Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

I think that is a possible argument, but seems a little harsh. Canon is clearly able to maintain compatibility with older and new lenses for EOS cameras while having the ability to make improvements to their system as desired.

Expecting them to publish the protocols so that other companies can offer competitive offerings might harm Canon users by making Canon's return on investment lower, thus either increasing prices or limiting development of new technologies and products.

That leaves off-brand lenses such as Tamron and Sigma with the requirement to reverse engineer their products which comes with a responsibility to keep their customers happy and for users to check compatibility carefully as you expressed so well.

Other than that, I agree with everything else you said.

Kuzano

Canon has repeatedly over the years shown little to no concern for "backward" compatibility. The biggest slap in the face from Canon to users was in the "Great Shift to EOS" many years ago leaving ALL users with FD mount lenses with virtually no ability to use the new EOS lenses on old film camera's.

Even now, canon lenses are the least adaptable for legacy use to other manufacturer camera's and also to their own marque.

The GStE, caused many Canon users to turn away from Canon. It's surprising they ever built the following they have now. Changing Mounts is a routine move for Canon, spread over time.

As a result, I personally feel Canon equipment is highly over-rated. They have certainly not exhibited any loyalty to followers of their equipment.

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

If we leave the impassioned rhetoric out and look at the facts a different story emerges. Canon made a difficult choice for good reasons in 1987. To have stayed with a mount compatible with FL/FD/FDn lenses would have compromised the design of autofocus systems.

FL lenses were introduced 1964 and the mount format was compatible with Canon camera bodies introduced up to 1986 with the T90 and system support till 1991. A product family life span of over 25 years is no bad thing, and of course the cameras still work as designed today. The EOS family introduced in 1987 is still going strong almost thirty years later.

So, one major transition in 56 years isn't too bad. For most people that is once in a life time. Although it is a non trivial modification I have a Canon FL 55mm f/1.2 and various FD lenses working just fine on my APS-C EOS body.

If people can't get over a product transition like that just once in over half a century, together with all the advantages that came with it, then no wonder they struggle to keep up with the pace of modern life and technology.

Canon has not only managed to stay in business, but is thriving and adapting to future business conditions quite well, in the camera market and many other business fields. Very few other vendors can match Canon's track record. Even brands that have survived are frequently under new corporate ownership, and brands that are doing a good job in cameras now such as Sony have done so buy acquiring other companies to gain the assets and markets required to be successful.

pecohen Loc: Central Maine

When we buy, even from company with a good reputation can we be certain everything will go smoothly? Absolutely not. I had a bad experience with B&H once though I'm inclined to put the blame on one of their employees not the company itself. I'm not blacklisting B&H for one misunderstanding that did eventually did work out for me.

On the other hand, when buying something used from an individual there is always a risk. So suppose you bought something from the bulletin board here on UHH and when it arrived it was defective and the seller did not agree to take it back. Would UHH go to bat for you? I'd be surprised and even if they did what could they do?

On the other hand, making people satisfied with their transactions on eBay is important to eBay's business model; I'd say it probably pretty important to PayPal's business model as well, but that may be a bit less clear. And they have a good record of ensuring that the transactions are honest.

I don't buy or sell on eBay much but I do occasionally and I actually prefer to deal through them precisely for the protection they provide.

blackest Loc: Ireland

But then there are also Canon EF-s lenses which use a modified EF mount so they can't be used on EF bodies.

Pentax have all their lenses working on the soon to be released K1 even the DA crop factor lenses and Medium Format lenses. I think Nikon is compatible to a greater or lesser extent too. Some low end bodies do not have a built in focus motor.

Olympus after switching from 43rds to m43rds provided an adapter to enable the 43rds lenses to fully work with the new m43 Olympus bodies.

Then there is Sony which has bodies which can use Canon Lenses as well as their own.

It is a bit off topic now, the original post was largely to help inform Canon owners of potential pitfalls of buying some third party EOS-EF lenses. It could be worse at least the older EF Canon lenses still work.
It's not too bad after all :)

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

All of that is correct, and Canon has made those decisions for its own reasons, which are fine by me, I can guess at the trade offs they made and the reasons. As a Canon APS-C user I like having access to high quality wide angle EF-S lenses at a lower price point that the EF lenses I would need. For longer lenses I would use EF when I can justify the cost.

Primarily I was trying to say that there is no good reason for Canon (or any other vendor) to expose its proprietary protocols to competing vendors unless they feel there is a commercial gain to be made.

blackest Loc: Ireland

If you remain with Canon and move to a full frame canon you will get no use of those EF-S lenses without hacking the lenses mount. For Pentax and Nikon it was a firmware option to support the crop factor lenses. Maybe there is a commercial gain to be made. Since the older EOS lenses made by Canon do work.

http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Ratings

That page may be quite surprising it was to me. It is a good job canon brought out the 5DS and 5DS R last year.

One last thing the older EOS lenses can not know the newer EOS protocol so for a new canon body it must recognise the lens and use the older protocol, this at least is a good thing for existing canon customers as long as they continue to support the older lenses.

Since it is the camera body which has to recognise the lens it would have been an option to recognise the older Sigma lenses too. This would never have a hope of happening politically even though i'm sure technically it was a possibility.

I believe Canon took Sigma to court to try and stop Sigma making compatible lenses and lost. Getting a little more on topic the lens reviews for the Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 seem to rate it as a better lens than Canon's competing lens.

twhrider Loc: Indiana

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

As a Canon user, I just have a different decision process / value system from you. Not saying yours is not valid, just different from mine. I doubt I will go to full frame unless my financial situation changes significantly, so APS-C and EF-S for the wider end of the spectrum. The good ones hold their value, so I can always resell them. It makes good financial sense for me so I agree with that aspect of Canon's strategy. Also, hacking EF-S mounts is risky since there is a likelihood of mirror contact as well as vignetting issues. Staying with APS-C, say the 7D mk II, would give me a high end camera with all my current lenses including my FL/FD lenses (with Ed Mika mounts) that would also have mirror contact risks with a FF body.

As for the protocol / camera body firmware I agree with your technical assessment, and I'm more than happy with Canon's approach. As someone who works in the tech industry I see no reason to give competitors access to my research and development investments unless it benefits my business. If Sigma wants to put lenses on a Canon, they can reverse engineer the stuff and avoid being sued for patent infringement, and if Canon wants to change things then Sigma can jump through the necessary hoops.

On the other hand, I really like Magic Lantern, but it's 100% reverse engineered and open source, so Canon can see if any of their code is in the ML source. That I think helps Canon users and Canon's business, and protects the ML guys.

As for "I believe Canon took Sigma to court to try and stop Sigma making compatible lenses and lost" you can clearly believe what you want, and it may even be true, but a quick google search didn't surface any details on that. It did produce a result that Nikon sued Sigma over VR, Sigma lost and settled for $14.5M. I guess that's pretty much the same result all things being equal!

Frankly, the DXO mark stuff interests me, but like brother Sharpie, the sensor is one factor, but not the only one that influences my decision. There's no real value in me delineating what my criteria are since they are my individual subjective preferences. Essentially I'm happy with Canon's business decisions for the most part for my own needs. Others need to choose their own criteria.

So, if I want a Tamron or Sigma lens 'cos it is a better decision than a Canon offering I can choose to do that and accept the risks / inconvenience. Caveat Emptor.

That much said, Canon USA's new website sucks (not the European one), they should find out who made the decisions and approved/implemented the design and make them, ... well perhaps we can vote on the appropriate number and nature of the punishments! Being flogged with wet celery somehow doesn't seem adequate.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Always check the seller rating of the seller and if it is less than 100% with several sales transactions then dig deeper and read the comments that others have made about the seller. Hopefully the seller will do the right thing and refund the money, I have bought several thousands of dollars worth of camera gear on ebay and never have I had a problem.

robrory Loc: Coatesville, PA

Just so that no one makes the mistake that I made in ordering from somebody who just dumps junk on ebay; pavvih is the name of the seller. The lens needs replacement of the motor base unit, at a cost of $250.00.

ecar Loc: Oregon, USA

Best Advice I've seen yet here.

Anytime you buy a Third Party lens, you can run into this problem, and Like you said, the seller , in most cases, is operating on good faith.

I would have called both Sigma and Canon regarding this lens before I purchased it, to see what info was available regarding any problems on the camera's I wanted to use this lens on.

Most of the time, ebay sellers are pretty good folks. And from what I've seen here, we don't know yet that the seller is not honest. third party lenses can pose a problem for any brand of Cameras out there.

I bought a Tamron 18-200mm lens for my Sony a6000 and it came like new without any problems.

Before I would approach the seller, I'd do some homework to see if something small and insignificant would not be the problem.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Have you contacted him? If he is unwilling to refund then please give him a negative review. That is how bad sellers are weeded out of ebay.

Bobspez Loc: Southern NJ, USA

Exact same thing happened to me. I bought a used sigma 150-500mm HSM zoom and it did not autofocus on my Nikon D7000 or my Nikon D3100. I contacted the vendor then immediately contacted Paypal. The vendor offered to refund my money but not the return postage. Before I could even consider that, paypal emailed me a prepaid return postage label and once the tracking showed I mailed it, they refunded my purchase price including postage. It's the only bad camera equipment I ever got on ebay. I've bought at least a dozen lenses and 6 cameras on ebay over the last several years. I wouldn't hesitate to buy from ebay again. Paypal has refunded my money on 3 non-camera items as well. I use paypal on as many online purchases (inside and outside of ebay) as it's offered on.

Bobspez Loc: Southern NJ, USA

Paypal will just take his money and refund it to the buyer if he doesn't, and the item was advertised as in working condition.