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.

[dantose]

Unfortunately, I don't think their ultimate intent will matter. 3rd party is unlikely to be willing to develop specifically for RF even if Canon does open up to it at this point. Hopefully I'm wrong, but at this point I think the ecosystem will continue to be limited at the 5-10 year timeframe regardless of what Canon does at this juncture. 

The worst part? the specific items I'd avoid buying right now are RF lenses. I got an RP as a second camera before all this went down (and snagged a Yongnuo 85mm before everything went to hell). I was planning out my lens purchases as my 77d became a dedicated birding camera and was looking to get at least a 16mm and maybe a 100mm macro. BUT I don't want to get stuck with what may end up being the equivalent of an EF-m kit that doesn't work on anything. 

Worst of all, it's completely unnecessary. Canon is making interesting lenses that are competitive with 3rd party (especially primes) or that simply don't exist outside RF the 600 and 800 f11, dual fish eye, etc). Third party wasn't set up to eat their lunch on this and was really only coming out the gate strong on 85mm primes.

So what do I do? I want some lenses to fill out full frame and I'm coming up on a new birding camera purchase. Everyone's got to answer the question for themselves, but I did end up ordering the R10 for birding (controls and batteries are the same as the RP, so it standardizes my load out) but went with the Rokinon 14mm F2.8 manual lens for wide angle. The camera will work with my existing Sigma 150-600 adapted, and the lens won't tie me into a dying system if this goes the way I fear. 

[Tronhard]

I hope that what I am going to say will offer some comfort to you.  I do understand your position, but ironically, I saw the same narrative you express back in the 1990's when the EF mount replaced the FD mount.  There were 3rd party lenses well established for the legacy mount - I actually used Tamron SP Adaptall lenses because I could switch them between my Canon and Nikon Cameras.  At that time Nikon had retained the AI mount that they kept with until their Z mount.  Access to dedicated EF mounts by 3rd party suppliers was not immediate for the reasons I have outlined but after a couple of years they appeared - which made sense that they likely had access to license to make but took a while to develop for a fully electronic interface that combined focus, exposure and a motorized lens.

What makes things more difficult this time is the timing of the massive disruption caused by the pandemic combined with developing a whole new sensor system and optical interface.   It hit Canon harder than Sony (they started six years earlier) and Nikon as they had about six-month lead (Aug 2018 vs Feb 2019) and that six months made a big difference in the context of the design and logistic chains that developed, produced and shipped lenses.  The other things that impacted their ability to build momentum were location of their design facilities and manufacturing resources relative to lockdowns in Japan and China.  I suspect that has pushed back Canon's roadmap significantly and we likely be seeing more lenses from Canon and perhaps be further on towards opening up to other manufacturers. 

When Canon went digital in Oct 2000 with the D30, it was a ground-breaking camera - dropping the price of a DSLR by 90% and being the first to offer an APS-C CMOS sensor.
Ref: 

What made that transition to digital easier was that the first series of DSLRs all had APS-C sensors but EF FF mounts - so the whole array of optics (native and 3rd party) would work with them natively.  The EF-S mount came out some years later with the EOS 20D and of course there were not a lot of optics for that immediately but again, Canon relied on its huge array of FF lenses to hold the line.

What all this is about is context.  I submit that this is not a new situation in itself, but the cycle has been made more challenging by on-going hangovers from the disruption of COVID.  One could say, well what about Nikon, they seem to be doing OK and have allowed Tamron to make a 3rd party lens?  Absolutely true, but they have different design facilities and logistics structures to deliver parts, manufacture and ship finished units.  All of this has an impact on the release of new models and Nikon did not have to make their legacy DSLR mount compatible with the new mount.  I think Canon banked on people using their EF units as they brought on RF lenses - and for many, including me that has worked.   Also, I personally see that Canon are more conservative in their approach to delivering new units and technology. 

In the end, there are some great optics out there for Canon from their own lineup at a reasonable price point - for example one can get a wide range of coverage for an RF mount using the RF-S 18-45 and the RF 24-240 or RF-S 18-150 and RF 100-400.  It was for that reason that I deliberately presented an image with the much less forgiving R5 with 45M, using the RF 24-240 - that demanding sensor was well served by a relatively budget lens unit with a wide range.

[joshcruz]

I have been shooting with Canon for two decades. Since a year ago, I started using Sony. As a result, I've hardly used my R7 and R6Mii the past six months. Sony FF has been liberating to use. I can go high end or midrange and nearly all the native lenses are good. The Tamron or Samyang 35-150mm, the ultrawide Viltrox 16mm 1.8, etc. They bring out the best in my Sony bodies. Bad enough that Canon's top of the line maxing out at 45mp vs Sony's 61mp. Worse that the cost of Canon RF system ownership has become more prohibitive just because Canon continues to behave like the big pharma of photography. Even Nikon which is also late in the FF mirrorless game has opened up the Z mount!

[Tronhard]

In that case, I sincerely suggest  you just move to Sony full time - really, I doubt there is nothing we can say, and Canon can practically do that will be likely to make you happy.  I have provided a list of lenses from some months back to prove that Canon have not locked everyone out of the market as you suggest - it's just not true.  I have also told  you why any OEM will not open their mounts up, but all that has fallen on deaf ears.
I shoot Sony as well, and I respect their gear along with Fuji, Nikon and Olympus.  They are ALL good camera makers, or they would not have a market, and each has its strengths, but in the end it's down to the shooter. 
Nikon have released their mount like Canon on a case by case basis, so you would be drawing a long bow to suggest they have 'opened up' the Z mount - they have not.  They are in precisely the same position as Canon.
All that said, I wish you good luck and good shooting with whatever you use!

[Waddizzle]

Canon critics like to point to Sony as an example of how “opening the mount to third party lenses” should be done.  Sony is actually a bad example to use.  They obviously do not know the history of the Sony E-Mount.

Sony announced their E-mount in 2010, but the first camera bodies did not reach the market until 2011.  Sony had zero lens production capacity.  Sony subcontracted Hasselblad and Leica to manufacture the initial lineup of Sony branded lenses.  

Two years after the initial release of “Sony” E-mount lenses, subcontractors Hasselblad and Leica began introducing a few E-mount lenses under their own brand names.  The lenses were not the best bang for the buck.

Most Sony users would use an EF-Mount adapter to use Canon lenses.  This practice continued until the 2017-2019 time frame when third party lenses for the Sony E-Mount really took off.  

Sony had worked out the last of the kinks and had finally developed their lens production facilities.  Note that when third party E-Mount lenses really began to the market in 2017-2019, this was about some 6 to 8 years after the Sony E-Mount was introduced.  Canon is operating on a MUCH faster timeline than what Sony ever did.

Canon has every right to protect their investment into R&D. and fill out their lineup of RF lenses before opening it up to third party lenses.  After all, this is exactly what Sony did. 

But some manufacturers began producing and selling third party products without proper licensing agreements with Canon.  These cheap, imported products were a public relations and warranty service nightmare for Canon.

The third party products were causing R Series bodies to malfunction, produce error codes, and in many causes actually damage camera bodies.  So Canon enforced the IP, and forced the cheap imported products off store shelves.

Those are the actual facts, AFAIK.  Canon never issued any public statements as to the motive behind prohibiting third party lenses.  My explanations of Canon’s motives are speculation and based upon observations.

You are not the first forum member to threaten they will change brands if Canon does not allow third party lenses.  It seems that you feel a 60MP camera with a frame rate of 8-10 fps is superior to a 45MP camera with a frame rate of 20 fps.  You are entitled to your opinions.

[joshcruz]

Your responses are typical cherry picking to defend Canon as if you do it for a living. Bottomline today, Canon is photography's big pharma by keeping the RF mount shut to non-Canon lens aside from less than a handful MF lenses. I can only punish Canon by diminishing the business I give it. How many times have famous brands so successfully made us drink from their Kool-aid fountain. Go slow guys, you're close to getting drunk.

[Tronhard]

Cherry picking is not providing clear data, that you want to ignore.  I have said that I doubt we can say anything to convince you and your closed and emotive responses are not a hallmark of a collegial debate.  Time for us all to move on, I think.  I am encouraging you to get the gear that works for you and hope you are happy with it, so I guess in that respect we are in agreement - buy Sony!

[joshcruz]

Cherry picking is using only the data that proves your narrow point, shoving aside the larger data that points to the larger conclusion that there is nearly ZERO NON-CANON RF LENS today, end of story. You don't get to dictate when people move on or move forward. Do you read at all btw? Buy Sony when I'm already invested in both systems as I previously wrote?

[Tronhard]

Sending emotive posts and abusing those who offer data when you only offer biased opinions vitriol is not helping anyone. This is a pointless discussion.  I will ignore you from now on.

[Waddizzle]

---

@joshcruz wrote:

Your responses are typical cherry picking to defend Canon as if you do it for a living. Bottomline today, Canon is photography's big pharma by keeping the RF mount shut to non-Canon lens aside from less than a handful MF lenses. I can only punish Canon by diminishing the business I give it. How many times have famous brands so successfully made us drink from their Kool-aid fountain. Go slow guys, you're close to getting drunk.

---

It was you who picked to use Sony as an example of how it should be done.  My apologies for debunking your example.   You chose to use Sony as an example.  Sony’s track record is not a good one to use to support your argument or complaint, unfortunately.  

Canon will open up their RF-Mount to third party manufacturers 1-2 years faster than Sony did.  And this was done despite a global pandemic and economic shutdown that lasted for the better part of a year.  This is being done despite an ongoing supply chain shortages of microchips.

You are free to present alternative facts to support y0ur complaint, whatever that might be.