Opinion: Canon’s mounting woes

[EricN]

No one in this thread can explain why Canon's decisions are good for us, the photographers

One way it's good for us is that stores can keep more of Canon's lenses in stock once Canon has produced enough of each lens, it should allow lenses to stay in stock more consistently. If you're patient and willing to use the adapter and ef/ef-s lenses until the rf lens you want is available, I think there is nothing to complain about. For people switching from ef-m to rf nobody forced you to switch before lenses you wanted were available.

 

[Cochese]

Personally, I think Canon is mostly being bullish on their mount until they can flesh out their lens lineup, specifically so nobody can get a 1up on them. Which is part of the reason they\'re doing all kinds of random lenses that are out of the ordinary

 

[neuroanatomist]

Canon has only 2 choices: do nothing and lets competition to take over(right now), or let some lens for Sigma Tamron Samyang&CN manufactures to relief the situation.

Let the competition take over (right now)? Lol. Why do people make such asinine claims?

 

[neuroanatomist]

This is really the crux of it. I used to be an engineer for Microsoft. Since Windows 8 they have undeniably screwed up over and over, there has not been a universally agreed upon great operating system since Win7. And yet they maintain around 80-95% of the market depending on what one chooses to classify as a PC.

I thought you weren’t talking about market share. You objected when I brought it up, and said it was irrelevant. Now market share is the crux of it? Make up your mind.

Why should any of us care about what makes sense for Canon?

You can try to understand what’s going on around you, or you can stick your head in the sand. If the latter works for you, great.

I would suggest no one make gear buying decisions based on what benefits Canon. But what makes sense to Canon determines what gear they’ll make available to us. The latter is something many people on this forum care about, which is why the former matters.

But what I will never understand is when the customers respond to the boot on their neck with "Yes daddy, please more!"

Is that what anyone who buys Canon gear or a Microsoft software product is doing? After all, the only way people really get to ‘vote’ in this situation is with their wallet. If you use MS software, you’re a hypocrite.

Also, it appears you’re conflating explaining a decision with condoning that decision. They’re not the same.

I'm just disappointed that after such a great intro to the system it became clear that maintaining my business was not a priority. Which is fine, it's their choice, but of course I'm disappointed.

LOL. Maintaining any one individual as a customer is not the priority of any major corporation. Anyone who thinks it is or should be is daft.

You’re welcome to be disappointed, and to express that feeling. Hopefully it’s apparent that just as you don’t care what’s best for Canon, they don’t care what’s best for you. So you switched to Fuji, and Canon made decisions that keep them dominating the market. As you said initially, win/win.

Except that for someone who ‘won’, you seem awfully bitter about it.

 

[rbr]

Canon is really lacking on the wide end for RF glass. I did try the RF 14-35 f4L and wanted to like it but found it to be absolutely terrible for my uses and I would never want to own one or use one at any price point. I would love to see the Sigma ART DG DN lenses in RF mount. Right now I continue to use the wonderful Sigma DG HSM ART lenses in EF mount with an adapter.

 

[ReflexVE]

One way it's good for us is that stores can keep more of Canon's lenses in stock once Canon has produced enough of each lens, it should allow lenses to stay in stock more consistently. If you're patient and willing to use the adapter and ef/ef-s lenses until the rf lens you want is available, I think there is nothing to complain about. For people switching from ef-m to rf nobody forced you to switch before lenses you wanted were available.

I've literally never had a problem getting a lens for any manufacturer unless it is the moment of launch. This is a non-issue. And yes, nobody forces anyone to switch, but on the flip side the M50 is a good starter camera and I outgrew it two years after I got it in 2018. Thank god I didn't wait for RF-S to both arrive and be fleshed out before switching (in my case to a more mature system). Would have missed a ton of stuff if I had.

 

[John Wilde]

Canon forecasts that they will sell 2.9 million interchangeable lens cameras this year, for a market share of (2.9/5.85) of almost 50%. They forecast that their camera-only revenue will be +11.6% compared to last year.

This issue gets a lot of attention on the internet, but doesn't appear to be impacting sales.

 

[ReflexVE]

I thought you weren’t talking about market share. You objected when I brought it up, and said it was irrelevant. Now market share is the crux of it? Make up your mind.


You can try to understand what’s going on around you, or you can stick your head in the sand. If the latter works for you, great.

I would suggest no one make gear buying decisions based on what benefits Canon. But what makes sense to Canon determines what gear they’ll make available to us. The latter is something many people on this forum care about, which is why the former matters.


Is that what anyone who buys Canon gear or a Microsoft software product is doing? After all, the only way people really get to ‘vote’ in this situation is with their wallet. If you use MS software, you’re a hypocrite.

Also, it appears you’re conflating explaining a decision with condoning that decision. They’re not the same.


LOL. Maintaining any one individual as a customer is not the priority of any major corporation. Anyone who thinks it is or should be is daft.

You’re welcome to be disappointed, and to express that feeling. Hopefully it’s apparent that just as you don’t care what’s best for Canon, they don’t care what’s best for you. So you switched to Fuji, and Canon made decisions that keep them dominating the market. As you said initially, win/win.

Except that for someone who ‘won’, you seem awfully bitter about it.

1) I am addressing why Canon isn't going anywhere despite the mistakes they make. That is all. And responding to the original article author in support of his further thoughts on the topic. Again, I know how to stay on topic, you should try it sometime.

2) I'm not bitter. I'm disappointed. I shouldn't have had to switch. A better company would have created paths for people like me. If there is any bitterness at all it's that perhaps I wasted my time starting with Canon rather than Fuji or Sony. Not because Canon makes bad cameras of course, but because they don't seem to respect their users. When I first bought my M50 a professional friend of mine warned me to go Sony or Fuji and I ignored them because the M50 seemed like such a good deal. And it was...so long as it's the only camera you ever wanted. Once I had to switch I had to switch everything since, well, EF-M lenses were abandoned. When I did make the switch I asked that friend their opinion and they said if I preferred crop to go Fuji, if I preferred FF go Sony and neither would ever abandon me without options. They were correct.

 

[ReflexVE]

Canon forecasts that they will sell 2.9 million interchangeable lens cameras this year, for a market share of (2.9/5.85) of almost 50%. They forecast that their camera-only revenue will be +11.6% compared to last year.

This issue gets a lot of attention on the internet, but doesn't appear to be impacting sales.

There's no real way to know that though, like most big corps they get a lot of things right and some things wrong. We can't know what the hypothetical sales would be had they made a different choice. As of now, at least for me, I can't recommend RF mount cameras to the people who ask me due to the lens lineup (at least the bodies now have reasonable top to bottom options). In a couple more years, maybe.

 

[neuroanatomist]

This issue gets a lot of attention on the internet, but doesn't appear to be impacting sales.

Exactly. Tempest in a teapot.

 

[neuroanatomist]

2) I'm not bitter. I'm disappointed. I shouldn't have had to switch. A better company would have created paths for people like me. If there is any bitterness at all it's that perhaps I wasted my time starting with Canon rather than Fuji or Sony. Not because Canon makes bad cameras of course, but because they don't seem to respect their users. When I first bought my M50 a professional friend of mine warned me to go Sony or Fuji and I ignored them because the M50 seemed like such a good deal. And it was...so long as it's the only camera you ever wanted. Once I had to switch I had to switch everything since, well, EF-M lenses were abandoned. When I did make the switch I asked that friend their opinion and they said if I preferred crop to go Fuji, if I preferred FF go Sony and neither would ever abandon me without options. They were correct.

You should’ve done your research before hand, or listened to your friend. It’s been the case for years that anyone who is committed to APS-C, as you seem to be, should go with Fuji. Canon, Nikon and Sony have focused mainly on FF, with relatively limited options for APS-C users looking for higher-end gear. Fuji is intentionally targeting smaller markets where the big three aren’t playing – high-end APS-C and MF.

From Canon’s perspective, it’s been clear for years that they see customers’ main upgrade path as FF. The 7-series DSLRs had the longest update cycle, the 90D effectively replaced the 7DII, there were only 8 EF-M lenses and most are slow zooms, there was no M5II, etc.

It seems to be your contention that we shouldn’t care about what matters to Canon, but if you had bothered to do so initially, you’d have started with Fuji and perhaps not have ‘wasted your time’ with Canon.

I’m not sure why you’re still wasting time discussing Canon here on CR, but I’ve wasted enough time replying to you.

 

[esglord]

Microsoft was once fined €731M for not allowing browser choice on Windows. The law fights against monopolies despite what some here mistakenly seem to think is reasonable.

True, and maybe a bad example on my part, but Microsoft Windows had over 90% of the market share at that time whereas canon has the largest market share in interchangeable lens cameras but far from a monopoly.

 

[Jayk0607]

This is really the crux of it. I used to be an engineer for Microsoft. Since Windows 8 they have undeniably screwed up over and over, there has not been a universally agreed upon great operating system since Win7. And yet they maintain around 80-95% of the market depending on what one chooses to classify as a PC. They do this despite more restrictive rules on third parties (sound familiar?). They do this despite repeatedly messing with the UI in ways that make it difficult for existing users. They do it despite limiting the hardware severely for the latest releases like Win11 and (soon) Win12. They do juuuuuust enough right that customers accept the drawbacks to stay with what they know.

I think comparing OS to camera is little different. Camera user or entity can fairly easily swap to another manufacturer vs it's harder for businesses (big market share for MS) to change OS. In fact, there is no real alternative OS for big corporation, as a lot of the tools they use are not offered in other OS. And I believe enterprise is big for MS.

Market leaders of that size are very tough to dethrone, regardless of how customer unfriendly they are. That does not validate their decisions. No one in this thread can explain why Canon's decisions are good for us, the photographers. All they are doing is explaining why they believe it makes sense for Canon. Why should any of us care about what makes sense for Canon? I want to take great photos. As a crop shooter, they simply don't offer a competitive product anymore unless I want to pair a lower end body (R7) with a lens costing as much or more than the body and with size/weight to match. That's a ridiculous proposition given that Fuji and Sony both offer more both with the bodies and the lenses natively, plus have an open ecosystem on the latter.

There is no explanation to do from consumer perspective. I can pick on just about any company and what I don't like about it and ask why that's not good for consumers. People talk about why it's good for Canon, because it's a business. It helps them to protect their IP and focus on their product and help them eliminate unnecessary overhead costs. Ultimately this can benefit consumers.

I think you can still take great photos with R7 and what Canon offers. All modern cameras and lenses are very capable.

 

[EricN]

Personally, I think Canon is mostly being bullish on their mount until they can flesh out their lens lineup, specifically so nobody can get a 1up on them. Which is part of the reason they\'re doing all kinds of random lenses that are out of the ordinary

It's a reasonable guess about what they've been doing.

 

[EricN]

Canon is really lacking on the wide end for RF glass. I did try the RF 14-35 f4L and wanted to like it but found it to be absolutely terrible for my uses and I would never want to own one or use one at any price point. I would love to see the Sigma ART DG DN lenses in RF mount. Right now I continue to use the wonderful Sigma DG HSM ART lenses in EF mount with an adapter.

I haven't used the RF 14-34 F/4L. What didn't you like about it?

 

[snappy604]

I'm the cheesed camp with Canon's choices here. Will I jump? sadly no, as others have mentioned, once someone is dominant in an area and folks have an investment, its not easy/desirable to jump, but it doesn't mean you can't be annoyed with the choices.

I still have and use a bunch of Sigma EF lenses with an adapter and they are good and work fine, but wish they were allowed native RF.

It was only because of the backwards comparability with EF that I continued with Canon. If I didn't have that investment already, with the current competition I'd have gone in a different direction. Most of the other major players take fantastic photos as well. Doesn't mean I'm not happy with my R5 and it doesn't mean I'm going to jump ship (already invested).

Yes it is their prerogative, but doesn't mean I'm not cheesed about them limiting 3rd parties developing native or reverse engineered lenses. I like to mix my lens sources, some native, some 3rd party.

I hope they do watch this forum and these kinds of discussions.

 

[EricN]

I've literally never had a problem getting a lens for any manufacturer unless it is the moment of launch. This is a non-issue. And yes, nobody forces anyone to switch, but on the flip side the M50 is a good starter camera and I outgrew it two years after I got it in 2018. Thank god I didn't wait for RF-S to both arrive and be fleshed out before switching (in my case to a more mature system). Would have missed a ton of stuff if I had.

I'm literally often seeing things I want out of stock. It must be something to do with what your taste (or lack of) in lenses.

Edit: I've literally taken a look at Fuji X mount lenses on B&H There's quite a few lenses that are out of stock as well as even more that are special order only. These are both by Fuji and third-party manufacturers.

 

[Antono Refa]

Microsoft software, Adobe software etc etc etc all not allowed on Apple? Bose headphones etc not working either?

The Apple II series was open. Everyone could make cards for those, and people opened their Apple IIs and installed whatever HW they bought.
Then the policy changed with the Mac. If a customer opened it to add RAM, the warranty was voided. Which is why I bought PCs with Windows. Sure, if I broke my computer adding RAM or replacing a failed HDD I would have to pay a technician to fix it, but that's the way I like it.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I'm literally often seeing things I want out of stock. It must be something to do with what your taste (or lack of) in lenses.

Maybe he’s never heard of the Fuji X100V, which launched in early 2020 at an MSRP of $1400, but is so hard to find now that it’s selling for >$2K, even used.

Wait, forget about that. We’re talking about lenses and that’s a camera body. Totally off topic and not at all relevant to the discussion.

 

[EricN]

I’m not sure why you’re still wasting time discussing Canon here on CR, but I’ve wasted enough time replying to you.

I figured it would be like that yesterday.