Canon was again asked during CP+ about third-party support for the RF mount. They must be tired of answering these sorts of questions, but hey, if people are asking the question, there must be demand. Or they are just whining like I have been.
I’m hoping for a 3rd party 1:1 200-ish mm macro with AF, but only it it outperforms my EF180L. I don’t have any other wishes for lenses, just for V1 sized RF bodiesThe Canon speak? They are coming.
Why they aren't here yet? A mix of licensing fees, mount conversions and manufacturing capabilities of the third-party? I'm only guessing.
Obviously Canon is part of the equation, but I doubt they're the entire reason we don't have them yet.
Well many of us simply want better versions of our EF mount lenses. All I wanted was a new version of the 50 1.4 which is my most used lens over the last decade and still works great as long as I use it at f2.5 or higher. There isn't an RF equivalent of my EF lenses that I need to buy aside from that 50 and I can't talk about the latest Canon attempt without cursing and raging.View attachment 222747
I had never looked at the numbers, but a guy on Facebook did the numbers. (I can't confirm the accuracy, but I'm sure it's close if not bang on)
Sure we have EF, but I think people want their core lenses with an RF mount.
People out of touch with reality often see things that aren’t real.…I could see a ton of other people doing it because this is just nonsense already.
People out of touch with reality often see things that aren’t real.
To clarify, this is reality:
![]()
Canon is Number 1 – Again and Again
Canon is once again number one in the industry, selling more ILCs (interchangeable lens cameras) than any other manufacturer. Canon has held this rank since 200www.canonrumors.com
Yeah, and it’s because of @Richard CR and the way he constantly praises that little gem of a camera.Ya, but they only sell R100s and it skews the numbers!
More than that, Canon representatives, and especially this person have a beautiful skill to say nothing by saying something. I'm curious if he heard what he said and how pathetic it was. He'd better stay silent.Canon never comes out and directly states something...
Yeah, and it’s because of @Richard CR and the way he constantly praises that little gem of a camera.
"that little gem of a camera"Yeah, and it’s because of @Richard CR and the way he constantly praises that little gem of a camera.
Seriously, though, it’s evident from the average unit price of MILCs ($800) that unit sales remain driven by APS-C bodies.
More than that, Canon representatives, and especially this person have a beautiful skill to say nothing by saying something. I'm curious if he heard what he said and how pathetic it was. He'd better stay silent.
In all seriousness, I sometimes wonder if the demise of the M format was due in part to the fact some M devices did in fact "hit the APS-C lineup correctly"...I know both of my daughters think so.If they hit the APS-C lineup correctly... Up goes the marketshare
That said... I'd buy the sigma 300-600 immediately.
That's the job of a business executive.More than that, Canon representatives, and especially this person have a beautiful skill to say nothing by saying something.