Canon screwing amateur photographers (Page 11): 🤭...

Joes49

CHG_CANON wrote:

If you want to keep playing this game, pretty soon you're going to have to take your shoes off.

🤭

therwol Loc: USA

John O. wrote:

It looks like Vitrox was infringing on Canon's pat... (show quote)

Canon has no obligation to allow anyone else to produce RF lenses that utilize their patented technology. They could sell the right to use these patents if they want. If they maintain their current stance, it remains to be seen whether this might hurt the sales of their cameras and lenses. I doubt it, but you never know.

BebuLamar

therwol wrote:

Canon has no obligation to allow anyone else to produce RF lenses that utilize their patented technology. They could sell the right to use these patents if they want. If they maintain their current stance, it remains to be seen whether this might hurt the sales of their cameras and lenses. I doubt it, but you never know.

Nikon allows third party to make their lenses. I don't see anybody jumps ship from Canon to Nikon because of this. I don't think Canon will lose any sales.

therwol Loc: USA

BebuLamar wrote:

Nikon allows third party to make their lenses. I don't see anybody jumps ship from Canon to Nikon because of this. I don't think Canon will lose any sales.

I don't think they will either.

goofybruce

Sony has articulating screen.... only have to kneel on ground, not lay on belly, to get a low angle for shooting mushrooms (which I do a lot).... and to shoot from "above" the crowd as well.

lreisner Loc: Union,NJ

rmalarz wrote:

I've never understood the desire to put third-party glass on a top-of-the-line camera. I believe the Nikon D850 has an articulating screen.
--Bob

Lenses and cameras are two different products. Just because a company makes a top of the line camera doesn't mean that another company can not make a top of the line lens for that camera as long as they have the specs for that camera. In many cases, Tamron and Sigma lenses either exceed those of the camera makers or the differences are microscopic except to pixel peepers. Tamron lenses tend to be stripped down in features and slightly in their build quality, but their prices are striped down as well but not the picture quality. If you are a travel photographer like me, weight and size are important factors. Tamron lenses often excel in that area.

I would agree with you if you said, buy the best quality lenses you can afford if you buy a top of the line camera. My advice would be to be buy the best lens you can afford for any level camera. Even an entry level camera can take amazing pictures with a top of the line lens. Conversely, a top of the line camera with a poor quality lens will take terrible pictures no matter how good the camera is.

gwilliams6

therwol wrote:

Canon has no obligation to allow anyone else to produce RF lenses that utilize their patented technology. They could sell the right to use these patents if they want. If they maintain their current stance, it remains to be seen whether this might hurt the sales of their cameras and lenses. I doubt it, but you never know.

It is partly because of Canon's market arrogance towards customers why I left Canon after using their pro gear for over 42 years. So they lost this longtime pro and others I know. But they are so big they dont really care in those corporate offices. lol

This story has been trending across the world and many folks on smaller budgets are weighing in saying they will find other brand options instead of having to choose between buying cheaper quality kit RF glass, or being forced to buy expensive RF lenses to get good RF glass.

People want options and still want quality lenses at reasonable prices to fit their tight budgets. Other fullframe mirrorless makers like Nikon with its Z-mount, Sony with its E-mount, and Panasonic, Sigma and Leica with their shared L-mount get it. Canon seems clueless here.

Cheers and best to you.

Bill_de Loc: US

Is Canon going after all the 3rd party lens manufacturers who make Canon compatible lenses, or just one?

I have a feeling, without evidence, that there is more to this story than what has been released.

---

gwilliams6

John O. wrote:

It looks like Vitrox was infringing on Canon's pat... (show quote)

There are still some early produced third party RF lenses left at dealers, but dont expect any new ones . Canon can claim infringement but unless and until they win such a case in courts around the world (an expensive and time consuming thing to do), those remaining third party RF lenses can be legally sold.

But it sends the message and you wont now see Sigma, Tamron and others making any new RF lenses that wont get any firmware support or coding from Canon going forward.

Canon's business model and corporate philosophy is their own, right or wrong. Yes it will cost them some potential R camera buyers , but Canon is so large they wont feel it in those corporate boardrooms, LOL.

Cheers and best to you.

therwol Loc: USA

lreisner wrote:

Just because a company makes a top of the line camera doesn't mean that another company can not make a top of the line lens for that camera as long as they have the specs for that camera.

Wrong. Companies own patents on the technology in their equipment. To make lenses using OEM patented technology is against the law unless permission is given or unless a licensing fee is paid. If caught, the best the violator can hope for is a cease and desist order. The worst would be a costly lawsuit. I would be surprised if Nikon isn't getting some licensing fees from third parties like Tamron and Sigma. If not, then they just don't care. Canon takes a different stance on this.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

gwilliams6 wrote:

It is partly because of Canon's market arrogance t... (show quote)

Gerald, given your impressive resume, which you have reminded us of many, many times, why are 95% of the 115 threads you have initiated either touting Sony or bashing Canon? I would think you would have more helpful information with your experience to contribute than these 2 subjects, so here is my question: are you compensated in any way by Sony? If so, now I understand the tenor of your posts, and if not, why not share more of your technical/composition experience rather than focus on Sony marketing?

epd1947

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtX7gSJb5sI

Milkiebear

I am not a huge fans of focus by wire and sold my 24-105 RF because of it just not working right for manual focus. So I actually have yet to buy any other RF lenses, so far just using my old EF, but I was hoping for a sigma art RF mount that does not use the same focus by wire. And yes 95% of the time I am using manual focus.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

epd1947 wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtX7gSJb5sI

We shall see.
They can always change direction.

BebuLamar

Milkiebear wrote:

I am not a huge fans of focus by wire and sold my 24-105 RF because of it just not working right for manual focus. So I actually have yet to buy any other RF lenses, so far just using my old EF, but I was hoping for a sigma art RF mount that does not use the same focus by wire. And yes 95% of the time I am using manual focus.

If you are really into manual focus should check out the Zeiss lenses. I am not sure but I think they make some manual focus only lens with large well damped focusing ring,
I guess they don't make them for the RF mount yet.