[Jonathan Mac]

Yes,Canon spent the $$$$$$$$ to engineer the RF cameras and should be justly rewarded.

I dont think any people owning the R system should be complaining because Canon has the cheap range of RF glass.Primes like 16f2.8..24 f1.8..35 f1.8...50 f1.8...85 f2 , 600 f11 and 800 f11.The zoom range is good too 15-30,24-105,24-240,100-400.Also the adapters are excellent and loads of EF and EFs glass available new and used.

Its logical to think that Canon would like to see their gear as an exclusive area.

As far as Viltrox goes, some people like their glass and their adapters work(but no WR).At this stage the only lens I've seen reports on that out does native is the 13mm for Fuji,its getting very enthusiastic write ups and reports.

I don't think there's any danger of Canon not earning their money back and a very healthy profit on top from the development of the RF system.

Canon are to be credited as the only brand whose FF mirrorless lens range includes multiple cheaper options even if they're not as good as the more expensive ones. Other brands just don't have that cheaper option. However, Canon lenses in general are expensive and people expect to be able to buy third-party lenses to get far better value for their money, and overall I think that's good for Canon's RF ecosystem. Canon can risk this move because they're still the leader in the market and don't need the extra boost to their ecosystem, but then Sony don't need it either but allow, even encourage, it, and that's good for their customers as it provides competition even within the mount ecosystem and that drives quality and variety up.

The Viltrox lenses I have (for Fujifilm X - 23mm & 56mm) are excellent, but I don't think that has any bearing on Canon's decision.

[Serkevan]

I assume many people ignore current tech. The old camera "protocols" were probably relatively plain and simple things which where just proprietary but openly visible. There you could "reverse engineer".

With current mirrorless toys and their brand-new lens mounts and protocols I do assume that these are digitally encrypted protocols (super easy today).

#1: this now makes "reverse engineering" at least a lot more difficult or technically impossible.

#2: In many countries breaking any sort of digital communication encryption would be considered hacking and illegal in many ways. Beginning with copyright laws and ending in more severe crimes. The same laws which prevent people from copying games.
So I am sure there is zero "patent" required today, you just need to encrypt your software communication and can sue anyone breaking in there.
It is about software legislation now.

AFAIK, third parties simply use EF protocols, which are compatible with RF.
I mean, I guess Canon can start killing their own EF lenses, but that would be an even worse move.

[martin42mm]

AFAIK, third parties simply use EF protocols, which are compatible with RF.
I mean, I guess Canon can start killing their own EF lenses, but that would be an even worse move.

Like when Canon killed the FD mount.......? Canon seem to enjoy disenchanting their own user base.

[UncleVanya]

Comparing to Sony is a bit of a mismatch. Sony started out with no real presence in the market ends Limited lens line up and had to allow 3rd party involvement to get any type of depth to the lineup in a reasonable timeframe without massive financial risk.

The fact that Sony has a large market now is probably born from that decision, but I doubt they would take the same stance if they had started with Canon’s market position. As much as I dislike Canon (and the way they’ve discarded their former lens mounts) I think this decision isn’t hard to understand. I’m not clear if it will ultimately hurt them or help them however.

[martin42mm]

Comparing to Sony is a bit of a mismatch. Sony started out with no real presence in the market ends Limited lens line up and had to allow 3rd party involvement to get any type of depth to the lineup in a reasonable timeframe without massive financial risk.

The fact that Sony has a large market now is probably born from that decision, but I doubt they would take the same stance if they had started with Canon’s market position. As much as I dislike Canon (and the way they’ve discarded their former lens mounts) I think this decision isn’t hard to understand. I’m not clear if it will ultimately hurt them or help them however.

Looking at the 700+ responses on the DPReview website in regard to this announcement, the overwhelming majority are disgusted with Canon for doing it, the decision cementing their resolve NEVER to go to Canon gear, others who were contemplating just that move seriously reconsidering their position, and even hardened Canon users decrying the decision, with a few saying their current Canon will be their last. Hardly a scientific poll on the outcome of Canon's position, but I suspect quite indicative of general sentiment. Someone has dropped a serious clanger at Canon I reckon.

[StiffLegged]

… Pentax is routinely dinged in reviews for having poor third party lens support and I suppose that should be brought up … in Canon reviews as well.

As if that’s Pentax’s fault! However it can now be laid at Canon’s door that they actively prevent third party support - might leave their R10 dead in the water, the chumps.

[martin42mm]

As if that’s Pentax’s fault! However it can now be laid at Canon’s door that they actively prevent third party support - might leave their R10 dead in the water, the chumps.

There's a wonderful post in the comments thread on the DPREview site following this announcement. One Canon owner is so wedded to the Canon blurb that he says he has never, and never will, put 3rd party lenses on his camera, describing them as 'bottle glass'. It's his loss, choice-wise and financially, and there have been numerous less than subtle comments aimed at this blinkered attitude. It's his choice, of course, but why decry 3rd party manufacturers making lenses to fit a variety of cameras , and those that chose to use them? I doubt he's ever tried one, so isn't talking from experience , but prejudice. But as I said in an earlier post, this should free up third-party capacity for making lenses for Pentax if they have any sense-far simpler to make a lens that will be compatible with Pentax than many 'electronics-only' camera mounts.

[repaap]

It is funny. 3rd party all in all . Especially when many has left ‘Pentax’ because of just those new Tamron f1.8 primes. Because they were not available and they are so good. I suppose many has gone to Nikon/Sony camp. Tamron&sigma will propably be part of Sony, Nikon& L-mount, since they were part of that from the beginning. It would be one to deny that now.

Frankly I’m surprised that viltrox has been doing RF AF lenses so long, since there practically has not been any other 3rd party AF lenses so far for RF.

All in all for Sony the situation in terms of lenses is different since co’op has been it part of that from the beginning.

Where Canon has mostly been doing most by them self. Not sure if they have been happy with Sigma/Tamron even with EF mount.

[Serkevan]

Not sure if they have been happy with Sigma/Tamron even with EF mount.

It's Canon, the company that chips their ink cartridges so they read empty when they are half full, while attempting to block any other brand's cartridges (and, on the side, make the scanner stop working if the printer has no ink, because *of course*).

[KiloHotelphoto]

I suppose so. I imagine the best you can do is get Sigma lenses in the EOS mount and put them on your RF camera with an adapter.

Pentax is routinely dinged in reviews for having poor third party lens support and I suppose that should be brought up going forward in Canon reviews as well. The big area where the complaints generally come are related to super telephoto lenses like the 150-600 lenses that Sigma and Tamron offer. These are quite nice lenses for the price and the fact that Canon excludes them may help Canon lens sales, but certainly could push away some wildlife photographers.

They have a great lens selection for wildlife. 1200mm F8, 800 F5.6, 600 F4, 400 F2.8 and 100-500 4.5-7.1 all are L glass. Then they have the 800 and 600 F11 and the 100-400 5.6-8 lenses that are all more affordable options plus the 1.4 and 2X teleconverters.

I completely agree with any brand that wants to keep their lens mount closed off to 3rd party lenses. Right now Canon and Nikon developed new mounts that they put a lot of money into and they want to earn that money back. Canon developed new features in the bodies and the lenses to get the best out of them working together, even some of the old EF lenses don't work as good as a new RF lenses.

The people who aren't going to move to an RF or Z mount body because no 3rd partly lenses aren't the customers Canon and Nikon are probably too concerned with anyway. They will buy a camera maybe every few years and that's it, they want customers who will buy a camera and then spend money building up a lens collection from them that's how they make their money and that's the main concern for every business.

People who want to use Sigma lenses can always buy a Sigma camera body they don't need to buy a Canon or Nikon.

[Rondec]

They have a great lens selection for wildlife. 1200mm F8, 800 F5.6, 600 F4, 400 F2.8 and 100-500 4.5-7.1 all are L glass. Then they have the 800 and 600 F11 and the 100-400 5.6-8 lenses that are all more affordable options plus the 1.4 and 2X teleconverters.

I completely agree with any brand that wants to keep their lens mount closed off to 3rd party lenses. Right now Canon and Nikon developed new mounts that they put a lot of money into and they want to earn that money back. Canon developed new features in the bodies and the lenses to get the best out of them working together, even some of the old EF lenses don't work as good as a new RF lenses.

The people who aren't going to move to an RF or Z mount body because no 3rd partly lenses aren't the customers Canon and Nikon are probably too concerned with anyway. They will buy a camera maybe every few years and that's it, they want customers who will buy a camera and then spend money building up a lens collection from them that's how they make their money and that's the main concern for every business.

People who want to use Sigma lenses can always buy a Sigma camera body they don't need to buy a Canon or Nikon.

I think the point is that if you want a 600mm lens, the Tamron 150-600 will cost you 1200 dollars, You can get the Sigma 150-600 Contemporary for 900 dollars. The Canon lenses you mentioned are either significantly more expensive or don't have the reach.

I'll take it for granted that the Canon lenses are better, but there are still folks who would prefer to spend half the money for lens that it is decent.

I don't feel particularly sorry for Canon and Nikon. As Serekvan says, it smacks of printer companies that chip their cartridges so that you can't buy third party ink. My GE refrigerator now has a chip on the water filter so that GE can make it so that you have to buy a 40 dollar chipped water filter from them rather than a 12 dollar off brand water filter. I'm not sure if there is a lot of tech that went into the water filters, but to me it feels like companies are focused on getting money out of consumers and not letting other generic companies under cut them.

[repaap]

It's Canon, the company that chips their ink cartridges so they read empty when they are half full, while attempting to block any other brand's cartridges (and, on the side, make the scanner stop working if the printer has no ink, because *of course*).

Yup! it is for your own good to keep ink tanks full at all times! (lol)

[StiffLegged]

...I don't feel particularly sorry for Canon and Nikon

Did I miss something – what are Nikon doing?

https://www.tamron.eu/magazine/blog/detail/tamrons-first-nikon-z-mount-syste...odel-a047-117/

[KiloHotelphoto]

You can get the Canon 600mm F11 for $700 now.

[Rondec]

Did I miss something – what are Nikon doing?

I don't know that Nikon is doing anything. KiloHotel simply said that Canon and Nikon have spent a bunch of money on their mounts and lenses for them and they should not have to fight third party competition with lenses. If you want a Sigma lens you should buy a Sigma camera (I guess he meant an L mount camera).