No 3rd party RF Lenses...

[greeneyes_516]

This is a Deal Breaker for me. I am still using DSLR and it will still be a little while before I get a mirrorless camera because of budget. This news is going to make me look into getting Nikon or Sony, if when I go to a mirrorless camera, if I can't get 3rd party RF lenses for Canon. Since the beginning, I have been using Canon. From my first 35mm Film camera, then stepped up to DSLR with the Canon Rebel XTI. Few years later got the Canon 60D and then got the Canon 80D. When I got the 80D, I started to try to get better lenses. So I do have the Canon 24-70 L and got the Tamron 70-210 F4, I also have 2 Sigma lenses. I am on a limited budget. I finally stepped up to Full Frame with the Canon 6D Mark II. I will say that I am happy with all the photos that I have been able to get with my cameras over the years, but I am not a Fan Boy. For a matter of fact, I have recommended a friend to get a Nikon camera, because of what they were wanting to use it for and to stay with in their budget. I have used friends Nikon cameras in the past and was totally happy with those cameras. When people ask for a recommendation on a camera, I just tell them to stay with a Major brand so they have options in the future for expanding their equipment. In the future I will get a mirrorless camera and to start off with, I was going adapt my current lens to the Camera. But will be wanting to get mirrorless lenses when money allows. There is no way I can afford to get any L series Canon RF lenses, so this will be a deal breaker for me. This will make me sell off my Canon equipment, and go with Nikon or Sony, depending on which one has the options that I want at my price. A sad day for Canon.

[Oz]

I read your previous response after I posted my comment.  You make some good points.  The reason I need an 85mm is for client headshots and portrait work that I've taken up as a hobby.  With the exception to Sigma Art lenses, I found EF lenses are not sharp enough for the R5 and the chromatic aberration can be intense and time consuming to deal at post. I need an efficient work flow for my work and having to swap EF-RF adapter with EF lenses is cumbersome and places a limit to my creativity.  For the price that I've spent on my Canon gear I could've instead purchased a Sony A7SIII, the new Sony A7IV and had money left to fix them with 3rd party lenses.

You're absolutely right about those who don't understand the benefits of a large sensor and great optics, unfortunately the problem is that most of those people are clients or potential clients and some of these clients are having trouble justifying hiring a professional when there cell phone camera along with decent compositions are able to produce beautiful photos.  I agree COVID has been a big problem for all manufacturers but that also includes Canon's customers.  We are dealing with inflation, Canon has raised their prices on their expensive lenses and the lack of 3rd party lenses does not help anyone.  It's already been 3 years since the RF mount was introduced, It'll be a foolish business decision to not allow 3rd party lenses, it would also be foolish to wait to long and watch your customers migrate to other systems.  

[Tronhard]

Hi Oz:
Thank you for responding, and your detailed reply.   

Switching brands is expensive, and given you appreciate the costs of getting professional gear for professional results, I would suggest that doing so would be a last resort.  It would be particularly galling if, having done so, it was then announced that Sigma was releasing lenses in the foreseeable future that you wanted.

If I can make a suggestion that might help ease the road ahead. I am assuming you are happy with the R-series bodies you are using and are used to Canon's interface, so if you could retain those there would be a benefit to you. So, if you have not sold your previous EF glass, and it worked for you, I would suggest investing in the EF-RF adapters.  I don't know what glass you are currently using, but If it is just one EF-mount  lens that is the issue, just leave the adapter on the lens with the appropriate caps and it will be transparent. If you are in a position to have to mix several EF lenses then the adapter goes on with the first one goes on, and you leave the adapter on for the second EF lens; or if that is too clumsy, otherwise just get a basic adapter for each EF lens - they are not a huge investment.  The main thing is you will get the results you want with lenses you like and are used to.

If you still like the RF body performance, then this will work - I have tested multiple EF lenses  and several Sigma units via the adapter on R5 and R6  units and they have, so far, been flawless. 

I shoot multiple systems: Fuji, Nikon, Olympus and Sony and they are all good brands.  That said, I have to say that of the bunch in terms of ease of using the interface, Canon are ahead of the bunch in my experience. From there I would go (in descending order): Nikon, Olympus, Fuji and Sony.  Sony makes awesome gear, but their menus are a nightmare!  So, I would look past the hardware to the user interface and consider that, because you will face it every day.

I hope this will help and give you food for thought.  What might seem a disaster is not necessarily so, there are ways to continue to gain the benefits of the bodies until your preferred lenses come out.  I am absolutely convinced that reliable 3rd parties will be engaged to make lenses for the RF mount, but you may have to be patient for a while.

[lilloyaltitan]

Hi Oz,

I am not a professional photographer, and I am still very much learning this craft but I made the same debate as you at about the same time and I ended up going with the R6. I had been adapting my old lenses, 1st and 3rd party alike, for months before I finally sold my 400mm L EF lens so I could buy the 100-400mm RF. 

I wanted to jump in here because I ordered the Rokinon 85mm f/1.4 from Amazon the other day. I was under the impression that Samyang = Rokinon = Bower. To wit, I have seen the 14mm f/2.8 in both Rokinon and Samyang side by side and, save the label, all else appeared identical. Granted, I did not dismantle either lens, but you get my meaning. 

In any case, your comment about Canon pulling the Samyang lens before you could buy it caught my eye since I just placed my order. So far, it has not shipped yet but neither has it been canceled. Plus, there seems to be stock on both the e-commerce site I used as well as another one of the larger photo-video-audio centered sellers (at the writing of this response anyway). Needless to say, I will be anxiously waiting for the "shipping confirmation" notice. 

To address another of your comments, I don’t think anything is clear about the future of 3rd party RF lenses. There are some 3rd party lenses still out there – I’m literally looking at some on the other ecommerce site on my other screen.

I must have been living under a rock (studying) but I just heard about this "war on 3rd party lenses" about an hour ago. I only loosely follow a few content creators but Tony Northrup is one so, after seeing his take, I came here to the source to see if there was any kind of official response. I'm a little disappointed if unsurprised that there is none. While Trevor has done a great job of representing another opinion, it seems that he does not speak for Canon. (Correct me if I’m wrong, Trevor.) 

In almost 20 years with Canon, from point and shoot to film through APS-C and now to FF mirrorless, Canon has always been tight-lipped about developments and details of new releases. While an official statement would be nice –  even something noncommittal like “we can neither confirm nor deny if 3rd party lenses will be licensed in the future” – I am not holding my breath. I do hope and believe that they are aware and they’re probably smirking in their ivory tower background just waiting till they can let the other foot fall.

Apologies for the long-winded interjection. I hope you're able to secure one of those 85s, if you're still looking for it. Whatever the case may be, keep shooting!

[Tronhard]

Thank you for your articulate and down-to-earth contribution. As others have said, I am tired of this situation, but I hate this kind of mass knee-jerk reaction that benefits no-one except the rumour mills.  I spent periods of my life working in the intelligence community and lived with an academic and they have made me opposed to such a situation.  That said, there are two wrongs here:

FIRST: I think the whole issue has been blown up out of proportion by the speculation and wild assumptions from click-bait posts especially on populist video sites.  I shall  speculate that, having engendered a lot of angst and got people to express their chagrin at Canon, who will then clarify their position, these rumour-mongers will claim some sort of victory for the consumer: due, of course, to their own vigilance and journalist genius...

SECOND: I agree that by Canon have not helped themselves by not being prepared for this, and by not having prepared a clearly posted policy on their websites, or even leaking it to Canonrumors.com. In not doing so, they have created an information vacuum and, just as in physics, the world of information does not like a vacuum: and it tends to be filled with the fears and frustrations of consumers, encouraged by those who gain from such speculation, rumour and panic. The only reference to an official statement I have seen is THIS ONE from Canon Germany.   While it states the facts, and makes clear why Viltrox were told to C&D, it still leaves open the issue that a simple clarification would resolve with an answer for just one question: something like - "Does Canon intend to open the RF mount to 3rd party lens manufacturers, and if so under what conditions?" - one could substitute "when" for the last phrase, but I suspect that would suggest a date, which I think is too simplistic a question at this stage.

So, come on Canon, time to get real with some transparency and end this ridiculous situation.  You are bringing your own brand into disrepute and that is not helpful.

[Oz]

Thank you for your response.  You don't have to be a professional photographer or an expert to express your opinion on this.  I've worked in the aerospace industry as a certified FAA repairman, handled hundreds of ITAR process related paperwork, worked with high level military officials to get their heli's up and running for black-operations.  I've worked in various engineering departments in the auto industry for a long time, have visited over 350 supplier facilities and at the end of the day...none of that matters..how you spend your money is important to you and your wife or loved one...lol. You're entitled and encouraged to express your opinion on this, anyone who makes mockery of it is insecure.  

I've been keeping an eye on Canon RF system since the release of the mediocre R and RP bodies and played the waiting game for better bodies and more lens options.  I decided to invest in the RF system when Samyang announced the release of the RF 85mm f1.4 with autofocus. Manual focusing RF lenses where already present in the market, the lack of autofocus lenses is what kept me waiting. I had the assumption the RF system was opened to be fully licensed to 3rd party when a company finally released an autofocus lens.  Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the whole reason for the C&D is related to the autofocus feature which is why you don't see autofocus lenses from 3rd party on RF mount.  

The RF glass is superb and I would love to have a whole set but it's out of reach for most people starting out and for folks like me running my type of business. My plan was to purchase the R5 for stills and video, get by with 3rd party RF glass while purchasing upgraded bodies along the way like a Canon R mark II for example, then upgrade to Canons RF glass once I get a Komodo RED (with RF mount) for my film making projects. This would allow me to scale up my business overtime.  It would be nice to have 3rd party glass available for the photographers I hire and for the ability to expand my creativity into other types of photography work.  Purchasing old generation (not as sharp) EF glass and having to purchase $100 adapters may work for some but not for me. 

As to Tony Northrup, it's obvious he makes click bait type of content. That's how successful youtube channels operate and thats in part of youtube's algorithms.  I think most reasonable people can look through that and pick up on the things that make sense.  I find it offensive for someone to assume that everyone is just responding to what some youtube guy said.  People are genuinely upset and rightfully so.

Canon is in the right to their patents and to go after any company who infringes on it, there's no arguing that, it's part of business.  We also have the right to how we spend our money and hopefully Canon gets to grip with that.  Technology is moving in a fast pace even with the Covid crisis.  Unfortunately for Canon, consumers don't care if the company is playing catchup.  People are going to buy from companies that are in the forefront of innovation and who are consumer friendly.  Should we just sit here and hope that maybe Canon would give us what we want while technology advances? How long would it be ok for you to wait?  I myself will not wait till Canon fills their expensive lens lineup but I will stay optimistic until black Friday.  Thats when I'll start making a move to another system if I don't hear anything good from Canon.

[deebatman316]

I also agree with Oz, there are YouTubers that make click bait content. As mentioned above Tony and Chelsea Northrup and Jared Polin to name a few. I learned that you need camera gear that fits your needs. I'm not a pro photographer its just my hobby. I couldn't justify the price of the R and RP when I bought my 5D Mark IV. The R3, R5, R6, R7 and R10 weren't released yet. I went with something that fits my needs not what a pro needs. Then also if you're buying a new camera you don't have to get a mirrorless camera. New and used DSLRs won't disappear right now or become nonfunctional because mirrorless is here. The whole 3rd Party RF lenses and adapters ordeal was blown out of proportion.

-Demetrius

40D, 5D IV, EF 16-35mm F/2.8L III, EF 24-70mm F/2.8L II, EF 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 IS USM, EF 50 F/1.8 STM

430EX III-RT, 600EX II-RT

[Tronhard]

You don't have to be a professional photographer or an expert to express your opinion on this.
Absolutely agree, for my part, my statement that I have been a professional photographer should not imply any relationship to anyone else or make them feel threatened in some way: it simply expresses where I'm coming from in this specific field. I am used to the expectation that one will provide a context of a person's background and experience from working with academics and think tanks to establish some level of context and trust.  The world if full of opinions, and when I engage with them the first thing I want to know is where the person providing them is coming from.  Qualifications and experience are important, at least to me, in establishing context.

How you spend your money is important to you and your wife or loved one... 
You're not wrong there! I'm no longer working and that changes the financial landscape significantly.  You are a working professional, and I am retired - that's a big difference.

I believe the whole reason for the C&D is related to the autofocus feature 
From the information to hand so far, I have the same impression.  I suspect that it is possible Viltrox did not actually reverse engineer Canon's IP but may have had access to it through licensing and then jumped the gun in releasing it before they should.  This is, to some degree, supported by the Viltrox statement that for the time being, these lenses are no longer offered.  If they had reverse engineered the would almost certainly be required to delete any IP and the results from that.  My suspicion is further supported by comments from Sigma that I refer to at the bottom of this post.

I find it offensive for someone to assume that everyone is just responding to what some YouTube guy said.  People are genuinely upset and rightfully so.
I don't know if you are responding to my reaction to the situation, but at no time did I suggest that 'everyone' is just responding in that manner.  So, I think that (for my situation) you are drawing a long bow there and being offended by what is really your misinterpretation. Certainly, the majority of responses I have seen have shown a negative reaction towards Canon, based on what they perceive from the material presented, but I have seen some comments from others seeking a more measured approach.

Purchasing old generation (not as sharp) EF glass and having to purchase $100 adapters may work for some but not for me.

I am not sure if you bracketed comment (not as sharp), is supposed to be specific to certain lenses or suggests that EF glass is inherently inferior.  

I agree that this depends on multiple factors.   The intent of the user (obviously not all are working in a professional capacity, for example), their budgets, the investment they already have in good EF glass and the types of photography they engage in - to name just a few.  One of the things that people often don't discuss is what is going to be produced, which is massively significant.  For example, (in the stills photography context), conventional wisdom suggests it requires a higher investment if one is going to produce large, detailed, fine Art (with a capital A), prints for sale, compared to say posting images on social media - and there are lots of those.

Older lenses on newer, especially large, high MP bodies will show their inherent blemishes, but a great lens will endure.  I have tested a range of Canon EF lenses with the EOS 5DsR, a 52MP FF sensor without an anti-aliasing filter that will show any flaw in optics or technique, and the newer (post 2010) and some earlier lenses have performed really well - but again, I am not shooting video.  I have then tested those same lenses on the R5 and R6 bodies and have found no suggestion that they behave any differently in terms of quality, but they certainly benefit from new focusing and tracking technologies of the new MILC systems.  My point is that for a lot of people, their Canon EF glass will still work perfectly until they get a native RF lens that suits their purposes.  Third party EF lenses are another matter.

People are going to buy from companies that are in the forefront of innovation and who are consumer friendly. Should we just sit here and hope that maybe Canon would give us what we want while technology advances?

I have a lot of sympathy with this, but not sure it is fair to discount the mayhem from COVID.  Sigma have a huge advantage of about six years' head start in MILC field, and their gear is excellent.   Nikon have been in the same boat as Canon but have recently announced an apparently fully compliant AF Z-mount lens from Tamron.  Fujifilm have kept their stable of XF lenses very much to themselves, and only recently did Tamron offer the first super zoom, the XF 18-300 (which is a great lens, I have it on one of my X-T4 bodies).  Yet there has been fairly muted response to their situations. Being the most popular camera gear maker makes one a tall poppy target.

I am speculating that the pre-emptive effort by Viltrox in producing an autofocus RF lens for the most popular brand out there has been the initiator of all this.  As I mentioned, in other posts, the interview with the CEO of Sigma gave some subtle clues that they are ramping up their design staff capacity to engage with "new lens mounts".  Now, there are only two new mounts out there, to my knowledge: Nikon's Z and Canon's RF.  So, the use of the plural is potentially very significant.  If they are confident enough to invest in new capacity for this, then they must have confidence that what they produce will come to market. Further, Sigma as an old business partner of Canon, is extremely unlikely to try to reverse-engineer anyone else's technology, so it suggests that they have a connection to at least some of Canon RF IP.

That said, I totally agree that Canon need to do some damage control here: even if they feel immune from the economic pressures of this and perhaps see it as a storm in a teacup, they will show good faith with their user community by making a statement I alluded to in a previous post.

If you don't get a definitive answer to your satisfaction, I wish you well with another brand - you need to do what works for you as a professional.  Personally, I have far too much money invested in Canon to consider switching, and while I enjoy the benefits of the R-series for bodies for what I do, I am still happy to use my menagerie of DSLRs and EF glass for the enjoyment of it.  I think in the end the market will stabilize and 3rd party gear will be here.

[deebatman316]

To clear things up I was just stating that YouTubers can post clickbait material. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I'm not against 3rd parties, The Canon EOS R series or the RF Mount. RF glass will perform better than older EF glass did on Higher MP sensors. I do not think EF glass is better than RF glass. But some EF glass is worth adapting. Canon may have released their proprietary lens communication standard to 3rd parties. Canon may have told the 3rd parties that they couldn't make lenses or adapters for X amount time. At the end of the day its Canon's choice to release their proprietary lens communication. Then holding those who release compatible products too early accountable. At some point 3rd party products will become available.

-Demetrius

40D, 5D IV, EF 16-35mm F/2.8L III, EF 24-70mm F/2.8L II, EF 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 IS USM, EF 50 F/1.8 STM

430EX III-RT, 600EX II-RT

[Tronhard]

Hi Demetrius:

My post was generally responding to Oz's post.  I have not commented on your post per se, but generally agree with you!

[deebatman316]

Thanks for clearing things up Trevor. The reply looked like it was directed to me. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

-Demetrius

40D, 5D IV, EF 16-35mm F/2.8L III, EF 24-70mm F/2.8L II, EF 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 IS USM, EF 50 F/1.8 STM

430EX III-RT, 600EX II-RT