

There‘s a worry that Nikon is becoming one…

 

[dolina]

Are Sony and Nikon not for-profit businesses?

In 2011 Sony Discloses Basic Specifications of the "E-mount" for Interchangeable Single Lens Cameras without Fee. This was done to help get to #2 in 2019 displacing Nikon.

In 2021 Nikon selectively licensed their Z mount in the hopes of replicating Sony's success and get to #2 again. Let us see if this will be successful before the 2030s.

Both companies compromised because they had little or no choice at the time they made the decision to license their tech out. Google did this with Android where in the OS is free for consumers & brands to install to remove every possible friction or bottleneck to growth and adoption. Microsoft tried to compete and replicate their desktop business model of a license fee-based Windows Mobile and failed.

Canon is #1 in interchangeable lens cameras. They have little to no incentive to license with or without a fee to 3rd parties as their business model has them earning more selling 1st party lenses. In this respect they are following Apple's business model in the hopes of continuing to be the biggest profit & venenue generator in the perpetually shrinking digital still camera market.

Digital still camera market is experiencing shrinkage so every additional sale of a 1st party body, lens & accessory helps. Without this economies of scale does not function in helping push prices down.

>80% of the 30+ lenses each released from 2018-2022 by Canon & Nikon are

- faster inventory turnover
- better profit margins

The missing EF & F mount lenses that will be released on the RF & Z mounts in the next 4 years will tend to be

- slower inventory turnover
- worse profit margins

Why are they releasing their products this way? Because any for profit company want to get their ROI faster.

 

[dtaylor]

All the focussing alrorithms happen inside the camera anyway. The camera just has to tell the lens if it has to focus further or closer until the focus fits. Is that part any different for RF lenses than for EF lenses? Nobody wants Canon to give a way the secret how it nails the focus on animal eyes or fast moving subjects.

For a while there have been claims online that the RF pins in the same positions as their EF counterparts serve the same function, and that the new pins implement a high speed serial channel. (And when I say "claims" it's by people with photographs of disassembled equipment and testing equipment.) It would appear that AF is still handled over the EF pins, but I can't point to hard confirmation of that, nor have I tried testing any of this myself. The sites I'm thinking of have details on the pins, but not the RF serial channel protocol.

Canon marketing would like you to believe that there's super secret magic stuff in the RF mount that makes RF lenses perform better. It's more likely that the serial channel is used for stuff like lens corrections stored in the lens and everything else is handled the old fashioned way. It's also possible that on RF lenses with OIS the serial channel enables better coordination with IBIS.

 

[kten]

As much as I dislike it [3rd party AF in RF support] I think there is a lot of unfair shade thrown at Canon over this. Sure I don't like it and as someone who owns fair bit of sigma glass and likes the look of a lot of sigmas mirrorless only stuff and have been waiting for it to come in an RF flavour I feel disappointed, but I understand it and can't give Canon too much flak if any over it. They have to defend their IP or risk losing it I presume, plus recoup cost of r&d, shareholder pressure and fact some of those 3rd parties are pretty closely in bed with competitors (namely Tamron with Sony).

There are many things I feel are valid reasons to throw stones at Canon for, more so in the printer segment but some photo and low end video world such as stripping features that are in equal tier or lower models to greater degree than simple cannibalising lines avoidance. Being very very conservative and slow to adapt vs others (although it is also a strength) and ill thought out stuff like touch bar added to the R (which I actually don't mind) or sticking with old codecs longer than most despite digic generation at those points being more than capable of better ones. Defending their IP and not making it easy for 3rd party companies to profit from seems unreasonable to harshly criticise over though imho.

 

[dtaylor]

What is your real expectation? How many RF lenses should Canon have released in the first 4 years of a new mount given covid/supply chain issues impacting all manufacturing?

How many could Canon, Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, Samyang, and Viltrox combined have released? How many people would have gone RF if those lenses had been available?

 

[neuroanatomist]

As much as I dislike it I think there is a lot of unfair shade thrown at Canon over this. Sure I don't like it and as someone who owns fair bit of sigma glass and likes the look of a lot of sigmas mirrorless only stuff and have been waiting for it to come in an RF flavour I feel disappointed, but I understand it and can't give Canon too much flak if any over it. They have to defend their IP or risk losing it I presume, plus recoup cost of r&d, shareholder pressure and fact some of those 3rd parties are pretty closely in bed with competitors (namely Tamron with Sony).

There are many things I feel are valid reasons to throw stones at Canon for, more so in the printer segment but some photo and low end video world such as stripping features that are in equal tier or lower models to greater degree than simple cannibalising lines avoidance. Being very very conservative and slow to adapt vs others (although it is also a strength) and ill thought out stuff like touch bar added to the R (which I actually don't mind) or sticking with old codecs longer than most despite digic generation at those points being more than capable of better ones. Defending their IP and not making it easy for 3rd party companies to profit from seems unreasonable to harshly criticise over though imho.

You know how Sméagol gets when he is denied The Precious 3rd Party Lenses.

 

[dtaylor]

As much as I dislike it I think there is a lot of unfair shade thrown at Canon over this. Sure I don't like it and as someone who owns fair bit of sigma glass and likes the look of a lot of sigmas mirrorless only stuff and have been waiting for it to come in an RF flavour I feel disappointed, but I understand it and can't give Canon too much flak if any over it. They have to defend their IP or risk losing it I presume, plus recoup cost of r&d, shareholder pressure and fact some of those 3rd parties are pretty closely in bed with competitors (namely Tamron with Sony).

Everyone is acting like Canon invented cold fusion. They took the EF mount, moved it back, and added some pins. This is not Earth shattering innovation, nor is it something that puts them ahead of their competitors. It's just a mount with a communications protocol. Things that make Canon unique (color science, focus pull algorithms, AI tracking AF) are sitting in the camera body. I could understand this argument if there was something unique to the RF mount which meant that RF lenses could focus 10x faster than lenses on any other mount ever could. There's not.

Canon got these patents precisely to do what they're doing now because they believe that it will not cost them marketshare but rather gain them lens sales. People complaining think Canon is wrong because...well, because they're ready to leave over it.

 

[kten]

Everyone is acting like Canon invented cold fusion. They took the EF mount, moved it back, and added some pins. This is not Earth shattering innovation, nor is it something that puts them ahead of their competitors. It's just a mount with a communications protocol. Things that make Canon unique (color science, focus pull algorithms, AI tracking AF) are sitting in the camera body. I could understand this argument if there was something unique to the RF mount which meant that RF lenses could focus 10x faster than lenses on any other mount ever could. There's not.

Canon got these patents precisely to do what they're doing now because they believe that it will not cost them marketshare but rather gain them lens sales. People complaining think Canon is wrong because...well, because they're ready to leave over it.

I should have been more clear on I don't mean the mount design costs, but the lens design costs. The two are linked and defending the mount defends their whole RF ecosystem and everything developed in it such as The new RF 70-200s for instance are both clearly new designs and if 3rd parties can start eating some of their lunch there releasing similar IQ lenses with reliable AF in small sizes/weight it'll hurt their bottom line I presume.

 

[Szst]

I bought into the RF ecosystem 3 months ago knowing full well I was gonna rely mostly on EF glass but it still sucks to see Sony and Nikon getting all the fancy third party new and improved lenses. I'm happy with my R5C but buyer's remorse is unavoidable and Canon's definitely not helping.

 

[dolina]

How many could Canon, Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, Samyang, and Viltrox combined have released? How many people would have gone RF if those lenses had been available?

3rd party lens buyers tend to be lower margin customers.

In a forever shrinking digital still camera market you want to have more higher margin customers.

This can be seen by how many L lenses vs non-L lenses or Full Frame bodies vs APS-C bodies were released in the past 4 years.

In the smartphone market Apple takes 75% of the profits even when they only cater to the price points of $429-1,599.

Android sells for as little as $29 to beyond $1,599.

I am hopeful that RF L lenses were designed for a larger than 35mm full frame image circle to allow for a 0.79x medium format image sensor. This is being said as this is higher-end of the market.

 

[unfocused]

This is a rumors and speculation website - we talk about what the camera makers are doing, and why (in addition to new releases, etc).

If you're not interested, then what are you doing here?

Being detached from reality is not the same as speculating.

 

[kten]

Also I think people are complaining because they're going on emotion vs rational thought. I dislike it as much if not more than the next guy, but of course I get it and Canon aren't out of order in doing this no matter how I feel about it. It likely won't cost them marketshare because they are the primary player, and folks are always saying they are leaving over something (overheating, ISO performance, DR, the list goes on). For me the biggest thing that Canon does better than anyone that there isn't an equivalent of is ergo's, glass plenty of others have similar options, the colour science is pretty much only applicable to OOC jpegs since 3rd party raw developers like ACR doesn't have Canon profiles for newer models and the same colour responses can be had with other camera easily and I can make friends Nikon, Fuji and Sony raw files match various Canon cr2 and cr3 files easy.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Also I think people are complaining because they're going on emotion vs rational thought. I dislike it as much if not more than the next guy, but of course I get it and Canon aren't out of order in doing this no matter how I feel about it. It likely won't cost them marketshare because they are the primary player, and folks are always saying they are leaving over something (overheating, ISO performance, DR, the list goes on).

That's it, in a nutshell. Except they've convinced themselves that their emotional reaction represents rational thought, and that they represent the majority of Canon's customers.