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]

Each of us has to make their own decision, and I respect the right of you and others to make their choices, but over the last four plus decades I have seen technology advances frequently switch between brands with monotonous regularity.   I see no economic or qualitative sense is ditching significant investments (you mention people selling $50k, for example) by switching between brands.  This seems more of a philosophical issue than a practical one.

I started my photographic career over 40 years ago and in the time since then I have shot with gear from a range of manufacturers.  Today, I shoot with Canon, Fuji, Nikon, Olympus and Sony, but the vast majority of the gear I use is from Canon.  In part this is because of the investment in the equipment, but more from the fact that I don't believe or depend on getting the latest gear and switching between brands because I think it will somehow make me a better photographer.  Their glass is excellent, their technology as good as anyone else's and I am used to the layout of controls and menus - which can have significant impact on the practical use of the equipment.

ALL manufacturers make great gear, and in the context of the current discussion, I do not feel held back by not having access to 3rd party RF glass.  I still use Sigma EF lenses (EF150-600c and EF 60-600s) with my R-5 and R-6 bodies in my preferred genre, which is wildlife photography. While I now live in NZ, where there aren't any macro mammals, I shoot birds and that is challenging for any gear.  I find that legacy Canon EF glass can still get results with which I have no issue - and, as one would expect, I am very critical of my results.

So, for those who feel their photography is held back by not having immediate access to 3rd party RF glass, then the best thing may be for them to switch, but I would say this is more of an emotional, rather than a truly qualitative or economic issue. With the hit that one will take selling Canon gear second-hand, and buying new Sony equipment, I would argue that simply getting Canon RF glass would be just as economically viable.  Canon have some good and more economical glass out there - I have and use the RF 24-240 on occasion and find it to does a great job when I want only one lens with wide focal range, also the RF 100-400 is a great lens and very economical. 

The following is a photo is an example.Canon EOS R5, RF 24-240@240mm, f/7.1, 1/640sec, ISO-200

Canon is doing what almost all manufacturers do: it is filling out it line-up of lenses to return some of the huge investment it has made in switching to the new platform.  If you look back in history, this is not new.  Sony have the advantage of starting about 6 years ahead, Nikon were slightly ahead of Canon and in the timeline of COVID and its impacts that was significant in delivering new lenses quickly - if you read my detailed response earlier in this thread regarding this you will see what I mean.  Furthermore, my comments on the interview with the head of Sigma indicate a huge expansion in their development and production facilities to cope with, as he put it, the needs for developing lenses for the new mounts - of which there are only two Nikon Z and Canon RF.  Companies like Sigma would not be investing as indicated unless they had confidence that they were on a clear path to produce glass for a mount.  It takes a significant amount time to design, develop and produce sophisticated lenses and the firmware that go with them, and I am fairly confident that they are on that path right now.

As I say, absolutely you and others must make your own decisions, but in the end it's not the gear that counts, it's the photographer. 
The following images have been drastically reduced to post within the limits of this site, and were taken with R-series bodies and legacy lenses:  All taken hand-held in available light.
Canon EOS R6, Sigma 150-600 C @ 550mm, f/6.3, 1/150sec, ISO-200
The NZ Tui enjoying a flowering flax bush

Canon EOS R6, Sigma 150-600c @ 267mm ,f/5.6, 1/320sec, ISO-400The Australasian Gannet has a major nesting site close by where I live.  These very large sea birds fly at high speed and require a camera and lens combination that is fast and accurate to focus, in this scenario the use of eye tracking worked well with the Sigma EF lens.

[Oz]

OK Trevor,  you have a lot of great Canon gear and have invested a lot of money on RF and EF lenses and you don't feel held back because of it, good for you.  Are you able to get a Tamron 35-150mm F2-2.8 for your Canon cameras?... nope, so yes, Canon IS holding people back if they cannot get lenses that Canon will never release.  A lot of professionals I know are leaving Canon and it's not just because the lack of third party is upsetting them (emotional as you say) it's also economical.  One RF lens cost as much or more than the new mid-range camera bodies like the new Panasonic S5 Mark II with the updated autofocus, Canon R6 Mark II or the Sony A74.  Just recently I checked the online stores of all my local Camera shops and noticed that there are more Canon cameras and lenses both old and new (R5 & R6's) for sell in the used and open box section than any other camera manufacturer.  Maybe it's just my area?  If this continues, Canon will be in trouble.  By the time Canon fills their RF lineup there will be a small pool of consumers interested to buy any of those lenses.   

[Tronhard]

@ OZ:

You have completely misread or twisted my comments.  I have tried to say that I have shot with a lot of brands - to me a camera is simply a tool and I will shoot with whatever is required and at hand.  My gear is mostly older DSLRs, and I have a modest investment in R-series gear.  I find it ironic that you criticize me for retaining my investment in Canon gear, yet champion those who will dispose of thousands of dollars for a lack of a specific piece of kit.  I keep with the gear I have because I can make it work and it would be a poor investment to sell it at a great loss.  

As you say: "Canon IS holding people back if they cannot get lenses that Canon will never release."   That is a sad statement, and it says more about what their skills as photographers if they depend on specific lenses to work.  Furthermore, you have no idea of what Canon will, or will not release.  

If you look back on the history of photography, those who have produced noteworthy images have never said that they were waiting for this or that lens - they got on with the job with the technology at hand.  I have done the same, and the photos I presented were specifically designed to make that point.  In that post I am taking images, using R series bodies - which is the platform we are discussing - and Sigma 3rd party lenses, something that apparently is apparently unacceptable to those demanding an instant release of 3rd Party RF lenses.  A professional does not throw their toys out of the cot when faced with a challenge, they get on and do the job - or they don't have clients and they don't have a career.   

I don't rely on the technology to take images, I rely on skill.  If a camera or lens was capable of taking acceptable images when it was released it is still capable of doing so now.  Given that huge number of people who shoot to display digitally or on social media, the technology offered by the latest gear is squandered as images are downsized to fit the media.  

Outside extremely specialized optics, such as in microscopy or astronomical deep space imagery, of which the example you quote is certainly not one, a competent photographer should be able to take decent photos with equipment that is available to them.   You can't buy skill, you have to learn it and earn it. I still take photos with digital cameras that are over 20 years old to reinforce that fact. 

[Oz]

Wanting a Tamron 35-150mm F2-2.8 so that I could take on family & friend trips and safely leave two expensive RF lenses at home has nothing to do with reliance nor skill.

You say "I find it ironic that you criticize me for retaining my investment in Canon gear, yet champion those who will dispose of thousands of dollars for a lack of a specific piece of kit".   -You are the one twisting words here.    

[Tronhard]

If you explained your actual specific need rather than launching a tirade about Canon in general, we could be more helpful.  What camera are you trying to get a lens for right now FF or APS-C? 

I note that the Tamron 35-150 f/2-2.8 is quite a unique unit and was release in Aug 2021 and only for the Sony mount, which has been around for much longer that either Canon, Fuji, or Nikon mounts, so Sony had a long time to establish its own lens range.  That is not unusual and is not specifically a Canon issue. So, while I understand your desire for the lens/aperture benefit, I think it is drawing a long bow to say that Canon is specifically at issue here.

Your post, to which I responded, was not about this, it was a general tirade against Canon and was full of generalizations and statements of dubious validity.   I responded calling you out, so drop the attitude please.

[Oz]

This is a thread of folks who are disagreeing with Canon's decision.  No one is asking for any help, assistance, advice or history lessons therefor we should presume that people on here already have photography knowledge and understand they can adapt old lenses with adapters.  No one needs to have specific needs and overly explain themselves to disagree with a company's decision.  Just like Canon can close off their system without the need to explain themselves, people can disagree on that decision and not have to explain themselves.  

You say "I have absolutely no sympathy with those who throw the baby out with the bathwater and apparently dispose of thousands of dollars' worth of gear because they can't get a specific 3rd party lens. It makes no sense economically or in a business context.  It was for those people that the old adage " a bad workman blames his tools" was coined."  - no one here is blaming his or her tools and no one cares if you sympathize or not and who are you to say it doesn't make sense economically or in a business context?  Do you know everyones business needs?  

You have repeatedly expressed to just about everyone who post on this thread that you have great gear to enjoy, no need or wants for native third party lenses so why are you having a meltdown?   

[Tronhard]

If that is how you look at this as a hate page for those who are disgruntled then no amount of logical debate will help you.  Perhaps just go buy a Sony for which your preferred lens is designed and then go enjoy photography.

[Oz]

Not looking for a debate, just native third-party options.  

[dantose]

For adapted lenses (which he was discussing) you can get the Tameron 24-70 2.8 and the 70-200 2.8 for about the same as that one. Or you can get the Sigma art 50-100 to get that to f1.8. 

For RF native, there's the 28-70 f2 and the 70-200 f2.8

I'm as critical of Canon's boneheaded move as anyone, but you're being WAY over dramatic. 

[Tronhard]

To be clear, I have sympathy with those critical of Canon's lack of communication on the issue and that they could resolve this whole issue by simply making a statement that in the foreseeable future 3rd party makers will be licensed to release RF lenses.  I honestly and sincerely believe that the licenses are there, but the makers are under a gag order not to say so until Canon gives the go-ahead.  As I said, it takes years to fully develop a lens for a new system and it is made all the more challenging by the complexities of modern lens electronics, communications and firmware.

I have absolutely no sympathy with those who throw the baby out with the bathwater and apparently dispose of thousands of dollars' worth of gear because they can't get a specific 3rd party lens. It makes no sense economically or in a business context.  It was for those people that the old adage " a bad workman blames his tools" was coined.