Earlier this week I was made aware that Samyang had removed all RF lenses from their website. The responses from Samyang representatives on social media were ambiguous at best.
However, a more direct response was given to a DPReview forum member on the matter.
The reasons behind this are not yet known, but it should be noted that RF mount lenses still appear on the Rokinon website. Rokinon is a brand owned by Samyang Optics. This could just...
I read somewhere that Canon is breaking compatibility with these Samyang lenses with each firmware update, so I suspect cost of reverse engineering and developing firmwares has gotten out of hand or time required for new firmwares might be causing support issues.
That was my fear - the rapid firmware updates actually reducing performance for competitors on purpose. I really hope that isn't true, because it's not a great look from the consumer side of things. It's all hearsay for now I guess - that's a conclusion I really don't want to jump to.
To my ear, neither Rokinon nor Samyang sound nice.
Canon doesn't purposely remove compatibility with third-party lenses and accessories. The flip side is that they have no responsibility to test for compatibility with third-party products if there isn't an official partnership, Atomos comes to mind.
Is Samyang using the EF protocol and not the RF protocol on RF mount? I imagine they set it up so that the camera thinks it is an EF lens+adapter when really it isn't.
Canon may not have the responsibility to test thrid party products, but if Canon is aware there is third-party gear out there then, at least assuming it is not some really rare piece of gear, in my opinion it doesn't say much for Canon if they stick their heads in the sand so far as checking if what they are doing is breaking compatability with the third-party gear. I have no idea whether Canon does or doesn't worry about breaking compatability with third party gear, but if they don't, I blame Canon at least as much as the third-parties for the problem. I am convinced the existence of third-party gear helps attract buyers to a system. I know I won't move to RF unless and until we start seeing good third-party lens support (I'll move to another mirrorless system).
That's like blaming an automaker for not testing if their vehicle works reliability with third-party modifications, that cost to the automaker would be massive. The same applies here with Canon. If compatibility is hurt, Canon has zero control over the software in a third party's product, why on earth should we expect Canon to spend time and money to prevent these issues from happening? If Canon wants to add improvements in their software, do you really want them forgoing those improvements if it makes a $500 Samyang fully compatible? This is one of the issues with reverse engineering, we see it across all sorts of industries.
The Rokinon RF lenses are still listed. I'm thinking this is more of a branding and cost savings exercise. It never made much sense to sell the exact same lenses under two brands. There were also markets around the world that didn't sell both brands. I'm hoping this is just a streamlining of Samyang's business.
I disagree. Canon should not waste a second of their time testing third-party gear. It is up to the third party to keep pace with the current firmware. That is how Magic Lantern always worked and developers donate their own time keeping up.
Not really.
Those are partnerships, built to a specific OEM spec. There is a whole industry of third-party parts makers that have no relationship with the automaker. I have built 4 cars in my day and it can be a trainwreck with the third parties. I'm not mad at Ford because Mishimoto has a product that doesn't play well with something made by BBK when attached to a Ford block....
