Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Game over ...
#1
So they stopped the development of new EF lenses:

https://petapixel.com/2020/01/08/canon-d...mand-more/
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com

Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
#2
Well, there is almost everything you can think of available in EF ... except for instance a 600 DO :-)
It's quite a task to bring RF to where EF is today
#3
Stopped development but not manufacturing, they also specified unless customers ask for them, but yes obviously canon progressively is moving mirrorless
#4
Ha! EF is easily adapted to RF, but not the other way around. They just want to sell lenses that are less versatile, forcing photographers to buy lenses that will force DSLR's into early retirement. LOL- sorry, the new lenses don't work an a 1 DX iii. Too bad! Toss it, and buy our new professional camera!

But I thought the 1 DX iii was really good! Nope! Ancient history!
#5
Why the negativity? Wink

Seriously: how is anyone "forced" to buy the new lenses? Unless those people want to get a mirrorless camera in the first place? And consequently are very open to the new lenses?

And how are the the current EF lenses and the new (and coming!) EF cameras "ancient"? Canon's decision to stop EF development makes perfect sense, since the EF lens lineup is the most advanced and complete of the whole industry, as has been mentioned already. But that decision does not render any existing product useless, nor do they stop producing and selling the current lenses.
Editor
opticallimits.com

#6
If the EOS EF DSLR line continues to be bought by customers, there will be new lenses for the EF line. That is "customers asking". If demand stays behind, it makes little sense to develop new lenses. The market will decide.
#7
(01-13-2020, 12:39 PM)Brightcolours Wrote: If the EOS EF DSLR line continues to be bought by customers, there will be new lenses for the EF line. That is "customers asking". If demand stays behind, it makes little sense to develop new lenses. The market will decide.

People aslo buy Kodak branded stuff, yet I'm convinced no big photo company wants to follow their example.
#8
@ mst-

Sorry my comment seemed like negativity. I have been shooting mainly Canon, crop sensor and FF cameras. I don't own too many EF-S lenses because EF lenses work on both types of camera. So why have a large number of lenses that work only on some of my Canon cameras only?

The same goes for the EM mount and the RF mount. Some people will want the the native lenses, but the EF lenses will work fine with them too. Some of the EF lenses will always be great. And Sigma, Tamron, and others will be there to fill in the gaps.

I do question the Canon's logic of charging relatively little for more advanced mirrorless bodies, and effectively giving a huge portion of future of EF lens sales to third party lens makers. It seems to me Canon users will have the best of both worlds, so I am actually happy about this new direction. Really, the only negative is that I don't see why Canon doesn't try to price their RF lenses so they are attractive alternatives. This is a competitive market. If they are committed to RF then they better be prepared to compete in price. There are too many amazing EF lenses + RF adapters to be pretending that you can sell an RF 50 1.2L for $2,300 when you can by a brand new Sigma 50/1.4 "Art" for under $800 (plus a one time cost for an EF-RF adapter.

In fact the combined cost of the Sigma 135mm f/1.8 DG HSM Art Lens for Canon EF and the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Lens for Canon EF is over $150 less than Canon sells its RF 50/1.2 L.

So yes, I say ha! But not negatively. It's great for consumers. And I do fully believe all that was said about if consumers want this or that, then this or that will happen. And we can all look back in a year or two and see what consumers wanted. I know what I want!
#9
Canon prices lenses so that they do make a profit and stay in business. Sigma is structured differently, not every Japanese camera + lens maker can compete on price with them.
It is not a coincidence that also Nikon, Sony and Fuji price lenses higher than Sigma and Tamron do. They are not all "stupid".

Besides that Sigma can sell lenses cheaper and still be profitable because the company is structured differently, there are some other aspects to consider too. The Canon RF 50mm f1.2 has more elements (15 vs 13) of which more are aspherical (more expensive to make), 3 vs 1. And, of course, there is the half a stop bigger aperture where the elements have to perform too.

I prefer DSLRs with optical view finders myself, but I do understand why others may prefer mirrorless things with EVF screens, and I do understand why Canon makes lenses for mirrorless RF mount.
#10
In essence, you are saying that it is uneconomical for Canon to produce lenses.

At least traditionally, cameras were sold with little profits, not lenses. Cameras are used to lock in customers and lenses are then used to rip them off.
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com

Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)