The state of third-party lenses for the RF mount, Canon may be involved


CR Pro
Mar 28, 2012
I think the better analogy is that Apple maintains a closed environment in its iOS App Store, only allowing software it personally vets and allows on a platform (iOS) that could just as easily support other software it hasn't vetted. This is like Canon with the RF system.
I see your analogy.

But for me....errr....I just see hardware and software as two different and SEPARATE entities to be treated differently.

You should be able to buy hardware and do with it as you please. The software, in general, is licensed to you....and you should have the ability to use other software if you please, etc.

In this case, there would be code on the hardware you own, that makes calls to the canon. Merely talking to an API, or in this case and hardware interface connected to you, should be free to do, legal....

Knowing what to SAY, that's the trick. But again, I think this is still considered legal if they did a clean room reverse engineer of canon cameras.

  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0


Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
The fact that you misunderstand something doesn't make it false. Canon leads the market because of their aggregate business decisions over the last two decades.
I didn't misunderstand anything. It was a silly and false analogy. Businesses are not static physical objects. Canon's business wisdom is not a physical constant. Blocking out 3rd party lens manufacturers is not 'a coin flip just like all the past ones.' You've mocked other people in this thread for their arguments and logic, but that was one of the silliest things posted in this thread, period.

That's your opinion, not fact.
I never claimed it was fact. Why does this confuse you? Do I really have to go through the work of labeling statements as fact, opinion, prediction, etc, just for you?

You stated it as a foregone conclusion, when it's merely your opinion.
You've stated that Canon makes, and will continue to make, wise business decisions as a foregone conclusion, a fact, when it is merely your opinion.

It's only significant in your own mind and the minds of a handful of forum posters. There haven't been articles in the Nikkei about this, for example, merely some blog-type posts on a couple of photo-specific websites. The financial markets tell the tale, because stock trading is driven in large part by analysts who's job it is to watch the media and predict the effects of current events that affect the companies they track.
Numerous major photography sites and blogs have published articles on this. Likewise some of the most popular influencers are now making videos about it and discussing it on social media. It's only insignificant in your mind because you don't want to consider the potential repercussions. The term is 'normalcy bias'.

Here's what a company's stock looks like after a bad news day.
Because "bad days" only come in one flavor: instantaneous and catastrophic. And if Canon's stock didn't tank to near zero the day this became photo news, then nobody cares and everything must be OK, right?

Now, here's what Canon's stock looked like the day after this 'news' broke:
The financial markets have not had a chance to react. This is nothing like a drug company being forced to pull a major product (another false analogy). Nobody...not me (admittedly), and certainly not you...will know the true fallout of this for a few years. Though we should have indicators within one year. If you're right then the financial markets won't react. If other people are right and this costs Canon sales and revenue, the markets will react.

Yes, anything can happen. In much the same way you can be hit by lightning tomorrow. The probability of either happening is miniscule. Come back in a year and tell me 'told you so' when Canon has fallen to #2 in global ILC market share. I'm not going to hold my breath.
If Canon holds to this decision long enough then I won't be around this forum to tell you "I told you so." I'll simply be on another mount, in another forum.

The complaints about Canon's poor low ISO DR on this forum and others were far more extensive, with far more complainers than we've seen over this issue, yet still that had no effect on Canon's bottom line.
No, there were not far more DR complainers. There were more persistent complainers. This is being discussed pretty heavily across photography related social media, and it's just a few days old. One difference between this and DR is that nobody will sit around arguing the impact or technical nature of 3rd party lens support, year after year, while debating whether to stay or leave. They will simply leave if RF does not have the lenses they need at prices they can afford.

Furthermore: that argument of yours had some merit when the DR gap was several years old and yet there had been no negative shift in marketshare. It has zero merit with breaking news which has not had a chance to ripple across a year of sales. I'll admit that right now the people complaining only have indicators as to how the market will react over time. But you don't even have that. Just your normalcy bias that 'everything is fine' while you hand wave the negative indicators.

The reality is different. You believe this is a bigger issue than DR because it apparently matters to you.
This is a bigger issue because it touches a heck of a lot more people, scenarios, budgets, etc. than ever cared about DR.

You and a few people you know are complaining about this. Me and a few people I know don't care. How many people feel the way either of us does about this issue? I have no idea, and neither do you.
The Northrups have 80k views and 1,700 comments in one day after releasing a video about this. Care to guess how many of the comments are positive about this move from Canon? But it's 'just a few people', right?

Now search YouTube for "Canon 3rd party lenses." See all those frowns? Click each video and read the comments. See the negativity? There were videos that talked about DR, but never an explosion of them, all terribly negative, in a couple days.

But it's just a few people though, nothing to worry about. Clearly all these negative comments are not an indicator that this could be a very bad move, right?

Who is more likely to be better able to estimate that for the global ILC, me, or Canon?
Because companies never become arrogant or blind to how the market will react. No, companies never make mistakes.

All that would fix is your angst. The business case for not doing so is very clear. I know you don't understand it, but Canon does and that's why they have not licensed the mount.
The 'business case' is the age old mistake of the #1 company assuming they can get away with soaking customers because they 'control the market.' What's funny is that when I got into photography, I had that impression of Nikon. It looked like Nikon thought they could charge more while offering fewer features simply because they were Nikon. It cost them. Now Canon is committing the same fallacy you are. We'll see if it works out any better for them than any of the other market leaders who fell before.
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
I didn't misunderstand anything. It was a silly and false analogy. Businesses are not static physical objects. Canon's business wisdom is not a physical constant. Blocking out 3rd party lens manufacturers is not 'a coin flip just like all the past ones.' You've mocked other people in this thread for their arguments and logic, but that was one of the silliest things posted in this thread, period.
Since the coin was being flipped, it was not a static physical object, it was a moving physical object. So was the Titanic, which was your analogy. But I bet you think that is not silly, right? :rolleyes:

Really no point in responding to the rest of your repetition. Time will tell which of us is correct, and if you're not around to see it because you've switched to another brand and another forum over this Titanic-killing iceberg of an issue, I will somehow manage to contain my disappointment.
Upvote 0


Love, joy, and peace to all of good will.
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
The Ozarks
Every rumor here has not been true. And 3rd party manufacturers make and sell apple parts and accessories.
I had no idea there were 3rd party lens makers for Apple cameras, aside from clip on add-ons that do not require any proprietary disclosures from Apple.

As far as accessories go, just about any strap, case, screen protector manufacturer makes a product for Canon. No input is required from Canon to make them. In other words, Canon does not have to go to those factories to show them how Canon does it. Canon doesn't have to help them beat Canon.
Upvote 0