Patent: Canon Reversible Mount Lens

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
neuroanatomist said:
As one who also 'has people for that', I must say that you sound neither bourgeois nor pompous. With all due respect to those folks in IP departments, I think I'd club myself to death with my 600/4 if that was my day job. Ok, maybe a little pompous. ;)

It's just that younger me thought I'd be the renaissance man who would become highly skilled in all 50 hats my job would have me wear. I'd be the sharpest kid at CAD, FE, analysis, regulatory work, finance, project management, etc. -- you get the idea. For a while, I was well on my way to getting there.

And now we just have 'people' for all that. Less about me and more about working at larger companies these days, but still.

Upside: I can focus on what I love. And how. Pretty damn great.

Downside: Knee-bucklingly humbling moments of technical incompetence surface periodically. Hoooow exactly does this newfangled coffee machine or networked copier work again? ;D

- A
 

rs

EOS R
Dec 29, 2012
1,024
0
UK
Perfect for those who were struggling to find somewhere to keep their second DSLR :eek:
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
rs said:
Perfect for those who were struggling to find somewhere to keep their second DSLR :eek:

I think the future of macro isn't reversing lenses or making better dedicated macro lenses, it's getting more macro functionality out of multipurpose glass.

The 100L is a fine macro instrument and a damn good portrait lens.

The 24-70 f.4L IS is a fine standard zoom and its unheard of 0.7x max mag -- a marvel to this day -- is a joy. Sure it has a very short working distance and is not 'serious macro' friendly, but in good light it does very well. My 100L is the tool I reach for for flora and such, but if I'm traveling or hiking, the 24-70 f/4L IS is all I take. Functionality that lets you leave other things at home is value for me.

I have no bone to pick with dedicated macro gear, mind you, but I love the thought of one lens doing two jobs very well, and I hope Canon does more of this. This patent is one way to do that, but perhaps they can go a different route.

- A
 
Oct 7, 2013
350
0
neuroanatomist said:
douglaurent said:
Maybe you just stop repeating the "Canon is *******" phrase I never wrote...

Is your memory so poor? Or is your metacognition so inadequate that you fail to comprehend the meaning of your own words?

douglaurent said:
By 2017 Sony will have destroyed their business if they don't wake up and come around with some better specs as well.


douglaurent said:
...explain in detail why a lens with a macro reverse front mount is better than a dedicated external macro adapter that could be used on any existing lens, like the one from Novoflex.

Why have a ring light built into a macro lens like the EF-M 28mm, when there are dedicated external ring lights from both Canon and 3rd parties that can be used on any existing lens? Less to carry around. Plus it's just pretty darn cool.

Canon has cut their sales in half the last 5 years. A lot of the items Sony and other manufacturers have sold could have been sold by Canon. If Canon continues this path, their business will go further down - especially once Sony managed to release the fusion of an A7RII and A99II, which means there is little reason to buy a 1DX2 or 5D4 anymore - except for the decreasing amount of people like you who seem to know only gear of one brand.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
26,069
4,640
douglaurent said:
Canon has cut their sales in half the last 5 years. A lot of the items Sony and other manufacturers have sold could have been sold by Canon. If Canon continues this path, their business will go further down - especially once Sony managed to release the fusion of an A7RII and A99II, which means there is little reason to buy a 1DX2 or 5D4 anymore - except for the decreasing amount of people like you who seem to know only gear of one brand.

Oh, so that's your best attempt at a cogent explanation of why Sony is losing market share to Canon? Pathetic.

CHWAC.
 

tmroper

EOS 90D
Sep 22, 2016
177
66
Seems like the "Seinfeld" episode with the reverse peephole might be prior art for a patent like this. But maybe not.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
douglaurent said:
Canon has cut their sales in half the last 5 years. A lot of the items Sony and other manufacturers have sold could have been sold by Canon. If Canon continues this path, their business will go further down - especially once Sony managed to release the fusion of an A7RII and A99II, which means there is little reason to buy a 1DX2 or 5D4 anymore - except for the decreasing amount of people like you who seem to know only gear of one brand.

Let's unpack that, shall we?

First: when an entire industry goes sideways due to disruptive technology, calling out the biggest company (and only calling out the the biggest company) for not stopping that gravitational industry change is giggle-worthy. That's like calling out Capitol Records in the year 2000 and telling them they should have seen music piracy coming and acquired the internet to overcome it. Stupid Capitol Records.

Second: Let's assume the mythical A9 gripped super mirrorless rig arrives. For fun, let's give it 20 fps, 75 MP, IBIS, 500 AF points, 8K video and five times the A7R II present battery life. Do you honestly think that after the A7R II -- studded for war technology-wise -- Sony is just missing another new body with more technology to begin the great exodus of professionals from Canon and Nikon?

Third: There are reasons to buy a camera body other than the specs the body has. Some bodies bolt on to a wide ecosystem of lenses and communicate ideally with them for best AF performance. Some bodies have wonderful, intuitive controls and menus that don't make you want to kill small woodland creatures with a hammer. Some bodies actually have grips that are appropriately sized for a human hand and a 70-200 f/2.8 payload. But, sure, Sony has technology -- have at it, son.

- A
 

hbr

EOS RP
Oct 22, 2016
326
0
http://asia.nikkei.com/Markets/Tokyo-Market/Market-Scramble-Canon-s-rise-looks-frail-without-earnings-support

This report talks about the decline of the Japanese market in general and loss of profits yet it also says, "Canon overtook Keyence in market capitalization last week to become Japan's most valuable electronics maker for the first time in about five months."

Canon is *******, ******* I tell you.
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
6,413
4,038
68
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
ahsanford said:
douglaurent said:
...once Sony managed to release the fusion of an A7RII and A99II, which means there is little reason to buy a 1DX2 or 5D4 anymore - except for the decreasing amount of people like you who seem to know only gear of one brand.

...There are reasons to buy a camera body other than the specs the body has. Some bodies bolt on to a wide ecosystem of lenses and communicate ideally with them for best AF performance. Some bodies have wonderful, intuitive controls and menus that don't make you want to kill small woodland creatures with a hammer. Some bodies actually have grips that are appropriately sized for a human hand and a 70-200 f/2.8 payload. But, sure, Sony has technology -- have at it, son...

Related to this, I believe is that many, if not most, people really aren't looking for major changes. Doug may own 50 different camera bodies, but who would want that? The higher up the chain you go, I believe you'll find people want familiarity. I don't want to have to learn new controls. I want the next body I buy to function like the one I'm already used to. That's why Canon makes its top three bodies (7D, 5D and 1Dx) virtually interchangeable as far as controls go.

For me personally, I can't see ever switching brands, simply because the differences in specs are so small that it's not worth the learning curve to adapt to a new body. I'm sure many Nikon shooters feel the same way.
 

Ryananthony

EOS RP
Nov 7, 2015
498
2
unfocused said:
ahsanford said:
douglaurent said:
...once Sony managed to release the fusion of an A7RII and A99II, which means there is little reason to buy a 1DX2 or 5D4 anymore - except for the decreasing amount of people like you who seem to know only gear of one brand.

...There are reasons to buy a camera body other than the specs the body has. Some bodies bolt on to a wide ecosystem of lenses and communicate ideally with them for best AF performance. Some bodies have wonderful, intuitive controls and menus that don't make you want to kill small woodland creatures with a hammer. Some bodies actually have grips that are appropriately sized for a human hand and a 70-200 f/2.8 payload. But, sure, Sony has technology -- have at it, son...

For me personally, I can't see ever switching brands, simply because the differences in specs are so small that it's not worth the learning curve to adapt to a new body. I'm sure many Nikon shooters feel the same way.

This is how I feel. With all the talk about superior image quality and dynamic range of Sony or nikon, people make it out to sound like canon cameras can't even create an image. For me, I have yet to see anything from a stills perspective that would have me consider switching brands and dealing with swapping gear, from a unprofessional point of view.

The gentleman I purchased my 1dx off of, switched from canon to Sony for his wedding photography. He told me, he didn't realize how good canons service was until he had to send his Sony in for repair. 3 months it took for him to get his camera back, and they didn't give him a loner. He was considering switching back when I spoke to him.

From what I've read, and experiences shared with me ( with no experience myself) Canon is top tier for those who use their gear every day and rely on the tools and services they provide.
 

hbr

EOS RP
Oct 22, 2016
326
0
I don't have the money to have multiple systems so I certainly have no plans to switch, even it the other competitors offer cameras that have better specs in some areas.
 

Mikehit

EOS R6
Jul 28, 2015
3,350
552
unfocused said:
Related to this, I believe is that many, if not most, people really aren't looking for major changes. Doug may own 50 different camera bodies, but who would want that? The higher up the chain you go, I believe you'll find people want familiarity. I don't want to have to learn new controls. I want the next body I buy to function like the one I'm already used to. That's why Canon makes its top three bodies (7D, 5D and 1Dx) virtually interchangeable as far as controls go.

For me personally, I can't see ever switching brands, simply because the differences in specs are so small that it's not worth the learning curve to adapt to a new body. I'm sure many Nikon shooters feel the same way.

Have a +1, my friend.
Dammit, have a +100.

Do Canon take advantage of this? Sure they do.
But what it does mean is that they can afford to take time to make sure they introduce technologies they know will work, they have a level of reliability that gives the customer confidence, and I end up with a system that has continuity and does the job it was intended for with minimum fuss.
 

AvTvM

EOS R6
Nov 4, 2011
3,165
0
unfocused said:
Related to this, I believe is that many, if not most, people really aren't looking for major changes. Doug may own 50 different camera bodies, but who would want that? The higher up the chain you go, I believe you'll find people want familiarity. I don't want to have to learn new controls. I want the next body I buy to function like the one I'm already used to. That's why Canon makes its top three bodies (7D, 5D and 1Dx) virtually interchangeable as far as controls go.

For me personally, I can't see ever switching brands, simply because the differences in specs are so small that it's not worth the learning curve to adapt to a new body. I'm sure many Nikon shooters feel the same way.

yes, agreed. there are some very good and valid reasons for "brand loyalty" and "market inertia".

BUT
... if the difference in functionality and or price exceeds a certain threshold, that inertia can quickly turn into a landslide.

if nikon instead of Canon had offered me the EOS M mirrorless system: ultracompact, APS-C sensor, decent IQ, decent and compact lenses ... and all of it at very affordable prices ... i would have bought it as my "compact and light" system for travel and mountaineering/outdoor use. even if controls would have been somewhat different from my 5D3 and raw files were NEF, not CR2 requiring some changes in my post workflow. same if Sony had not only brought A6000/A6300/A6500 but also lenses matching Canon EF-M lineup (small, good, cheap). Nikon 1 system failed, because sensor is too small and because they never offered a fully featured V-body and because they asked "APS-C prices" for that system.

had sony's not only launched A7 and A7R Series camera bodies, but also a range of *good, compact and not grossly overpriced* FE lenses ... i would not gave bought 5D3 as my last mirrorslapper. and more other Canon and Nikon users would have switched. but ... sony decided (stupidly) to only offer lenses as big as and significantly more expensive than Canon/Nikon's ... so me and millions of other potential customers did not buy into Sony's mirrorless system, despite their compact mirrorless camera bodies with great sensors and IQ. also A7 first series was riddled with shutter shock problem, very poor battery charge and sub-par AF. Now A7 series II is riddled with not so compact bodies and significantly higher prices. makes 'em less attractive.

end result: inertia prevailed for good reasons, landslide switching did not happen. but that is no prediction it won't happen tomorrow. it is just a matter of supply. market demand - for highly compact, fully capable camera systems at reasonable prices - is there. :)
 

Mikehit

EOS R6
Jul 28, 2015
3,350
552
AvTvM said:
end result: inertia prevailed for good reasons, landslide switching did not happen. but that is no prediction it won't happen tomorrow. it is just a matter of supply. market demand - for highly compact, fully capable camera systems at reasonable prices - is there. :)

In any industry where the competition is tight and new technologies are arising, the first stage is one of playing chicken - who will be the first to make a drastic move and switch significantly because incorporating new technologies takes time and money...a lot of money and as a corporation like CaNikonyou cannot afford to get it wrong. Basically Sony had nothing to lose and everything to gain by switching to their mirrorless models. Olympus and Panasonic similarly dived in the MFT market (the consortium enabled them to effectively share development costs and reduce risks). It is also significant that SOny have made no great strides since then and do not look like making great strides anytime soon and this gives CaNikon time to develop their own systems.

CaNikon are caught in that hinterland of seeing where the market is gong but not wanting to lose their core customer base because you abandon them at your peril.

As a result Sony jumped to their mirrorless systems and they then had a choice of either spending more money to develop their lens range or (as they did) sell your camera as a platform for third party lenses. Despite all the hullabaloo when it appeared, the A7 series has still not seduced enough people because the idea still seems...well...weird to to most people. Sometimes I wonder if they convinced themselves the advantages of their body size was that they did not need to develop a mirrorless in the mould of the Canon M series, or maybe they wanted to but their need to make the Sony series compatible with CaNikon lenses meant they needed a throat diameter on the mount that dictated the size of future lenses. And if acting as a platform is their business model, then they also need CaNikon to develop a range of compact mirrorless lenses for Sony's own compact mirrorless to act as a platform for.


Meanwhile CaNikon, knowing their customers well, knew they did not need to pump millions immediately in to their compact mirrorless and could take their time while still selling enough to keep the company solvent. And they are doing just enough to keep the mirrorless afficionados in their respective camps - I call that smart marketing!

Compact mirrorless will come.
Superb wifi connectivity will come.
All those other fancy fandangles will come
And in the long run I agree with you that they are all on that edge where if they misjudge it they could face a sudden shift in sales. But one thing these companies are not ignorant of is where the market is going.
 

M_S

EOS 90D
Jul 31, 2013
158
10
neuroanatomist said:
AvTvM said:
douglaurent said:
Why bother developing a mirrorless fullframe camera, when instead you can invent the most useless product ever? Got numerous reverse rings like the electronic one by Novoflex and like it, but having a mount on the front of the lens instead of having an adapter is probably the worst idea and the last thing anybody wants.

+1 exactly

IF anything, then Canon should come up with a native/"original Canon" reverse mount adapter with tight tolerances and guaranteed lens-mount-protocol functionality.

Yeah, we know, we've heard it from your crew incessantly. Canon is ******* because they fail to innovate. Canon is ******* because they innovate, but not in the way that you think they should. Canon is *******. CHWAC.

The EF-M 28mm Macro is a pretty innovative lens. Compact, built in ring light, good IQ...but it's still another lens to carry, and the point of a MILC system (for some) is the small size of the kit. Consider the application of this patent – an EF-M 11-22mm f/3.5-5.6 IS or an EF-M 22mm f/2 IS, where you reverse the lens and it becomes a macro lens. One lens to carry, two lenses worth of functionality. But it doesn't fit in with your petty, private little world views of what products Canon should make just for you…so it's a bad idea.

And for you two in particular, it's amusing how one of you wants Canon to never make another dSLR, and the other wants Canon to make new versions of all of them and update just about every EF lens in the current lineup. Both of you claim Canon is ******* if they don't follow your advice, and your advice is at opposite ends of the spectrum. What a joke you guys are! CHWAC.
Giving a friendly feedback is beyond you I guess. Perhaps they don't teach that anymore and "know it all guys" with Putin attitude is the norm.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
26,069
4,640
AvTvM said:
if nikon instead of Canon had offered me the EOS M mirrorless system: ultracompact, APS-C sensor, decent IQ, decent and compact lenses ... and all of it at very affordable prices ... i would have bought it...

Ohhhh...if. But who got your money? Smart Canon.


AvTvM said:
had sony's not only launched A7 and A7R Series camera bodies, but also a range of *good, compact and not grossly overpriced* FE lenses ... i would not gave bought 5D3

Ohhhh...if. But who got your money? Smart Canon.
 

AvTvM

EOS R6
Nov 4, 2011
3,165
0
not so smart Canon. Mainly they profited from competitor's mistakes and inability.
Had Canon been REALLY smart and launched kick-ass EOS M system in 2012 and kick-ass FF MILC system in late 2013, Sony and Fuji would have today hold 0,1% market share ... combined. And Nikon would already be bankrupt. :)
 

jolyonralph

EOS R5 Mark II
CR Pro
Aug 25, 2015
1,423
931
London, UK
www.everyothershot.com
neuroanatomist said:
Ohhhh...if. But who got your money? Smart Canon.

I'm not going to suggest Canon aren't smart, but I held off buying the replacement for my 5D III (well, maybe second replacement as I already have the 5DSR) until the 5DIV was announced.

For me, the 5D IV was good, but didn't really offer me anything of a major incremental advantage that I couldn't do with my 5DSR or 5D III. Technically it was better in many ways, but it didn't allow me to do anything differently than before. So, I got an A7R II instead. I don't think the 5D IV is a bad camera - far from it - it's just not what I need right now.

At least from me Canon didn't get my money. For now :)

Jolyon