I "found" 22 additional skyscrapers over 500 feet in Guangzhou that were not listed on Skyscrapercenter. As a result Guangzhou surpassed Tokyo and Shanghai for the number of skyscrapers.
Upvote
0
Yep, modern lenses incorporate a lot of chips and circuitry that "speaks" to the camera, especially to the AF system. The lens and body electronics are intertwined. It's pretty easy to copy the physical mount and the electrical contacts, but it's entirely another matter to unravel the mysteries of the circuitry, understand the protocols, and get the lens to work efficiently and without errors or malfunctions. Canon, Nikon and Sony can't even make their own cameras and lenses work without occasional freezes occurring, so what hope have Sigma and Tamron got?Yes - but that is the answer at a theoretical level. At a practical level, the next question is whether or not it is actually possible to make an RF lens without violating Canon's patents. It seems to be possible for a fully manual lens (based on the fact various manual RF lenses seem to be staying on the market). For a lens with AF or other electronics though, it may or may not be (I certainly don't know), but it seems no one has managed to find a way to do it so far.
I don't know about Nikon and Sony, but I have followed the freezing issue pretty closely with Canon (mainly because I have had the issue with two R5s and one R3). I have not seen any evidence (credible or not) that the phenomenon is lens-related. I have also not seen any cases where adapted lenses using the Canon RF adapters have any relationship to freezes. It may be difficult for third-parties to produce a mount that does not infringe on Canon's patents, but given how flawlessly both native and third-party EF mount lenses work with adapters, I don't see any reason why third-parties are facing any greater challenges with RF lens mounts than they were with EF lens mounts. Perhaps you have information to the contrary that you can share....Canon, Nikon and Sony can't even make their own cameras and lenses work without occasional freezes occurring, so what hope have Sigma and Tamron got?
I agree that native EF lenses work flawlessly via adaptors (although not as fast as RF lenses). However, I think it's possible that the extra RF contacts may allow additional functionality on future Canon body and lens combinations. Sigma and Tamron could certainly manufacture RF mount lenses that didn't make use of the extra contacts, but they'd probably prefer to wait until they've been licenced (or have figured out the RF-specific protocols), to ensure full compatibility. Only guessing of course, and I could be completely wrong...I don't know about Nikon and Sony, but I have followed the freezing issue pretty closely with Canon (mainly because I have had the issue with two R5s and one R3). I have not seen any evidence (credible or not) that the phenomenon is lens-related. I have also not seen any cases where adapted lenses using the Canon RF adapters have any relationship to freezes. It may be difficult for third-parties to produce a mount that does not infringe on Canon's patents, but given how flawlessly both native and third-party EF mount lenses work with adapters, I don't see any reason why third-parties are facing any greater challenges with RF lens mounts than they were with EF lens mounts. Perhaps you have information to the contrary that you can share.
Canon also released new EF/PL mount cine lensesI don't know about Tamron, but Sigma seems like they're not getting rid of their EF lenses anytime soon. They also manufacture cine lenses, and the new ones they just announced are available in EF, though of course cine is its own thing.
There is. Samyang were using their EF lens protocol on their RF lenses. This version must be clean, because it's been in use for many years and Canon didn't threaten them before (and they probably would've if it were). This, in turn, means that no patents have been infringed (there's broad consensus among people who know about patents that the bayonet itself cannot be thus protected). And yet they were threatened into submission by Canon... who have big offices in many countries, and probably lawyers on retainer there, who could easily file multiple parallel lawsuits against a smaller company. Sigma and Tamron are tiny in relation to Canon, and most certainly don't have lawyers on retainer in most markets. The cost of fending these suits off could be very high, and might prove a pyrrhic victory in the end.Here we go again. There is nothing stopping them from making RF lenses, so long as they don't violate Canon's patents.
I'm going to guess that they build the actual optical assembly as one part, and then attach what is essentially an adapter on the back of that for the mount in question. So their service just has to change back ends. No actual machine work needed!The nice thing about Sigma is that they have a mount conversion service. So for $100 or so you can convert your lens to another mount. The optical formula has to be compatible of course. Some lenses are only possible for mirrorless cameras. However you could buy a used Sigma lens for a Nikon DSLR and convert it to fit on the EF mount.
The 150 and 180 macros have been discontinued for over a year.The EF mount is not going anywhere.
I do find some of these discontinuations to be surprising, but, as it has been mentioned, these are not the top selling lenses.
These lenses will be missed:
I haven't been able to find a new Sigma 180mm for sale (in the Netherlands) the past 3 years. Which is one of the reasons I went with the Canon 180L instead.The 150 and 180 macros have been discontinued for over a year.
It has been formally discontinued on Sigma's web site for about that long. I found a decent used one about a year ago and it is a tad sharper than the 150, which I have had for about a decade. Both are very sharp lenses and the R5 focus stacking feature seems to work with both as well. The downside of the 180 is that it is a heavy beast. The Canon is not as fast (f/3.5 vs f/2.8), but it is substantially smaller and much lighter. https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Specifications.aspx?Lens=109&LensComp=919I haven't been able to find a new Sigma 180mm for sale (in the Netherlands) the past 3 years. Which is one of the reasons I went with the Canon 180L instead.
I'm using the 28/1.4 Sigma on an adapter, a bit. I bought it last year, so like three years after selling my EOS-1DsIII and buying the R.1) I wonder how much of their modern lens design sales are from EF mount lenses that are adapted to RF. I bet they sell more of those than Fuji mount lenses.
2) Since both Sigma and Tamron make lenses and lens elements for the larger OEM lens/camera makers, I wonder how much those commercial relationships cause them to be cautious in entering into direct competition with Nikon/Canon. We may find out in the future that lens elements in the $3k Canon lenses were produced by Tamron, for instance.
I'm with ya. I got my G2 some years ago, for maybe $900.. on ebay from an Aussy seller, so maybe no USA warranty. Never needed it, of course. But, I use it less now as I got the RF 24-105 f/4 with my R5. Both have superb QC and optics.Glad I managed to get the 24-70 2.8 from Tamron. Works perfectly with the RP