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.

[Tronhard]

Did you read my response below?

[dantose]

Yes, but it's irrelevant to my post. Regardless of whether Canon will eventually allow third party af lenses, there are fewer RF lenses available today than there were a month and a half ago and the pace of lens releases is unlikely to match other mount options in the foreseeable future. Now, maybe that will change in the future, maybe not. But that's the reality on the ground right now and will understandable factor into pirchasing decisions.

[Tronhard]

What I am saying is that this principle of developing native lenses first is neither unique nor specific to Canon.

Obviously, you have to make your decisions based on your needs and preferences - personally, I am in for the long haul with Canon; although I have, and shoot with, Fuji, Nikon, Olympus and Sony gear. 

The R-series system offers benefits as a system outside the necessity to purchase new RF glass. I have only three RF lenses and shoot a lot with my legacy EF glass - both native and from Sigma, without issues.  

You said: "I know, you can always adapt the deep bench of EF glass to RF, but that doesn't help them much as you can also adapt it to E mount. If someone is looking to move to mirrorless, it's a hard sell when the offerings just significantly shrunk."

Sure, one can use the native legacy lenses on both Canon and Sony (as well as Fuji).  However you are still using non-native lenses on a body with an adapter, which is apparently what you want to avoid. If the glass is equal, then surely it comes down to the performance of the bodies in that case, unless one is going to then invest in native Sony glass?  Switching camera systems in that context is not cheap, despite what a lot of folks seem to do on You Tube.

The offerings did not "just significantly shrunk" they simply did not expand for autofocus lenses as fast as you were expecting. 

You said: "there are fewer RF lenses available today than there were a month and a half ago".  Are you suggesting that Canon removed lens models from the market, or are you referring to lenses available in stock?  You would need to prove the former, and the latter is a function of logistics, not design policy.

[dantose]

AF lenses that were previously available are no longer available. This includes those removed following the cease and desists and also others that have more quietly vanished either due to less public cease and desists or chilling effects from the known ones. 

As far as the precedent, I'm aware of the walled garden strategy and understand the logic behind it. I'm just not sure it's wise in this market. 3 years into E-mount's release, Sigma, Tamron, et al were all releasing lenses. Z mount is only barely older than RF and has not only a stable of 3rd party lenses, but is now starting official partnerships with (IIRC) Tamron. 

There's a lot Canon is doing right too. They are making unique lenses that we haven't seen before, they have affordable options that are performing well, they have some stand out high end glass, but I think they are handling the 3rd party issue poorly, and the communication surrounding it even worse. 

BTW, I own an RP and a 77d. I'm looking at replacing the 77d with another crop sensor within a year. My plan was an R10 or R7 for christmas and maybe picking up that little 16mm they make for the RP, but with the uncertainty regarding the future of RF lens availability, I'm kicking that down the road and also looking at Sony. I like Canon cameras better than Sony cameras, but I know I'm going to have lots of lens options on Sony. There's uncertainty on that issue with the RF mount. 

That also raises the question of if I want to put more money into RF glass when I'm not sure which direction I'll go with my second camera. This isn't some stamping my foot "You've lost a customer!" reaction, but a reasoned approach about if I should really get the camera I really want when I don't know when (or even if) if I'll be able to get the glass I really want. i'm trying to make a decision not just for now, but also for my best guess of what will be 5 years down the road. 

[Tronhard]

I understand your concern.  I am simply saying that the environment within which you have been getting your information is skewed by the click-bait and hype, and general panic that it has caused in the market.  You say "I'm trying to make a decision not just for now, but also for my best guess of what will be 5 years down the road."

I will be absolutely amazed if market, the offerings, and the engagement with 3rd party suppliers will not have changed drastically in the next five years.  If you are considering the lenses designed for the RF APS-C mount, consider how long the bodies have been out for - just a few months.  So, it seems unreasonable to compare this situation to that of Sony, especially given that Sony made their releases well before COVID struck.  I am not suggesting blind loyalty to any brand here, I am suggesting that it is far too early to make conclusions and being concerned about what will happen in five years based on the last few months (in the context of APS-C) is drawing and extremely long bow. 

I think, if you don't need to, that delaying a decision is a wise move.  I think Sony and Nikon make great cameras, but I see no point in shifting my investment between brands on a short-term situation.  The lenses you mention not being available may, or may not be because of Canon - that is a surmise on anyone's part.  As I said, it could be as much because of changes that Canon may be making to the interface that engages between lenses and lens makers are actually in the loop and holding back to see how things settle.  It's an argument of equal merit because we have not proof or statements (of which I am aware) from either Canon or other 3rd party makers.  I will maintain that makers like Sigma would not be hiring significant numbers of designers for lenses they can't make for five years.

[John_SD]

I'm late to the thread, but the OP's concern is legit. Had I known nearly three years ago that Sigma and Tamron would be MIA in terms of developing third-pary RF lenses, I would have made the switch to Nikon, Sony, or Fuji. I no longer recommend Canon mirrorless for this reason. I do not expect Canon to suddenly change course and  open up their RF lenses for third-party manufacture. 

Look, I am just an enthusiast. If I were a pro (a real pro, not a guy who sells a couple of $2 "stock photos" a year), and gear would be a line-item on my spreadsheet before sending it off to the accountant for tax preparation, I could justify the outlandish cost of native RF lenses. But I am not in a situation to be able to write off the cost of gear. No, if one is considering a full-frame mirrorless and availability of third-party lenses is important, Canon is not where you want to be. By third-party I'm referring to Sigma and Tamron. i don't see this situation changing at this point. And yes, I know you can buy an adapter and hang EF lenses off of them. An inferior choice in my view. YMMV. 

[Canonoli]

I shoot birds, and always recommend people ditch them siggy's if they want to see a huge difference in their photography. You get what you pay for, and if logistics were better and chips shortages did not exist maybe Canon would have a lot more lens out to market. Have you ever thought of just selling what you have and moving on? And I had a stable of the best EF lenses, and when I bought the R, I was super impressed the images actually were a touch sharper on the R body. That led me to selling off my ef glass and investing in RF glass and a R5 and an R3. Oh, and by the way I am not a pro, but an avid enthusiast. You comment on it being an inferior choice, make me believe you are a troll.

[John_SD]

Couldn't care less what you think, troll.

[MattieC]

Well you’ve got a rock solid resale market. That’s a luxury itself.

[Jako132]

I couldn’t agree more greeneyes, I have quite a bit of cannon lenses and an R5 which does great but I just don’t see the value in holding onto it when glass options are only available from cannon. Many of my friends have switched to Sony selling around $50,000 worth of their gear as well and I am now doing the same as I can borrow their lenses and they can borrow mine as well. Cannon not allowing either sigma or Tamaron to sell under the rf lens is killing photographers who have invested thousands of dollars into high quality camera bodies and in what they believed to be a company looking out for its photographers. Unfortunately this no longer seems to be the case. I love Cannon but I have to do what makes sense for my brand and my photographers. If Cannon allows 3rd party glass again I’ll likely comeback to cannon but for the foreseeable future that’s not likely to happen. Cannon get your act together I am only one of many photographers you are losing as customers and it’s sad.