gwilliams6

Some of these lenses you list are KIT lenses like the RF24-105 f4-7.1.
The top quality RF 24-105mm f4 costs $1200 USD

The top quality RF 50mm f1.2 costs $2000 USD

Sure if you want to buy an expensive Canon R body and put cheap optical quality, variable-aperture kit lenses on it, then Canon has you covered.

I guess we will never know if third-party lens makers could have beat the optical quality of these kit lenses for less price, or matched the quality of the top RF lenses at less price.

But in other lens mounts the best third-party lenses do match the quality of the best OEM glass, and at less cost.

Cheers and best to you.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

Simple fix. Canon is NOT telling you what to buy, they are protecting their patents and their income. If you don't want to buy Canon, you don't have too. Best of luck

gwilliams6

Simple fix. Canon open up your lens mount and see your camera body sales increase as more folks can afford to buy into your system.

It works great for Sony with its E-mount, the most widely produced and used mirrorless lens mount in the world with nearly 200 E-mount lenses on the market from Sony and numerous third-party makers and more being introduced every week. Consequently Sony is the largest selling mirrorless camera brand in the world. Just a fact.

And now Nikon has opened up its Z-mount to third-party lens makers.

Panasonic and Olympus micro 4/3rds cameras share some lens mounts and Third-party lens makers make many lenses for both these brands.

And Full frame mirrorless Panasonic, Leica and Sigma share the L-mount lenses.

Canon has a different business model and philosophy. It is their right to do so, but a shame for many Canon owners that would like some more options.

Cheers and best to you.

Kreb's Cyclist

Fujifilm has some models with articulating screens. Panasonic as well.

Jimmy T Loc: Virginia

I didn't mean to offend, it was merely an illustration.
I too take an expen$ive RX for which there is no generic equivalent.
Best Wishes

sippyjug104 Loc: Missouri

From a sales and marketing standpoint, lenses produce more revenue than cameras. We buy a camera yet we buy many lenses. I would not be surprised to know that there are many folks like me that have a larger investment in lenses than in the camera they go on.

Our collection of lenses also tends to be a driving factor in our decision of what new camera brand we will buy. Of course, there are those who 'bite the bullet' and buy a new camera system and collection of lenses to go with it.

dbrugger25 Loc: Raleigh, NC

I have had my intellectual property and the products that resulted stolen and sold by others. The patent laws are weak and the inventors have to spend huge amounts of money to defend their rights. Canon may have the deep pockets to stop those thefts and they should be aggressive.

Surpose you spent huge sums of money creating a new technology and the products that employ it. Your products have just appeared on the market and you are just beginning to recover your investment. Then, less expensive knock-offs start flooding the market. It you can't protect your rights you might be bankrupted by people who are using your idea.

Think about the original IBM PC. It changed the face of the computer industry. They also employed sleezy Bill Gates to write an operating system called IBM DOS. Within a very short time clones began appearing and eventually IBM dropped out of the market. At the same time, Gates used the software he was hired to create for IBM and offered it to all the clone manufacturers under his own title, MS DOS. IBM did a poor job of protecting their property and had an ineffective contract with Gates.

There was a wonderful spreadsheet and database software in the 1980s called Lotus 123. There was a word processing program called Word Perfect. Bill Gates ripped-off both of those excellent softwares and created Microsoft Office. He ruined Lotus and Word Perfect.

A free market economy that encourages invention and innovation can't prosper without intellectual and creative protections. There would be no point in using resources to create a new wonder drug or technology or product if everyone could just copy your work and compete at lower prices. You have done all the work and they make all the profits.

If you employ your creative abilities, and do hard work to capture a beautiful photograph, or capture an image of an important moment in history that is rightfully YOUR image. If I could just copy it and sell it in the marketplace at a very low price, is that not theft? I'm sure all of you can understand that issue.

The same is true of any other invention. Technology will stagnate and decay if companies and inventors can't reep the harvest of their work for a limited number of years. Copyrights can be acquired very quickly. Inventions are protected during the three year registration process and seventeen years thereafter for a total of 20 years.

To keep things fair, patents, once issued, are published and easily accessable to others. Publishing serves two purposes. It shows others what they are not allowed to duplicate. It also might serve as the inspiration for an even better idea. If you review a patent and find a much better idea as a result, you can get your own patent. That protection causes great innovation and competition which benefits everyone.

The downside is that, if I invent something that is flawed, and you read my patent and make a better product that addresses those flaws, I lose and you win. That is both the risk and beauty of Capitalism.

BebuLamar

IBM had the copyright on their BIOS code. They gave Gates the right to sell the DOS software which they think Gates couldn't sell because nobody can make the clone unless they can make the BIOS without violating the copyright. Well that took Compaq to figure it out how to do it. Of course there were some smart lawyers to help them too.

leftj Loc: Texas

I offered to pay someone to steal my intellectual property and I had no takers.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

The other downside of patents is that you make the details of the invention public, so that once the patent expires (typically 20 years), it’s easier to duplicate the product. Many small companies think twice about patenting new ideas for this very reason.

scallihan Loc: Tigard, OR

I love the articulating screen on my humble Canon P&S. It allows me to get angles I otherwise could not get. I'm vertically challenged, so it enables me to shoot at arms length over people, or shoot from the ground without laying down (in a muddy field, for example), or shoot around corners. I've never understood why other makers didn't offer that.

PhotogHobbyist Loc: Bradford, PA

I believe that could be construed as "industrial espionage" or "patent infringement" and the company originating the design could sue the company that copied the design. I further believe that many companies actually sell the design to other companies with a percentage of the profits from the copies going to the originating company. That way there is less, if any, loss of revenue to the original company.

DoneFlyin Loc: Texas Hill Country

Well said!
I absolutely agree and have experienced the anger and humiliation of Chinese counterfeit goods produced with our own property - our own tooling - and packaged in another international company’s packaging for sale in select areas of Asia. (They were not aware it was occurring.) We had made the multi-millions in investments that we were working to recover. Those thieves were simply printing money.

Recovery of product development investment can take many forms. A company chooses the form they employ. And it’s not unusual that a market segment becomes disillusioned and parts ways with the company’s products if they don’t care for the impact of such a decision. Ultimately, the market will pick the winners and losers - and whether that management decision was the right one. You’re in the process of doing that right now. Ain’t Capitalism Grand!

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

There are several RF lenses that have no EF equal ie 24-240 and 800 f11 as a couple ...

josquin1 Loc: Massachusetts

All Tamron and Sigma lenses with the EF mount will work just fine with the EF-RF adaptor on the Canon R cameras. And I suspect all Sigma and Tamron would do is simply change the mounts to RF and announce new RF lenses. That's what Canon did when they announced their 500,600, and 1200 RFL lenses.