Canon's RF mount has generally produced some quite impressive lenses, but the company has also been quite aggressive in stopping third-party manufacturers from creating lenses for the mount, much to the frustration of many photographers. In a recent interview, the company has confirmed that their strategy has effectively not changed.
In recent years, companies like Sigma, Tamron, and Samyang have created thriving third-party lens ecosystems, with some options filling in gaps left by first-party lenses and others offering alternatives to those made by the likes of Canon and Nikon, often at more affordable prices. While most manufacturers allow such lenses, Canon has been quite restrictive, stopping the manufacturing of essentially all lenses except those that do not have autofocus.
Canon has said that they will consider licensing the RF mount on a case by case basis, considering how a lens fits within their current lens lineup and future plans, though, for the most part, they have continued to be rather restrictive, leaving the RF mount relatively lacking compared to other mounts when it comes third-party options.
In fact, in a recent interview with Camera Beta, Canon reiterated this strategy, saying (translated):
...if we receive a request from a third-party lens company to open the mount, we will study whether to license it based on Canon's own business plan and strategy. In fact, we are now communicating with several third-party lens companies in this regard.
It seems that the company intends to continue to be restrictive in licensing the RF mount. Certainly, that's their right, but it has generated a fair amount of frustration among photographers and filmmakers who had hoped to see eventually see lenses from a variety of popular third-party manufacturers make their way to Canon's mirrorless cameras.
There are a lot of "frustrated with Canon" photographers these days. I think they may be overestimating the loyalty of their users. I know that after 20 years of being a die-hard Canon photographer... I'm really starting to think about switching. There are just too many strikes going against them right now.
Honestly there’s no real reason to be loyal to any brand, not like if we buy 3 bodies we get the 4th free or anything like that.
I was using an R6 which I loved (and still think it’s better AF/High ISO wise than my a7IV) but was so stuck with what lenses I could get as they were either overpriced EF options that I’d need to adapt or excellent but even more expensive RF options.
If Canon had third party support like every other brand has, you could build a very good kit around third party lenses and I’d still be with Canon now.
I'm drooling at the thought of a frequent camera punch card. 😂
Can you get B& H to make us one?
Just make one, I’m sure they won’t be able to tell the legitimacy of it 😋
As a professional, and as someone who auditioned every system, on actual jobs, before switching to mirrorless, the only thing Canon has that's appealing for a professional is a TINY 70-200 2.8, the 28-70/2, and idiot-proof AF.
Otherwise, Nikon IMO makes a more compelling system in regards to total system cost and ROI.
Sony is appealing because of Auto AF modes and sheer number of lenses availible, but in a work environment shooting tethered, they're a total nightmare. Ergonomics have come a long way and they're OKAY now, but I actually don't know any legitimate pro's in my city who shoot Sony anymore. They all dumped it when the Z9 and R5 came out.
"Idiot proof AF"- dead.
The Z9... has me thinking adultress thoughts. The R5... *deep breathe - I think I've talked about that camera ad nauseum this week. I'm getting PTSD
https://fstoppers.com/reviews/hey-canon-why-are-your-cameras-falling-apa...
Sony also has some strange politics. Three camera lines, which in some areas all do the same, bad update politics (e.g. focus breathing compensation with the A1), bad displays (in comparison to other brands) and slower cameras than for example Canon (R6 40 images/s, Sony A7IV 11 images/s). This is why I consider switching to Canon.
I'd love to consider Nikon as well, but their system is too big and heavy. I sometimes shoot in the mountains, so I have to consider weight and volume. Here is Nikon the worst of the three.
I shot with the R5 for a while. It isn't a camera I would love, but for the most part, it's a tool that does what it should do well.
Were there any major CEO or other big shots changes in the past 5 years at Canon?
I switched away from Canon for this reason. Sold my R6, RF 70-200, the lot. Done with it. I loved the gear but I needed the 35-150 in my life so Sony it is, now.
Its a fanboy game all the time. How many times I have seen my friends switching system just in last 10 years. Or some of them even runs two systems at the same time. I have build really solid gear out of it as I stick to Canon since 2007. All the time you're switching gear your loosing. For me there is no way sigma or tamron will ever work as good on canon camera as canon lens. Every time I got 3rd party lens back in the days there were downsides to it. Slow AF, unaccurate AF, no weather sealing, cheap plastic body, etc. I can only encourage you all to switch to Sony or Nikon. I love buying second hand lenses for half the price of new.
you need to try modern 3rd party lenses. Tamron is actually better than sigma now. Both brands are MUCH better. Even Tokina is pumping out some bangers for mirrorless.
How many Canon RF lenses did you compare it with on R6, R5 or R3? One of the reasons Canon don't want 3rd party to step in is that ppl will complain just like in the old days about the camera.... Just because they do not know nothing about lenses
That's such a lame cop out excuse. The majority of people buying lenses aren't going to know everything there is to know about lenses or cameras. So because of that you want an Apple like locked down ecosystems that gives the user as little choice as possible? Do you really think Canon stands lose more customers to lack of lens/camera knowledge over Canon preventing the use of 3rd party lenses? Also what about niche lenses Canon won't make? Canon is only shooting themselves in the foot by doing this.
How long are you with Canon? If you with them long enough you know more than few reasons you don't really need lenses Canon doesn't make. Give me 2 examples of lenses you are going to change system for as I don't see it. Lame excuses are for ppl who change systems all the time and saying that companies made them do it. Well they didn't. I would love to see Nikon on the market for next 5 years while they are already behind Sony and Canon and camera market is shrinking... Who cares they can adopt 3rd party lenses when the AF is the worse out of them 3
Oh ... i have stopped all my purchases toward Canon gear. If my camera dies i am not going to repair it. Its going to camera heaven and im moving in different direction. I will not buy inferior (R5 breaking down more often then any camera in DSLR era) product they are peddling now unless i get to choose what i want to buy. Since that choice has been restricted by Canon i will be restricting Canon with my wallet.
Miha, I hadn't heard about the reliabiity rate of the R5, could you point me in the direction of that info?
I switched from Nikon to sony when I went to mirrorless, when I was Nikon I was Nikon glass only, but for sony, the sigmas are often better, tamron isn't because sony has partial investment in them and sony restricts third party glass from the same burst features that their lenses do.
I did shell out big bucks for the 70-200, it was worth it
At this point i know 3 people in person who had R5 break down several times in first 2 years of ownership (warranty is 2 years in my country) so this was fixed in warranty, but ... brand new camera to break down several times ... also i think there are people here in this thread that had same thing happen to them, also i think even one of articles talk about it.
Frustrated? Nobody put a gun to your head to buy or use Canon...just don't use Canon...crybabies...
Well, that's all fine and dandy if you're not already in the Canon ecco system. LOL
Well that was infantile. Why even bother.
Do you feel better about telling me your piece of mind? Because remind me, did you give me money to purchase my gear so now you have every right to tell me i am crybaby? Or did i earn it thru hard work and i get to choose what i want to spend my money on? Or even worse, you are just obnoxious and have to tell people what to do and what to think?
Please let me know when that Canon check clears for this amazing reply you made on my comment.
Well, the good news for me is that I was able to get the Rokinon 85 1.4 before Canon brought the hammer down on 3rd party OEM's. Also, I do have the magical RF 28-70, RF 100 macro and the RF 14-35. I'm still using my EF lenses and they work great, so I don't need anymore lenses (I said I don't need anymore, not that I don't want anymore). But I definitely will not be paying for any additional Canon RF glass. I'll either buy some used EF glass or just wait until Canon decides to return to normal. And yes I do agree that Canon is well within their right to do this, but...
Because of Canon's stance on blocking 3rd party lenses, I will not buy any more Canon gear.
All Canon had to do to keep me loyal forever is to open their RF mount to all of the 3rd party lans makers. Then I would have kept buying Canon bodies and a good number of Canon lenses.
If Canon will not make specialty lenses then I am forced to buy 3rd party ones to meet my needs. But when Canon will not make what I need, and then they won't let anybody else make what I need, what am I to do? The only choice they have given me is to buy cameras that are not Canon.
I don't buy 3rd party lenses because they are cheaper. I only buy 3rd party lenses when Canon doesn't have anything similar, like the Sigma 300-800mm, the Sigma 60-600mm (yes, a 10x supertelephoto zoom!) the Laowa 15mm f4 macro shift (yes, true 1:1 macro in an ultra wide angle!) and either the AstrHori or Laowa macro probe lenses.
----- ----- -----
please, everyone, get this thought ... many photographers do not buy 3rd party lenses to save money ... we buy them because there are no similar 1st party alternatives ... that is why we need 3rd party lenses ... because Canon does not make the lenses that meet our niche needs
----- ----- -----
I have bought nothing but Canon cameras from 2007 thru July of 2023. But I just bought a Sony A6600 mirrorless a few weeks ago because I need something that will work with the latest Laowa and Sigma and Tamron autofocus lenses without an adaptor.
For the time being I will keep the Canon cameras that I have but I will not buy any more of them. Any new or new-to-me purchases will be Sony cameras and lenses in the Sony E mount ... next up is a Sony A74 and a Sigma 60-600mm in the E mount. In a year or two when I become fully familiar and comfortable with the Sony menu system, I will probably sell off any Canon gear that I still have.
I'll stick with Canon. I have nothing but adapted lenses and they all work BETTER than they did when I was using a 5DIV. I've had my R5 for a year and a half and it's been a joy to use.
Ya' gotta' love this place. I have a good experience with my camera and lenses and get three thumbs down. Hilarious!
I am not a canon fan by any means but that EF to RF adapter is pretty baller. Plus they have that one that you can put an ND filter into which is bad ass. I wish Nikon had more varied adapters like that.
You have to consider they are the angry bratty bitter habitual down voters and this is their way to release.
People that complain about not being able to buy mediocre 3rd party lenses should switch. If you're a pro, you don't complain about the price of incredible glass. Especially when you get at least 10 years ROI out of it. Kids these days care way too much about GAS than actual work. A kid just the other day came up to me and asked how I got hired to shoot the Snoop Dogg concert and I said 8 years of assisting and slowly building a portfolio and slowly acquiring accounts and eventually word of mouth will open up a ton of oppertunities. I never complain about the price of lenses or worry about getting the latest gear. Remember when everyone was freaking out about dynamic range? lol
But I already told you, our desire/need for 3rd party lenses has nothing to do with lower prices or saving money. It is because Canon, Nikon, and Sony will not make many of the lenses that we want/need for our work.
I keep trying to get this point across, but people keep missing it and completely missing our real reason for wanting fully functional 3rd party lens compatibility.
If Canon made the lenses that Sigma and Laowa make, then I would buy those lenses from Canon, even if they were twice as expensive. I already bought a 400mm f2.8 from Canon, along with 2 other L series primes and 4 L series zooms. It's not like I'm some cheapskate who's buying Sigma and Laowa to save money. Sheesh.
What glass does sigma or laowa have that you can't get from Canon?
I explained that in detail in my previous comment.
Sigma makes plenty of 1.4 lenses, compact normal and wide 2.8 zooms, along with many compact, fast primes. All of which are excellent. And Laowa is loaded with unique UWA primes.
Well for instance, Sigma and Tamron have for years allowed me to do proper distance calibration on several points so my lens is sharp and every single distance. It offered you way to calibrate lens with more points and curves that would follow sharpest spots thru entire range. Canon just gave you wide and tele ... what happens in between is totaly irrelevant. And i often shoot zoomed in but model is close, so that have nothing to do with tele setting you calibrate for distant focus. So there ... one of the things that makes me want 3rd party lenses. Because of the features Canon does not want to provide no matter how much money lens or their system cost.
Or ... For years Sigma had lens that was 1.4 but was super quick to focus while Canon offered 1.2 that was so slow it was not even comparable. Yes its not 1.2 but i did not care since it was close enough but actually usable at 1.4
List of things why i want 3rd party lenses has almost nothing to do with Canon lenses ... its has to do with Canon not giving us what we want, so we go someplace else that will cater our wants. There .... simple as that.
How’s Canon’s 35mm f/1.2 coming along? Surely they have a 14mm, 20mm, 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm f/1.4? At prices us mortals can afford? I bet they’re as good as whatever 12mm f/2.8 lens Canon has? How’s Canon’s warranty? Sigma and Tamron stand behind their products with 7 and 6 year warranties, respectively, at least in my market. Seems like they’re confident in their products’ build quality. With Canon, meanwhile, you’re S.O.L. after a year. My shop sells a loooot of aftermarket extended warranties for Canon gear. Which is good, because we see a lot of Canon gear in for repair after that golden first year.
Could it be that people out there have different needs than you, and that for photographers both pro and hobbyist who need these lenses Canon ends up a poor choice? A hobbyist’s dollar is worth the same as a pro mind you, and there’s more of them. And most of the successful pros that I know are penny pinchers. That makes one a more lucrative demographic than the other.
Mind you, most successful pros I know are either working or spending time with family, not dragging knuckles in website comment sections with us plebs, talking about that one time they shot Snoop Dogg.
Canon have a few stand out lenses, with prices that match, but most of their line up is composed of zooms, lenses with slow apertures, and cheapy plastic primes. There’s no middle road, and as should be evident by this point a lot of people want that middle road.
If they have exactly what you personally need, great. Blow your load. But the broader consumer has different needs, and there’s many more of that type of customer out there.
So...you want Canon to have a complete lineup of RF lenses even though the R line has only been in existence for 5 years. Okay. I realize that Sony had their line filled in 5 years...no, they didn't. I'm being sarcastic. Canon had their EF line filled in 5 years. Again, sarcasm because Canon didn't have their EF line filled in 5 years.
It's the instant gratification society we now live in. I'll repeat; I use an R5 and all my lenses are adapted and all work better than they did with the 5DIV I had.
As someone who sells camera gear, I’ve stopped selling toward Canon unless the customer requests it specifically and/or after reading them the riot act about lens restrictions.
Canon’s executives are smelling their own farts so hard I don’t know what to say.
We’re still trying to clear out back-stock R6’s because Canon was only willing to cut MAP $100-$200 when the R6 Mk II launched. Who in their right mind would buy an outdated camera when they could get the new much better version for a couple hundred extra?
From the general lack of options to the ridiculous situation where they have 4 APS-C cameras but only two (kit zoom) APS-C lenses, they’ve become so anti consumer that it’s not worth the caveats. Thank goodness for healthy competition.
You make a good point.
All corporations need a healthy income to continue operations. But Canon seems to demand not only a healthy income, but a healthy income plus a bunch way above and beyond what they really need. To me it seems like corporate greed.
I am sure there is a fair amount of greed in any corporation, but Canon seems so intent on sucking up every dollar that they don't even try to mask the fact that they are so greedy. I mean, if you're gonna be greedy, at least keep the greed within reasonable limits and try to not be so obvious about it. It's like they are literally blinded by their greed to the point that they don't even realize what it looks like to their body of consumers.
And that is precisely why I am not going to buy more Canon products.
Canon execs said you can just adapt full frame lenses what's the problem. Because everyone knows full frame lenses act exactly the same as they do on crop as on native FF.
Because Canon said so.
The EF mount came out in 1987. I remember in the mid 2000s, various Sigmas and Tamrons (including a Tamron 80-200 zoom I owned) were still turning toes up when Canon put out a new camera body.
The only way we'd see fully compatible RF-mount lenses from third parties by now would be if Canon gave them the plans. Canon isn't letting anyone infringe on their IPs, and entitled photographers (who have IPs of their own to protect) think that's unfair.
40 years I've been shooting Canon, loyal to them like dog. Never been so frustrated. I'm a professional photographer and hate the R5. I wish the tech went into a 5D MkV. Never had a Canon body faill on on me in 40 years and the R5 has already failed 3 times in two years. This is not a dependable camera like its predecessor (the 5D series).
Not to mention the eye strain I get from the electronic viewfinder, the short battery life, the small size that probaly too small for every day use. The lack of RF lenses, a stupid new hotshoe makes compatibility a nightmare.
Canon, I HATE YOU.
This will prevent me from ever buying an RF mount camera. I understand they are trying to sell lenses and make money but if your competition is making lenses as good or better for less money then you need to be more competitive. That's capitalism. Just like me choosing not to buy canon products due to this decision is also capitalism. The competition is more open to allowing their customers to have choice so I roll with that.
My email address has been …canon1….for 20 years since I purchased a Canon 10D. I chose that over a Nikon D100. Prior to that, it was …nikon1…. It’s about to become …Sony…. or Nikon, or Fuji!
I'm 5dIV user, I plan to buy R7 next year for events (all sorts) photography that I like to do, basically everything with movement, but for everything else (landscape, portrait...) I would stick with my ff dslr. And since you can fit any EF lens on any RF mount, but not other way around, I will stick with EF and converter at some point. From this point of view, Canon protects its long-time, but also new (there is still plenty new dslrs sold today) customers. By not allowing 3rd parties to build RF, they force them to stick with EF. And believe me, once 3rds can make overpriced RFs, say goodbye to sensible new EFs. And, personally, I was always disappointed with almost every 3rd party lens i used, so I don't really care.
Pure hubris on the part of Canon. They have the benefit of a massive third party catalogue, made possible by Sony's early entry to the full frame mirrorless market. Canon has bodies to compete with the best, why not have a full lens lineup while developing the native RF-mount equivalents? Surely the "pros" in the comments will still dish out for 1st-party glass when it arrives?
Again, the R system has been around for 5 years. Canon didn't fill out their EF line in 5 years. Sony didn't fill out their line in 5 years, either.
Excuses.
They literally have no mid-range lenses. Thats their business choice to make. They made a rationale that even a stalwart lens like the 50 mm 1.4 doesn't need to be made, even though an update is overdue 20 plus years. It's no different than them creating absolutely bottom barrel lenses for their four crop bodies.
Canon and can do whatever they want, and excuses don't do anything and are not helping anyone.
As a customer we can't buy what they don't make. And if they don't know what we need, then that's their problem to fix before we spend our money elsewhere.
Looking forward to getting a Panasonic body as soon as I have the bandwidth. To see all of these nice cool lenses coming out like the Tamron 30 to 150, and every other manufacturer creating a new 50 mm 1.4, I'm looking forward to having actual options instead of just replacements for Canon's most important lenses and some filler trash around it.
Not surprisingly, you didn't answer my question. You've made it quite clear, over and over again, that you need a 50 1.4. Lotsa' options out there. Time to do something about instead of your incessant complaining that Canon isn't doing what you want.
What he means to say is that Sony has waaaay more lenses for their mount because lot of manufacturers are able to fill the gaps for product Sony themself dont make. Yes there is also several tiers .. meaning cheaper and more expensive, depending on your budget and your needs. Canon does this bit poorly and does not offer this flexibility. Hence hate and dislike from people.