I like that expression. I'm going to start using that in my daily interactions.don't give a flying f-stop
I like that expression. I'm going to start using that in my daily interactions.don't give a flying f-stop
That's not what the evidence shows... No, China still ignores Canon's questionable heavy-handed tactics when it comes to third-party lenses. Look at all the third-party RF lenses that are left on the market after Canon shut down the Korean Samyang/Rokinon RF offerings. You'll find they're all from China. Why? Because they don't give a flying f-stop about a Japanese corporation who can't do diddly squat to them about the situation. What are Canon going to do, complain to the Chinese government???![]()
Some people need a specific lens for their photography. I used to take 50-60% of my pictures with the 300 f/2.8 IS L - I miss an RF version a lot, and the RF 100-500 is no substitute at all.I realize that 24 lenses is not a fully developed system, but it is also pretty clear that Canon's RF lens lineup now covers probably 80-90% of the most commonly sold and used
Overall, I'm hard pressed to think of a commonly used focal length that isn't available either in prime or zoom form. If someone thinks the lenses lineup is "very limiting" they aren't trying very hard.
Some people need a specific lens for their photography. I used to take 50-60% of my pictures with the 300 f/2.8 IS L - I miss an RF version a lot, and the RF 100-500 is no substitute at all.
You can't expect that a lens system will be built out overnight or even in a year or two. No company has infinite production resources. That's even more true today in light of worldwide manufacturing challenges.Some people need a specific lens for their photography. I used to take 50-60% of my pictures with the 300 f/2.8 IS L - I miss an RF version a lot, and the RF 100-500 is no substitute at all.
You continue to use logic and facts here. When will you learn?You can't expect that a lens system will be built out overnight or even in a year or two. No company has infinite production resources. That's even more true today in light of worldwide manufacturing challenges.
Existing EF lenses continue to work on R bodies with the adapter, so if one absolutely needs a lens for their business, it is available.
Canon simply has to prioritize and that is my point. It's only natural that their priorities would focus on the most in demand lenses and they've done a good job in meeting the bulk of the market.
You may really, really need a 300 f2.8 but I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to figure out that it's a very small minority of photographers who fit into the category.
That’s a good rationale for lenses like the EF 11-24mm and TS-E 17mm, and it’s why any RF replacement would need to offer something major to outweigh that advantage for my use of those two lenses.I wouldn't get an RF 500 f4 even if it came out because I like having the adapter with filter option with my EF. I know there are 'adapters over my dead body' people, but rather suspect there are more than a few who arent, given the increase in price.
That’s a good rationale for lenses like the EF 11-24mm and TS-E 17mm, and it’s why any RF replacement would need to offer something major to outweigh that advantage for my use of those two lenses.
But like my EF 600/4 II, your 500/4 already has a drop-in filter slot. I’m curious as to why you need a second slot. I’m not planning to swap my 600 II for the RF version, but the adapter isn’t the reason.
Not up on the Lego case and its details, but that sounds like a knock-off or a fake version, which other countries can ban from being imported, because of consumer protection laws, where the product is purporting to be something its not.Since you state that "the evidence shows", then please show the evidence that Canon has gone to court (or tried to) in China and got ignored or refused.
LEGO (the toy building brick company) have successfully taken Chinese copycats to court and won. First time was around 15 years ago. Note that I didn't say that China has become 'perfect', has become a 'rechtsstaat' or that it treats foreign and domestic companies equally. I'm only saying that China has gotten 'better' over the last 10-15 years. (there's possibly an argument somewhere for the statement that they couldn't any get worse).
A lot of people claim things like "China does X" or "China is Y" when they have in fact never set foot there, haven't worked there, haven't spoken with the people, don't speak the language, and don't understand the culture. That includes some fairly well-known journalists and self-proclaimed 'China experts' in the US and in Europe.
I'm not an 'expert' on China in any way, but I have lived and worked there for 2½ years and can speak/read and write a bit. That probably puts me ahead of 90-95% of everyone else.
All this is going to be a MOOT POINT in a few days ..... SUPER LIGHT-WEIGHT High Refractive Index Sapphire-coated all-Acrylic lens elements, adaptive shape-changing optics and computational photography algorithms melded together in a FULLY OPENS SOURCE under GPL-3 licence terms lens system.
P.S. Anybody want an f/2.8 9600 mm SHARP Super-Telephoto lens with very very little chromatic aberration for around $2000 USD?
V
Treat such posts as if they are statements from young child who’s gotten ahold of some advanced textbooks and excerpted words at random in a vain attempt to sound impressive.Context really helps when you make a statement that reads like something out of a science-fiction novel. Have aliens landed, or did you get those flux capacitors working and have come back from the future? What exactly are you going on about here???
A 9600mm f/2.8 would be greater than 3400mm (11 feet) wide.All this is going to be a MOOT POINT in a few days ..... SUPER LIGHT-WEIGHT High Refractive Index Sapphire-coated all-Acrylic lens elements, adaptive shape-changing optics and computational photography algorithms melded together in a FULLY OPENS SOURCE under GPL-3 licence terms lens system.
P.S. Anybody want an f/2.8 9600 mm SHARP Super-Telephoto lens with very very little chromatic aberration for around $2000 USD?
V
Who said I expected anything? I replied to a statement saying that the existing lineup and zooms could cover all needs. Not true. And I still miss it. There are two other - much less popular - big whites with RF mount already, so it certainly could have happened by now.You can't expect that a lens system will be built out overnight or even in a year or two. No company has infinite production resources. That's even more true today in light of worldwide manufacturing challenges.
Existing EF lenses continue to work on R bodies with the adapter, so if one absolutely needs a lens for their business, it is available.
Canon simply has to prioritize and that is my point. It's only natural that their priorities would focus on the most in demand lenses and they've done a good job in meeting the bulk of the market.
You may really, really need a 300 f2.8 but I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to figure out that it's a very small minority of photographers who fit into the category.
With @HarryFilm‘s superawesomefantastic open source technology, such a lens would be only the size of a dry erase marker.A 9600mm f/2.8 would be greater than 3400mm (11 feet) wide.
Then I don’t understand why you replied to my post, since I didn’t say anything like that. If someone said that you should reply to them.Who said I expected anything? I replied to a statement saying that the existing lineup and zooms could cover all needs. Not true. And I still miss it. There are two other - much less popular - big whites with RF mount already, so it certainly could have happened by now.
Not sure if you've seen the newer generation of wedding and portrait photographers who hold their cameras at arms length by the body with two hands and shoot while viewing from the rear display, much like a smartphone?