Opinion: Canon’s mounting woes

[snappy604]

That's hilarious considering you claimed you had outgrown the M50, and are upset that you couldn't use the EF-M lenses on an RF body enough to waste all this time here on your posting crusade. We all know that EF lenses are accepted to work best on an RF body and the quality of a lens is more important than the body. Then again, you literarily have never noticed how many Fuji X lenses are back ordered or require special ordering. I'm not sure if it's ignorance from someone that claims that financial data is an unimportant strawman's arguments and doesn't seem to know about Sony's abandoned products or his own strawman argument.

Not sure what Fuji's lens issues have to do with a discussion on what we'd hoped to see with RF lenses.

I think most of us get that other vendors don't have a perfect solution either.. fairly sure sony, nikon and fuji forums have all sorts of gripes on what could be improved or desired within their line. They're not perfect, neither is Canon. Are there things we wish to see improve or get better yes.. doesn't mean we don't enjoy the products we have.. . but maybe wish something were better. End users different folks will have different needs/desires.

Looking to see an area improve doesn't mean we don't like a lot of things Canon does do, I'm pretty happy with my R5 and happy to see how long they continued to tinker with the firmware to improve it. I did think the overheating issue was overblown, I think the autofocus is pretty good and a big improvement from my previous SLRs.. love the ergonomics and the consistent menus etc and that the R5 manages to work well with all sorts of different styles.. the electronic view finder is top notch.. but there are areas where things could improve.. and 3rd party lens support is one for me and for others

Maybe Canon does something, maybe they don't.. but its less likely if folks don't ask.

 

[Richard CN]

What's remarkable is the fact that people feel the need for entitlement for a company to run a business the way they desire.

What a strange way to put this.

I wouldn't normally weigh in on a comment like this but I'll have a go at it. No one is saying we are entitled, but the industry as a whole is changing, sans Canon. Canon is the market leader, yes. That's like saying the band playing on the Titanic as it sank had the best audience on the ship. Canon's CMOS sensor fabs were producing over 10 million sensors a year, now they only need to do 3 million. Let's just arrange those deckchairs a bit more shall we?

The more people discuss it openly and publically the more a company such as Canon will consider doing something different.

The only thing I'm entitled to (and others) is having an opinion on the matter.

 

[Richard CN]

Can you provide some detail on the issues of UWA lenses with adaptors? I haven't heard of this before.

I'll have to find it.

it has to do with focal plane alignment - there are more surfaces and less precision because you have an adapter in the middle so if your mount is slightly out of alignment, and your adapter is out of alignment and adds to that error it can certainly cause issues, as the lens plane of focus will be tilted slightly with respect to the sensor plane.

 

[EricN]

Not sure what Fuji's lens issues have to do with a discussion on what we'd hoped to see with RF lenses.​

I think most of us get that other vendors don't have a perfect solution either.. fairly sure sony, nikon and fuji forums have all sorts of gripes on what could be improved or desired within their line. They're not perfect, neither is Canon. Are there things we wish to see improve or get better yes.. doesn't mean we don't enjoy the products we have.. . but maybe wish something were better. End users different folks will have different needs/desires.

Looking to see an area improve doesn't mean we don't like a lot of things Canon does do, I'm pretty happy with my R5 and happy to see how long they continued to tinker with the firmware to improve it. I did think the overheating issue was overblown, I think the autofocus is pretty good and a big improvement from my previous SLRs.. love the ergonomics and the consistent menus etc and that the R5 manages to work well with all sorts of different styles.. the electronic view finder is top notch.. but there are areas where things could improve.. and 3rd party lens support is one for me and for others

Maybe Canon does something, maybe they don't.. but its less likely if folks don't ask.

you should read some earlier comments from @ReflexVE to understand.

I think it's unlikely anyone capable of changing Canon's policy reads this. There would be more chance of success if:

1. you posted on one of Canon's official message boards.
2. Discuss it with some, if not all Explorers of Light
3. Contact B&H, Adorama, Amazon, et al. and discuss it with them.
4. Hire a Japanese translator and write a letter discussing it to send to as many of these people (although I believe there are English speakers) as you can:

https://craft.co/canon/executives#:~:text=Canon's%20Chairman%20%26%20CEO%20is%20Fujio,Fujio%20Mitarai%20and%2025%20others.

​

but hey, if you want to waste time, it's ok​

 

[David - Sydney]

What's remarkable is the fact that people feel the need for entitlement for a company to run a business the way they desire. It used to be the case that if you don't like a brand you wouldn't buy it again and would move elsewhere.

But today the unhappy must let the rest of us know exactly how they feel, sorta like that screaming kid in the corner of the classroom.

Depends on monopoly power though. The recent Qantas SNAFUs demonstrate that there is also a social contract with consumers and they will vote with their dollars if the service is poor enough.

I am certainly not saying that Canon = Qantas as Qantas has to pass the pub test at the end of the day.

 

[EricN]

not quite sure what you mean here.. I only bought the R5 body because the EF lenses I had (investment) would work. I even tested ahead that my key Sigma EF lenses (20mm and 35 mm ART primes and 150-600C) would work on this (and some native canon lenses like 180L macro).. or it'd have been a no go. Canon has had a large array of 3rd party lenses, and they do work via EF adapter, so while it was wrong, it is a fairly natural assumption that they'd likely continue.. didn't quite expect them to be as tight on control beyond first year or two, especially how wishy washy their answers were and still are.

Is it end of world? Will I stop using Canon right away? No, but it certainly doesn't endear a long time customer of theirs to them (D60 (not 60D, but the 6 megapixel original SLR), 40D, 7D, 80D, R5.. many G series etc) and a bunch of lenses with this behaviour. I do have 1 RF lens (24-70 2.8L), but unsure if I'll continue investing further unless I see a change. Not a threat or whine, but just a reality that I don't wish to further continue if options don't appear (but will enjoy what I have). The main reason I went Canon for so long was precisely because they seemed open to 3rd party lenses and even firmware (magic lantern was a huge motivation).

Adapter works fine, native mount is easier to deal with than constantly changing out adapters.

I get it is a business decision, and I get I'm not likely their main base... but I am part of a fair # of users... and frankly except for edge cases (action, macro, wildlife etc), most of the camera industry is disappearing to phones... alienating some of their longer term customers to protect some segments that may disappear anyway seems counter-intuitive... but as a member indicates, it's a business, they have the figures and they make the choices.. just like we do whether to spend there or not. The R5 + the RF 24-70L 2.8 was about $10k CAD at time.. not a small amount to sneeze at.

I didn't mean anyone specifically.

 

[David - Sydney]

I really dig the Sigma 20mm 1.4Art.. its superb for taking band pictures in low light. Surprisingly low distortion if you keep it mostly level.

Canon has served Astro in past.. even some dedicated bodies, but it is pretty niche.. though again one of the things that endeared me to the Canon line in past. Most folks

Canon have had their "a" bodies but not currently. It does seem strange not to offer it eg in R6iia or R5a. It should be a simple option to produce.

Not so much on the lens side of things. EF8-15/4 is great fun but there hasn't been a good wide/fast prime from Canon. The EF14mm wasn't very good and expensive and discontinued a long time ago. Others = ?

 

[David - Sydney]

But not many photographers do only a single type of photography, and for me it's about crop sensor shooting and the system there is basically a disaster compared to the competition.

Not sure what you mean by "crop sensor shooting"... are you only talking about high pixel density ie pixels on duck for telephoto?
The R7 has you covered plus plenty of big whites (or the RF100-400 or RF600/11 or RF800/11 on the cheaper side + TCs).
Canon doesn't have a good mid-priced telephoto range (yet!) but there is time.
Macro working distance?
What else is "crop sensor shooting"?

 

[David - Sydney]

Earlier I was with a Canon user who was using an R6 with an adapted Sigma 35mm f1.4 Art and it was terribly front heavy. My point about the weight is perfectly valid, half as light is not a small amount.

I am amazed how big and heavy the Sigma 20/1.4 is and is still front heavy on my R5... Except for maybe the Z9/R3, how would be more balanced especially as Sony bodies are smaller/lighter in general? The adaptor doesn't make that much of a difference for these big/heavy Sigma lenses.

 

[neuroanatomist]

What else is "crop sensor shooting"?

Some people simply prefer APS-C sensors. In some cases, it’s because the whole kit can be smaller/lighter. Personally, that’s why I have the M6II and M lenses. In other cases, it’s because they think APS-C offers advantages other than smaller size and/or lower system cost (which means that unless they’re focal length limited, they don’t understand the impact of sensor size). Although to be fair, if you’re shooting mainly in bright light, the IQ advantages of FF aren’t huge.

 

[David - Sydney]

Maybe Canon does something, maybe they don't.. but its less likely if folks don't ask.

"folks" can make suggestions directly to Canon's support pages. Makes more sense than a discussion on an internet forum!

The "folks" that Canon listens to are the professionals/ambassador etc. They will have direct feedback and it is unlikely that they will be complaining about 3rd party lens choices.
Sure there will be reviewers making their own assessments, driving their own agendas and using clickbait articles/podcasts to support their own pockets.
That said, Canon certainly reacted to the R5's overblown overheating teapot quickly but did so decisively in different updates for the 3 video modes affected.

 

[snappy604]

you should read some earlier comments from @ReflexVE to understand.

I think it's unlikely anyone capable of changing Canon's policy reads this. There would be more chance of success if:

1. you posted on one of Canon's official message boards.
2. Discuss it with some, if not all Explorers of Light
3. Contact B&H, Adorama, Amazon, et al. and discuss it with them.
4. Hire a Japanese translator and write a letter discussing it to send to as many of these people (although I believe there are English speakers) as you can:

https://craft.co/canon/executives#:~:text=Canon's%20Chairman%20%26%20CEO%20is%20Fujio,Fujio%20Mitarai%20and%2025%20others.

​

but hey, if you want to waste time, it's ok​

fair, maybe I missed something reading the chat.

I don't mind having a chat here.. it was even in the article title .. OPINION... and yes it's ok to have one, with the various spectrums.

 

[David - Sydney]

No one is saying we are entitled, but the industry as a whole is changing, sans Canon. Canon is the market leader, yes. That's like saying the band playing on the Titanic as it sank had the best audience on the ship. Canon's CMOS sensor fabs were producing over 10 million sensors a year, now they only need to do 3 million. Let's just arrange those deckchairs a bit more shall we?

To suggest that Canon is not changing strategy with the changing market conditions but that Sony and Nikon are is misleading. Clearly Canon has removed the EF-M line, discontinued most of the EF lenses and gone all in for R mount over a 5 year period.
After Magic Lantern showed what could actually be done on the 5Diii, the release of the R5 was quite revolutionary and similar to the 5Dii in that sense. Its capabilities redefined what a hybrid camera could do and surprised (annoyed) many.

To say that the industry is changing but not Canon because it hasn't allowed open access (or very limited licensed access) to 3rd party RF lenses is not looking at the bigger picture.

Apple is the market leader for phones in profit not volume. They aren't bleeding edge in many ways but they work together within their walled eco-system. Users accept that limitation for the benefits of compatibility and it has been a good strategy for them.

 

[David - Sydney]

I really dig the Sigma 20mm 1.4Art.. its superb for taking band pictures in low light. Surprisingly low distortion if you keep it mostly level.

Canon has served Astro in past.. even some dedicated bodies, but it is pretty niche.. though again one of the things that endeared me to the Canon line in past. Most folks

Canon have had their "a" bodies but not currently. It does seem strange not to offer it eg in R6iia or R5a. It should be a simple variant to sell albeit in small volumes.

Not so much astro on the lens side of things. EF8-15/4 is great fun but there hasn't been a good wide/fast prime from Canon. The EF14mm wasn't very good and expensive and was discontinued a long time ago. Others = ? The best is probably the RF15-35/2.8 but that has a hefty sticker price.

 

[snappy604]

"folks" can make suggestions directly to Canon's support pages. Makes more sense than a discussion on an internet forum!

The "folks" that Canon listens to are the professionals/ambassador etc. They will have direct feedback and it is unlikely that they will be complaining about 3rd party lens choices.
Sure there will be reviewers making their own assessments, driving their own agendas and using clickbait articles/podcasts to support their own pockets.
That said, Canon certainly reacted to the R5's overblown overheating teapot quickly but did so decisively in different updates for the 3 video modes affected.

they did react quickly to that funny enough.. and I thought it was a non-issue.. I thought it odd people would get worked up on non-video dedicated setup with bleeding edge 8k, a high bit recording codec overheating, esp given it's also weather sealed and not specifically designed dissipate heat. Maybe I'm too used to PC game builds to think it'd be anything but that Anyways, it does show they do pay attention sometimes.

 

[snappy604]

To suggest that Canon is not changing strategy with the changing market conditions but that Sony and Nikon are is misleading. Clearly Canon has removed the EF-M line, discontinued most of the EF lenses and gone all in for R mount over a 5 year period.
After Magic Lantern showed what could actually be done on the 5Diii, the release of the R5 was quite revolutionary and similar to the 5Dii in that sense. Its capabilities redefined what a hybrid camera could do and surprised (annoyed) many.

To say that the industry is changing but not Canon because it hasn't allowed open access (or very limited licensed access) to 3rd party RF lenses is not looking at the bigger picture.

Apple is the market leader for phones in profit not volume. They aren't bleeding edge in many ways but they work together within their walled eco-system. Users accept that limitation for the benefits of compatibility and it has been a good strategy for them.

and funny enough.. why I left apple years ago and won't go back.. but yep, it does work for them. In my case I didn't have an investment so I walked away.. same with the adobe ecosystem. Some things are harder than others, but not impossible.

 

[David - Sydney]

Some people simply prefer APS-C sensors. In some cases, it’s because the whole kit can be smaller/lighter. Personally, that’s why I have the M6II and M lenses. In other cases, it’s because they think APS-C offers advantages other than smaller size and/or lower system cost (which means that unless they’re focal length limited, they don’t understand the impact of sensor size). Although to be fair, if you’re shooting mainly in bright light, the IQ advantages of FF aren’t huge.

My RP is pretty small and light (and almost identical to the R8) so not always true but yes in general.
RP 485g 132.5 x 85.0 x 70.0mm
R8 461g 133 x 86 x 70 mm

The EF-M systems was a perfect example specifically for that market segment.

It used to be that APS-C vs FF sensor cost was significant but it looks like BSI/stacked makes a much bigger cost difference these days given the top down implementation of bodies using them. Unfortunately, I don't have cost estimates but I am sure they are out there somewhere in the interweb. It would depend on Canon's fab capabilities as well given (as Craig mentions) Canon only needs a third of the sensors that they used to make.

I also get the pixel density issue from a pure cost perspective as the longer (brighter) lenses add up quickly (RF600/11 and RF800/11 aside).

To just like "crop" does seem to be an outdated notion now. Lot more options to consider these days.

 

[snappy604]

I am amazed how big and heavy the Sigma 20/1.4 is and is still front heavy on my R5... Except for maybe the Z9/R3, how would be more balanced especially as Sony bodies are smaller/lighter in general? The adaptor doesn't make that much of a difference for these big/heavy Sigma lenses.

I use the Sigma 20/1.4... agree it's heavy, but don't find the balance off.. maybe it's because I hold the body with 1 hand and the lense with the other. It's really handy for band shots where I'm right up front and don't have a lot of room to work with. It has low distortion, the wide angle captures what I need (esp with the R5's high megapixel allowing crop), the wide angle gives just enough depth of field at 1.4 and the high ISO of the R5.. I can get 1/100th speed in some very low light situations and as much as 1/400th in a place with decent lighting. Along with the good FPS I can capture energetic bands quite well.

 

[neuroanatomist]

My RP is pretty small and light (and almost identical to the R8) so not always true but yes in general.
RP 485g 132.5 x 85.0 x 70.0mm
R8 461g 133 x 86 x 70 mm

The EF-M systems was a perfect example specifically for that market segment.

The point is the whole kit – body + lenses. My R8 isn’t that much bigger than my M6II. But UWA and standard zooms for FF are much bigger than the EF-M lenses, for example.

 

[snappy604]

Canon have had their "a" bodies but not currently. It does seem strange not to offer it eg in R6iia or R5a. It should be a simple variant to sell albeit in small volumes.

Not so much astro on the lens side of things. EF8-15/4 is great fun but there hasn't been a good wide/fast prime from Canon. The EF14mm wasn't very good and expensive and was discontinued a long time ago. Others = ? The best is probably the RF15-35/2.8 but that has a hefty sticker price.

Yeah hard to beat the sigma primes.. quite good. And this really reinforces the 3rd party choices for RF mount, its not just cost (though it is a part). . yes we can use adapter (have we beaten that to death yet?) but there are reasons to go to native RF.. esp if it could be properly licensed out by Canon.

and while I don't do astro, it would be cool if they released a new body with the support.. I hear you, but it's even a smaller niche... but also partially why I went Canon years ago.. that they used to do these kinds of things was phenomenal...