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

[HMC11]

I don't like this at all. The RF mount has been out since 2018 (when the EOS-R was released) and yet we still don't have a full set of matching, pro quality RF primes. The absence of third party glass has really become apparent with RF. It's fine if Canon wants to restrict the RF mount, it's their patent and they can do with it what they wish, but if you're going to keep others from manufacturing lenses for your cameras, then you should at least have a full set of lenses available for consumers to purchase. I can only imagine that the reason they're keeping 3rd parties from selling RF glass at this stage, is because Canon hasn't finished their full lens lineup yet and they don't want customers stocking up on 3rd party glass over Canon glass. People tend to invest in one brand and stick to it. So if new customers flock to Sigma for their RF needs, due to the lack of available Canon glass, they'll likely continue to purchase matching Sigma glass from that point on.

I guess Canon probably think they had time to develop the set of pro quality primes as EF equivalents can be adapted easily and perform at least as well on EF bodies. The supply chain issues did not help either. However, your point is well taken. The slew of fast RF primes patents that have been coming out seems to indicate that they are, in fact, looking to address it.

 

[mxwphoto]

Every rumor here has not been true. And 3rd party manufacturers make and sell apple parts and accessories.

My whole point is that Canon's actions mirror Apple's in that they prefer the walled garden approach with first party products only, and that it seems to have been quite beneficial and profitable thus far.

One can find plenty of accessories for Canon cameras as well like lens hoods, flashes , body skins, batteries, etc etc all without official licensing from Canon just like with Apple.

Lenses are integral to the camera so it is not an accessory, it is the other half of the product. That is like the equivalent of someone manufacturing a different camera module or screen for the iphone without Apple's consent.

And from software example side, rather than claiming appstore allows 3rd party developers, it is more akin to a 3rd party making addon code that fundamentally replaces a piece of the OS, which I am sure Apple would not allow for.

Also, there is a certain perceived cache to having an Apple product because it is expensive and "exclusive", so the same translate to things like the L primes.

With Sony and 3rd party lenses, yes there is AF compatibility but there are a string of asterisks like the change in focus box size and modes, fps, etc etc... So while I am an Android guy, I like my camera to just work and function without worrying about all the caveats 3rd party lenses bring with.

 

[AlanF]

I remember hearing phrase- Pharma companies exist to make profit from selling drugs and not to improve health of their consumers.

I have personal experience of working with several ethical Pharma companies and seen first hand that they generally try to improve health and make a healthy profit. There are several exceptions of course, some terrible, who just have a profit interest and do everything to exploit the system, and the opposite AstraZeneca who sold their COVID vaccine on a not-for-profit basis. I know the owner of an important Indian pharma company who fought successfully like a tiger to force the sale of HIV drugs cheaply to Africa and other areas that could not afford the high prices in the wealthy countries.

 

[David - Sydney]

In a competitive market this is false. Opening the mount...or at least not interfering with 3rd party lenses produced via reverse engineering...will retain a certain number of users/sales, as well as capture a certain number of new users/sales. Preventing 3rd party lenses will lose a certain number in both categories.

There is no law against reverse engineering. If the 3rd parties are infringing on patents then that is a different story.
"certain number of users" is the key issue. Given Canon's dominance and ongoing profitability for their shareholders, I don't see them being worried about a few users that they lose vs the potential new EF/RF lenses that they can sell. Canon cannot be everything to everyone and doesn't attempt to do so albeit their EF plus RF lenses cover a huge range of niches.

Is Canon moving to RF or not? If so, then "well it's on EF" won't last forever. Eventually Sigma, Tamron, etc. will stop making those lenses. And if they can't make them for RF, they will focus all of that engineering talent and manufacturing capacity on other mounts.

Canon are migrating to RF. The R mount has only just hit its 4th anniversary and yet people are suggesting that the R system isn't good enough and will move to Sony etc because they have 3rd party lenses.

Clearly Canon they are putting their R&D effort into new bodies and RF lenses. EF has been here since 1987 and Canon said they sold 100 million lenses up to 2014 alone. Some have been updated over time, others have been put to pasture but I don't see a wholesale end-of-sale notices for EF lenses for years to come. Why would Canon do that as virtually all the R&D costs have been amortised and it is only current manufacturing capacity which would be an issue IMHO.

Sigma, Tamron etc will stop making EF lenses when sales drop or it is uneconomical to contain. Neither of which has happened yet.

 

[David - Sydney]

Canon sales have been staying strong but Nikon’s have been going down and Sony’s has been rising. Plus you’ll find photography forums have really died down in activity compared to maybe 5 years ago. Now people use stuff like IG and Reddit which I see a lot of swapping.

Not sure how forum activity correlates with sales... DPR's comments are a cesspool of fanbois with no real added value. I read the articles but the comments are a waste of time.
IG is slowing down but Flickr keeps going somehow... maybe it will come back!

Actually had, just sold everything and swapped to Sony for the lenses 2 weeks ago I think the R6 is arguably a better body than the A7IV, but the lens pricing and range is too much to overlook.

A valid (single) data point then...
What lens(es) wasn't available to you that prompted you to switch?

 

[jd7]

However, Sigma CEO stated that Sigma is working on a Canon RF mount lens to be released this year or early 2023. Canon has no control of what Sigma does.

Source?

 

[jd7]

I don't believe any of this. Canon can not prevent a company from manufacturing lenses.

Probably not, but Canon can stop a company manufacturing lenses which infringes Canon's intellectual property (and perhaps in a few other situations as well). At least generally, Canon can also stop other people selling a lens which infringes Canon's intellectual property even if the seller wasn't the person who manufactutured the lens.

 

[jd7]

Tamron representatives have said Canon and Nikon lenses are on the way.

Source?

 

[jd7]

Did my own research. This is from a coppied post from DPReview. Not even legitimate. B&H Photo in the USA is and will continue to sell its 3rd party Viltrox Canon lenses and have more on their way.

Evidence?

 

[jd7]

I see that you have a R/RF system... on what basis are you making your comment?
If you were switching then let us know and feel free to leave the forum.
If you any data to share about others then feel free to share it for us.

I see DLee13 has responded to say he has swtiched from Canon to Sony recently. I don't see any reason why that means he should have to leave CR though.

Not quite switching systems (which is what DLee13 was talkding about), but for what it is worth I have shot Canon for 20+ years and in the last couple of years I have recommended to anyone getting into full frame photography to go with Sony, not Canon, unless they had some very specific use case which pointed to getting Canon (eg a very strong reason to shoot with the RF 28-70 f/2L). As it has turned out, all of the people I know who have moved into full frame photography in the last couple of years (admittedly only a few people) have gone with Sony, and all are happy. (And yes, if you are wondering, a switch from Canon to Sony in the not-too-distant future is on the cards for me - primarily because of the lack of third party AF lenses (particularly Sigma and Tamron lenses, and to a lesser extent Samyang lenses) for the RF mount. I just have other priorities right now.)

 

[SNJ Ops]

I see DLee13 has responded to say he has swtiched from Canon to Sony recently. I don't see any reason why that means he should have to leave CR though.

While this is a single example, I have seen other comments like this on other forums. Again I fully acknowledge in the grand scheme of things it probably won’t show up in future earnings reports. But I imagine Canon are aware of the discussions and the mainly negative perception the news from Viltrox has had.

 

[Chig]

I'm not going to pull any punches here: this is a rotten policy by Canon, and one which will financially hurt them in a market this competitive. Their main competitor, who desperately wants that #1 slot, has an open mount. And while not all competing mounts are open, nobody else seems to be taking steps to hinder 3rd party lens development.

I've dragged my feet on mirrorless for my primary kit because my current kit does everything I need with stunning IQ. But sooner or later I'm going to want or need to upgrade. And I'm not going to want to upgrade to a closed mount with no 3rd party lens options. Especially today with so many up-and-coming 3rd party lens manufacturers. If Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, Samyang/Rokinon, Viltrox, etc. are all going to throw their lens design expertise and manufacturing capability behind other mounts, then why would I want to be on the closed mount? And what am I supposed to say to new photographers? Why would I recommend Canon knowing it will limit their choices? I don't think I can.

This is the first time I've thought to myself that Sony will take the #1 sales spot. This is one of those stupid policies that sounds great to a boardroom full of people who are clueless about the existence of second order effects, but fails horribly in the marketplace.

All I can do is submit feedback (already have) telling Canon this is a dead end policy. And hope that so many people do the same that Canon reverses course before I decide to overhaul my kit.

Well Sony didn't even develop the A-mount but instead bought the Minolta SLR camera division (although they developed the E mount variant ) and Canon has become the #1 camera maker since first developing their advanced EF mount and eos auto focus system back in 1987 and now spent vast sums developing their R mount system.
Hopefully Canon will continue to be make enough profit to continue developing more wonderful Cameras and lenses and I personally prefer to buy their own lenses and consider them worth paying a bit extra for.

I don't think Sony or Nikon are much of a threat to Canon but the successful take over by the smartphone industry of the photography market certainly is and the lack of modern software interfaces in cameras is what Japanese camera companies need to address if they hope to survive

 

[dolina]

I'm certain that somebody from Canon's marketing research team checks in here from time to time. We're certainly not important but "irrelevant" is probably overstating the case. The people on this forum are gear heads and almost certainly spend much more on equipment than the average buyer. Of course, we're a very small sample, one of many samples, and there are a lot more average buyers.

Back in the 1970s and 1980s, Canon had the reputation for regarding third party lens manufacturers as parasites. I see no reason to believe that they feel differently now.

The problem with stating opinions about why Canon is acting the way they do is that there are dozens of possible reasons and everybody here is just guessing.

I think Canon's reason to visit CR is to check what new rumor got leaked to the press, again.

Depending on their wanted outcome they can further muddy the waters and say a EF 800mm Series 2 will come out in 2020 or provide clarification so people reading this site wouldn't be all tied up in knots

For me I look at the business case why X does not do Y when Z does Y.

 

[dolina]

So...to summarize:

No one knows anything.

Canon may be taking or threatening to take actions to protect their proprietary technology.

Has Canon ever licensed its technology to third-part competitors?

Have third parties ever been deterred by having to reverse engineer lens mount technology?

Is any Canon customer who already owns an R series camera selling that camera because they can't get cheap third-party lenses?

Is Canon likely to make a bad business decision that will hurt their sales?

If Canon determines that aggressive protection of their rights is hurting sales or causing them to lose market share, would they continue down an unprofitable road or would they revisit that strategy?

> No one knows anything.

Likely

> Canon may be taking or threatening to take actions to protect their proprietary technology.

More likely

> Has Canon ever licensed its technology to third-part competitors?

EF mount? Very unlikely

> Is any Canon customer who already owns an R series camera selling that camera because they can't get cheap third-party lenses?

If $ is a concern then odds are RF body to EF lens adapter is likely the solution. If you're on a budget buy a low mileage EF body that was owned by a GAS collector that babies & shoots sparingly but wants the latest toys.

> Is Canon likely to make a bad business decision that will hurt their sales?

Not to offend but all the camera brands are hedging against smartphones by going up market.

3rd party lenses is counter to that plan.

You can see it by the 2 APS-C RF bodies & 6 full frame RF bodies Canon has prioritized for production.

You can even see that with the number of RF L vs RF non-L lenses released since 2018.

If you're on a budget... stick to the dozens of EF bodies and the hundreds of EF lenses.

> If Canon determines that aggressive protection of their rights is hurting sales or causing them to lose market share, would they continue down an unprofitable road or would they revisit that strategy?

Does Canon want to be a loss leader or profitable?

If I was a shareholder I rather be profitable than to give people a subsidized lunch.

 

[dlee13]

Not sure how forum activity correlates with sales... DPR's comments are a cesspool of fanbois with no real added value. I read the articles but the comments are a waste of time.
IG is slowing down but Flickr keeps going somehow... maybe it will come back!

Well I was replying to someone who said people claim they are switching on this forum but Canon keeps dominating, my reply was to them that the amount of users/registered users is much lower compared to sites like Reddit.
It would be great for Flickr to come back but I think they'd really need to redevelop their app to have a lot better functionality/design if they want people to swap back. Being a paid service might stop some from using it too.

A valid (single) data point then...
What lens(es) wasn't available to you that prompted you to switch?

Well it's not so much just about availability, but the overall quality as well. For example if I wanted a 35mm f/1.4 I could either stick with the f/1.8 which is a great lens in every way but AF (thanks to the STM motor) or if I wanted f/1.4 lenses, my options were

35GM - $1899 AUD / $1399 USD
35L II - $2800 AUD / $1999 USD (much older, heavier lens in an old mount)
35mm DN Art - $1299 AUD / $749 USD

So I went with the 35GM of course. The for 85mm the f/2 is a decent lens but as it isn't full 1:1 and only 85mm it's not a great macro lens. At f/2. it leaves a bit to be desired for portraits/street so that would leave me with the RF85L which is absurdly expensive here so my options were

EF85L - f1/.4 $2299 AUD / $1599USD
RF85L - $3888 / $2699 USD
85mmGM - $1774AUD / $1798 USD
85mm DN Art - $1299 AUD / $1199 USD

Once again Sony had the better, cheaper, smaller option so I went with the 85mm DN Art. Then for a UWA zoom which I often use as a general purpose, especially for travel so prefer something smaller/lighter but not too slow like the new RF 15-30mm I had a few options too which were

EF16-35Lf/4 - $1799 AUD $1299 USD
RF14-35L - $2499 AUD / $1649 USD
FE PZ 16-35 - $1580 AUD / $1198 USD (released this year but still cheaper than RF/EF options)
Sigma DN 16-28mm f/2.8 - $1189 AUD / $899USD

Considering I originally bought the EF13-35 f/4L for only $1000 AUD years ago, I don't see the point in paying so much for an old lens in an old mount that requires an adapter. The Sigma 16-28mm and Sony 16-35mm were my best options and I ended up getting the latter for only $1400 AUD on sale (brand new of course)

Now if Sigma's 85mm DN Art and 16-28mm were available on the RF mount I could happily live with the RF 35mm as I honestly think it's comparable to the Sony 35GM in IQ, the UWA zoom, 85mm Art and many other third party lenses available on Sony were too good to resist.

While this is a single example, I have seen other comments like this on other forums. Again I fully acknowledge in the grand scheme of things it probably won’t show up in future earnings reports. But I imagine Canon are aware of the discussions and the mainly negative perception the news from Viltrox has had.

One thing to keep in mind too is the used market which is very strong in photography. When you buy a body brand new and sell it in good condition, it can often have multiple different owners from there one which would never count towards any manufacturers sales.

I see DLee13 has responded to say he has swtiched from Canon to Sony recently. I don't see any reason why that means he should have to leave CR though.

Thank you

Not quite switching systems (which is what DLee13 was talkding about), but for what it is worth I have shot Canon for 20+ years and in the last couple of years I have recommended to anyone getting into full frame photography to go with Sony, not Canon, unless they had some very specific use case which pointed to getting Canon (eg a very strong reason to shoot with the RF 28-70 f/2L). As it has turned out, all of the people I know who have moved into full frame photography in the last couple of years (admittedly only a few people) have gone with Sony, and all are happy. (And yes, if you are wondering, a switch from Canon to Sony in the not-too-distant future is on the cards for me - primarily because of the lack of third party AF lenses (particularly Sigma and Tamron lenses, and to a lesser extent Samyang lenses) for the RF mount. I just have other priorities right now.)

Well for me I actually had a 550D, 6D, 6DII then swapped to Sony for the A7III, back to Canon for the R6 for a few years now Sony again. I wouldn't consider myself a brand loyal person and use whatever offers the best value at the time. 2 years ago the Canon system was more compelling to me and now Sony is. You'll find each brand has their unique aspects that the competition doesn't have. Sony have zebra highlights which Canon still haven't added for some reason and Canon has the bulb timer which is one of the greatest things that Sony doesn't have.

To me a camera is only as good as the lenses available for it and Sony does have great options thanks to the third parties. Canon Australia really need to adjust their pricing too which is a whole other story but hopefully with Nikon coming to their senses and working with third parties, Canon will too.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Its not irrelevant at all, the fact that this topic is even being discussed on Nikon Rumours and Nikon forums is significant.

While some have claimed to not care that 3rd party options are scarce on RF mount how many Canon shooters would complain if Tamron, Zeiss, Voigtländer, Sigma, Tokina and Samyang all announced that they are all going to release RF mount glass in agreement with Canon to ensure the best possible performance?

Obviously it's significant enough to engender discussion on the internet. The point is, it's insignificant and irrelevant to Canon.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Canon sales have been staying strong but Nikon’s have been going down and Sony’s has been rising. Plus you’ll find photography forums have really died down in activity compared to maybe 5 years ago. Now people use stuff like IG and Reddit which I see a lot of swapping.

People have been complaining about Canon's decisions and predicting Canon's d00m on this forum, on DPR and elsewhere for well over a decade. During the time, Canon has gained market share and continues to dominate the market. What does that say about the impact of complaints here and elsewhere on the internet?

 

[neuroanatomist]

I have personal experience of working with several ethical Pharma companies and seen first hand that they generally try to improve health and make a healthy profit. There are several exceptions of course, some terrible, who just have a profit interest and do everything to exploit the system, and the opposite AstraZeneca who sold their COVID vaccine on a not-for-profit basis. I know the owner of an important Indian pharma company who fought successfully like a tiger to force the sale of HIV drugs cheaply to Africa and other areas that could not afford the high prices in the wealthy countries.

Here in the US, there is only one source for black widow antivenin. The company that produces it has a small farm in New Jersey (I've been there, it's also an executive meeting site) where they raise spiders, extract their venom, inject it into horses and produce the drug from the serum. The company loses money on the drug (it's a labor-intensive process and there are only a small number of bites each year, with the drug generally provided to children and the elderly; the cost for a dose is ~$40), but they keep making it and have no plans to stop.

 

[Bob Howland]

Canon has become the #1 camera maker since first developing their advanced EF mount and eos auto focus system back in 1987

How true!! But Canon was replacing the (new) FD mount, which was small and mechanically complex. (I owned FD cameras from 1975 to 1997.) Both Nikon and Minolta tried half measures to implement autofocus with the focusing motors in the camera body and that didn't work out well. Now, everybody uses the Canon strategy of putting the focusing motor in the lens. The thing that amazes me the most is how extendible the EOS protocol is.

When Canon introduced the FD system in 1971, they were already the largest Japanese camera manufacturer.

 

[dlee13]

People have been complaining about Canon's decisions and predicting Canon's d00m on this forum, on DPR and elsewhere for well over a decade. During the time, Canon has gained market share and continues to dominate the market. What does that say about the impact of complaints here and elsewhere on the internet?

Those people who claim they are doomed are often not even Canon users. Also I never said they’re doomed or will go bust, I’ve simply stated the fact that their pricing and strategy of blocking third parties is making many users unhappy.

This is also a Canon site so there will always be a level of bias, just like if the same kind of topic was asked on a Sony or Nikon forum.