[Serkevan]

This is what they did the last time, and they didn’t seem terribly concerned by the loss of disgruntled FD users who changed brands in disgust.

No, it is not. Last time, FD users had zero options for using their lenses, because no other camera body would take them. They HAD to change systems, at a loss, to something else. Today, EF users can adapt all their lenses to not only one but three other brands (Sony, Nikon Z, Fuji GFX), and to MFT if they are okay with the crop. And they can do so without any performance loss. All for the cost of a, say, 800€ Sony A7ii and a 200€ adapter. That's significantly less than, say, 4 high-quality lenses (and a body, lol).

Killing off FD entirely meant putting the users against a wall, hoping they take your solution. Killing off EF adapters means putting the users in a plane and giving them a free ride to the competition.

[StiffLegged]

[Wheatfield]

No, it is not. Last time, FD users had zero options for using their lenses, because no other camera body would take them. They HAD to change systems, at a loss, to something else. Today, EF users can adapt all their lenses to not only one but three other brands (Sony, Nikon Z, Fuji GFX), and to MFT if they are okay with the crop. And they can do so without any performance loss. All for the cost of a, say, 800€ Sony A7ii and a 200€ adapter. That's significantly less than, say, 4 high-quality lenses (and a body, lol).

Killing off FD entirely meant putting the users against a wall, hoping they take your solution. Killing off EF adapters means putting the users in a plane and giving them a free ride to the competition.

I guess the question is, whose fault was it they had zero options?
I really don't trust Canon to not have the hubris to try it again.

---------- Post added Mar 27th, 2022 at 02:09 PM ----------

Haven't we done this to death yet?

One could say that about 90% of the topics here before the second post in the thread appears.

[Serkevan]

I guess the question is, whose fault was it they had zero options?
I really don't trust Canon to not have the hubris to try it again.

My point is that Canon's stars were quite aligned for the FD kerfuffle, so forcing the situation in the way they did was a sound idea (again - from a practical standpoint. I would have scrubbed Canon from my life, had I been an FD user). Now, it is obvious that doing the same movement would just be terrible PR for basically no potential win.

[Wheatfield]

My point is that Canon's stars were quite aligned for the FD kerfuffle, so forcing the situation in the way they did was a sound idea (again - from a practical standpoint. I would have scrubbed Canon from my life, had I been an FD user). Now, it is obvious that doing the same movement would just be terrible PR for basically no potential win.

Consider this though: Minolta found themselves in exactly the same position as Canon and did the right thing by their manual focus customers.
Stop looking at this as a they had to drop FD because they had EF. They could have maintained support for the old mount and their old customers for more than the few years that they gave absolutely terrible support to the old mount.

[Serkevan]

Consider this though: Minolta found themselves in exactly the same position as Canon and did the right thing by their manual focus customers.
Stop looking at this as a they had to drop FD because they had EF. They could have maintained support for the old mount and their old customers for more than the few years that they gave absolutely terrible support to the old mount.

Yes, they could have. And that would have been the right to do, morally. The decision they made, however draconian, was financially sound.
I'm literally just saying that they *cannot* get away with pulling the same thing again.

[reh321]

Consider this though: Minolta found themselves in exactly the same position as Canon and did the right thing by their manual focus customers.
Stop looking at this as a they had to drop FD because they had EF. They could have maintained support for the old mount and their old customers for more than the few years that they gave absolutely terrible support to the old mount.

How did that work out for Minolta?

[RICHARD L.]

How did that work out for Minolta?

I invested a lot in the Minolta MD manual-focus system (4 X-700, 1 XD-11, 1 XE-7, various SR bodies + 26 MD lenses from the 16 mm f/2.8 Fisheye to the 500 mm f/8 Catadioptric and an MD 400 mm f/5.6 APO). When Minolta turned to Auto-focusing, they changed the bayonet mount (it turned in the opposite direction). I felt "so betrayed", so "left in the cold", when it came time to turn to digital SLRs, I switched to Pentax and started a lens system anew. A Fotodiox adapter now permits mounting Minolta MD lenses on a Pentax K-mount, so all is not lost.

Minolta Corp. merged with Konica Corp, they jointly dropped their Camera Division and sold it to Sony Corp. Minolta-Konica now specializes in Photocopiers and Medical equipment.

Regards

P.S. I like Canon compacts though. I now have a G3X superzoom that works wonders.

[reh321]

I invested a lot in the Minolta MD manual-focus system (4 X-700, 1 XD-11, 1 XE-7, various SR bodies + 26 MD lenses from the 16 mm f/2.8 Fisheye to the 500 mm f/8 Catadioptric and an MD 400 mm f/5.6 APO). When Minolta turned to Auto-focusing, they changed the bayonet mount (it turned in the opposite direction). I felt "so betrayed", so "left in the cold", when it came time to turn to digital SLRs, I switched to Pentax and started a lens system anew. A Fotodiox adapter now permits mounting Minolta MD lenses on a Pentax K-mount, so all is not lost.

Minolta Corp. merged with Konica Corp, they jointly dropped their Camera Division and sold it to Sony Corp. Minolta-Konica now specializes in Photocopiers and Medical equipment.

Regards

P.S. I like Canon compacts though. I now have a G3X superzoom that works wonders.

I felt their “Mind of Minolta” advertising was spooky, so I didn’t even consider them in in 1995 when I ended up going with Canon, where I stayed for 20 years before coming back to Pentax. According to my counts, I have still taken slightly more photos with Canon than with Pentax.

[reh321]

I invested a lot in the Minolta MD manual-focus system (4 X-700, 1 XD-11, 1 XE-7, various SR bodies + 26 MD lenses from the 16 mm f/2.8 Fisheye to the 500 mm f/8 Catadioptric and an MD 400 mm f/5.6 APO). When Minolta turned to Auto-focusing, they changed the bayonet mount (it turned in the opposite direction). I felt "so betrayed", so "left in the cold", when it came time to turn to digital SLRs, I switched to Pentax and started a lens system anew. A Fotodiox adapter now permits mounting Minolta MD lenses on a Pentax K-mount, so all is not lost.

Minolta Corp. merged with Konica Corp, they jointly dropped their Camera Division and sold it to Sony Corp. Minolta-Konica now specializes in Photocopiers and Medical equipment.

Regards

P.S. I like Canon compacts though. I now have a G3X superzoom that works wonders.

1. Auto-focus incompatible with what came before?
2. Brand absorbed by different company?

What were the lessons @Wheatfield wanted for us to learn?