avate (all verbs at the end). In a sentence, guy, not at the end of a text.
Its like with english middle. Its easy to handle anyway. But you sound funny, when you trie to speak german. We germans are doing right, because we still think we have to. :-)
Bring it to cameras: We still think we have to accept that an average camera has to be payd here at 25% higher prices. THAT really is stupid. Because most DSLRs are sold in Europe and most of them in germany. We should be able to tell companies like Canon: "No go! Those americans who buy less than half of us even they are double and have an higher incomelevel per head pay 40% of what you want to get from us. Pxxx of! Do a faire price. But germans are still stupid. They love to look up to anybody and still say "thank you" for an ass kick. Thats us. Not the verb at end of sentence.
No offence, too. You speak and understand english?
The americans always told me I sound like oxford english. The UK people mentioned my english sounds US like. Only the welsh and irish people say I sound like a german.
Donaudampfschiffahrtskapitaensuhrenfabrikantsgehilfenjackenknopf, eh?
Much more fun than the actual and literal translations is for a native English speaker to read it aloud,
carelessly and with attitude.
Not be stupid...but why in the heck is this even an issue...what are all these Alt lens makers thinking by NOT have a Canon mount as part of inventory?
Well, this is just speculation on my part but one reason that they may not offer a Canon mount is that their licensing agreement with Nikon forbids it. Alternatively, perhaps Canon hasn't allowed them to release an EOS mount (thereby reducing competition for it's own lenses)?
globalkiwi wrote:
Well, this is just speculation on my part but one reason that they may not offer a Canon mount is that their licensing agreement with Nikon forbids it. Alternatively, perhaps Canon hasn't allowed them to release an EOS mount (thereby reducing competition for it's own lenses)?
Good points! Most likely agreements that are old too. No doubt you are right...the lawyers are involved.
globalkiwi wrote:
Well, this is just speculation on my part but one reason that they may not offer a Canon mount is that their licensing agreement with Nikon forbids it. Alternatively, perhaps Canon hasn't allowed them to release an EOS mount (thereby reducing competition for it's own lenses)?
Zeiss does not have, and does not need, a licensing agreement with Nikon. The Nikon F mount (as implemented in the ZF lenses) is entirely in the public domain, and hasn't been covered by any patent for many, many years.
As I said, speculation. Does anyone know if Canon's EOS mount is in the public domain too? If not, it might explain why a Canon mount option is not common among Alt. lens makers.
globalkiwi wrote:
As I said, speculation. Does anyone know if Canon's EOS mount is in the public domain too? If not, it might explain why a Canon mount option is not common among Alt. lens makers.
The physical mount is likely no longer protected since it first came out in 1987, but the electronic communication protocols are probably trade secrets and are not apparently available to anyone. (Canon has publicly stated this)
Where do you get the idea that a Canon mount option isn't common? All the third party lens manufacturers have or have had Canon mount lenses. This includes Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, and Cosina. The exception is Zeiss. The electronic protocols are apparently reverse engineered...with varying levels of success.
they tell me that too ... I wouldn't take them too seriously! 
