p.12 #1 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Another key reason Sony is winning the tech race is because a few years ago it was disclosed that 50% of all image sensors used in both iPhones & Adroid smartphones are from Sony or using Sony IP.
So whatever annual revenue they get from ~1.4 billion smartphone worldwide shipment gets rolled into R&D money for full frame & other larger than smartphone image sensors. Whatever additional R&D spend specific for larger than smartphone image sensors can be sourced from sales of lower volume point & shoots and mirrorless bodies
That's a giant advantage over any & all camera brands who primarily get their R&D money from sales of their digital still cameras.
This is very similar to Apple's business models for Macs with Apple Silicon. The R&D money is sourced from sales of iPhones & iPads that have a annual worldwide shipment of ~0.25 billion. Whatever additional R&D spend specific for Macs can be sourced from sales of lower volume Mac laptops & desktops.
My issues with Sony in year 2015 are as follows
- Does not match or exceed Canon's CPS after sales service
- E mount bodies are too tiny for my big man hands
- Sony in-camera menu system in way too different from Canon's
- Sony's physical camera buttons are wrongly placed or incomplete unlike Canon's
If it weren't for my experience with Sony I would have bought a 2021 FujiFILM GFX 100S and adapted my EF L lenses onto it.
- larger than 35mm full frame medium format
- 100+ megapixels at EOS R3 prices
- dSLR form factor
- medium format near equivalent of 16-35mm, 24-70mm & 70-200mm are in-stock at near RF L lens prices
p.12 #2 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Well I’m not buying that argument. Canon is a huge company in its own right and has plenty of R&D money. They also build their own sensors.
The thing is they’ve been on top so long that they’ve gotten lazy in my opinion. In 1987 they changed the world with EOS, and in 1989 cemented their place in sports with the EOS 1. They did it again with the 1D. I’m still waiting for the R1 to be revolutionary. But with everything else they are doing, I’m not holding my breath.
dolina wrote:
Another key reason Sony is winning the tech race is because a few years ago it was disclosed that 50% of all image sensors used in both iPhones & Adroid smartphones are from Sony or using Sony IP.
So whatever annual revenue they get from ~1.4 billion smartphone worldwide shipment gets rolled into R&D money for full frame & other larger than smartphone image sensors. Whatever additional R&D spend specific for larger than smartphone image sensors can be sourced from sales of lower volume point & shoots and mirrorless bodies
That's a giant advantage over any & all camera brands who primarily get their R&D money from sales of their digital still cameras.
This is very similar to Apple's business models for Macs with Apple Silicon. The R&D money is sourced from sales of iPhones & iPads that have a annual worldwide shipment of ~0.25 billion. Whatever additional R&D spend specific for Macs can be sourced from sales of lower volume Mac laptops & desktops.
My issues with Sony in year 2015 are as follows
- Does not match or exceed Canon's CPS after sales service
- E mount bodies are too tiny for my big man hands
- Sony in-camera menu system in way too different from Canon's
- Sony's physical camera buttons are wrongly placed or incomplete unlike Canon's
If it weren't for my experience with Sony I would have bought a 2021 FujiFILM GFX 100S and adapted my EF L lenses onto it.
- larger than 35mm full frame medium format
- 100+ megapixels
- dSLR form factor...Show more →
p.12 #3 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
jwolfe wrote:
Well I’m not buying that argument. Canon is a huge company in its own right and has plenty of R&D money. They also build their own sensors.
The thing is they’ve been on top so long that they’ve gotten lazy in my opinion. In 1987 they changed the world with EOS, and in 1989 cemented their place in sports with the EOS 1. They did it again with the 1D. I’m still waiting for the R1 to be revolutionary. But with everything else they are doing, I’m not holding my breath.
Sony has made a lot of business deals with Canon's key accounts.
From what I remember Associated Press (AP) to equip all visual journalists globally with Sony imaging products
At the time of press release this would impact the cameras we will see in the 2022 & 2024 Olympics.
As for the R1 I expect it to be out within 9 months prior to July 2024 Olympics. It may be priced at the 2021 EOS R3's $6k or even higher like say $10k.
I am honest enough to say that if I was building a mirrorless system from scratch for use for wildlife & birds I'd go with Nikon
p.12 #4 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
I looked at getting a 1st Gen Sony for the numerous alts if prices dropped. Those things really had issues. Finally decided against it. Rebel sized battery powering an EVF dependant camera that didn't work in fairly extreme cold for one thing.
So Sony marketing is great but I'm skeptical about Sony being better. Or bettrr tech. Irritating the 6D2 bombed. And probably unwarranted. Sony marketing seemed to milk the advantages but I doubt that the early ones actually better overall. But people bought them anyway.
p.12 #5 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
dolina wrote:
Another key reason Sony is winning the tech race is because a few years ago it was disclosed that 50% of all image sensors used in both iPhones & Adroid smartphones are from Sony or using Sony IP.
So whatever annual revenue they get from ~1.4 billion smartphone worldwide shipment gets rolled into R&D money for full frame & other larger than smartphone image sensors. Whatever additional R&D spend specific for larger than smartphone image sensors can be sourced from sales of lower volume point & shoots and mirrorless bodies
That's a giant advantage over any & all camera brands who primarily get their R&D money from sales of their digital still cameras.
Canon have their own profitable areas outside of cameras. Look up Canon Tokki, they pretty much owned all the machines needed to make OLED displays which are used in most smartphones these days. So for ever camera sensor in a smartphone, that screen was likely made by a machine owned by Canon Tokki.
p.12 #6 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Photosbydlee wrote:
Canon have their own profitable areas outside of cameras. Look up Canon Tokki, they pretty much owned all the machines needed to make OLED displays which are used in most smartphones these days. So for ever camera sensor in a smartphone, that screen was likely made by a machine owned by Canon Tokki.
Very very good point relating to R&D money & IPs specific to AMOLED displays.
But with Sony's smartphone camera component deal has to do with both R&D money and image sensor IPs.
Canon may have revenue relating to AMOLEDs but how many Canon video cameras, point & shoots and EOS bodies use AMOLED displays?
Is the AMOLED displays of digital still & video cameras key selling points for photographers?
Sony's image sensor IPs that have been paid for by Apple & Android brands is present in all of Sony's digital still & video cameras and smartphones.
Chinese-branded smartphones tend to advertise that the built-in cameras are from Sony.
I've yet to see any brand smartphone advertise that their AMOLED screen is from Canon.
Almost all smartphones have a front & back camera.
A higher-end and some mid-tier smartphones have OLED screens.
The only reason I got the 2015 Sony a7R II was because of its
- 1st 35mm full frame BSI CMOS image sensor
- removal of AA filter
- IBIS
"SHENZHEN JUEYING TECHNOLOGY CO.LTD, manufactures auto focus lenses for Canon RF mount under the brand name "Viltrox". Canon believes that these products infringe their patent and design rights and has therefore requested the company to stop all activities infringing on Canon's intellectual property rights."
"SHENZHEN JUEYING TECHNOLOGY CO.LTD, manufactures auto focus lenses for Canon RF mount under the brand name "Viltrox". Canon believes that these products infringe their patent and design rights and has therefore requested the company to stop all activities infringing on Canon's intellectual property rights."
Link expired.
In the past 3rd party lense makers
- reverse engineer the tech in-house
- develop IPs that are legally different enough but functionally near identical to EF mount
- hired ex-Canon engineers or moonlighting Canon engineers to create work rounds
p.12 #9 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Lol I can't believe this is still going and how off topic it's gotten so here are some of my (equally off topic) takes:
1. Companies are not your friends; they "care" about you so they can sell you products and make money off you, no need to defend them
2. Companies are not your friends, again
3. IMHO it's pretty apparent why Canon are denying third party lens makers making RF lenses; Canon's a large company with a huge user base, they obviously believe they can maximise profit on their RF system by being the only one selling RF lenses, dick move but it is what it is. Should such a move start to hurt their sales I am sure they'll change stance quick. Their goal is to make as much money as they can for their shareholders and they'd only give us what (they think) we want if it makes them even more money, refer to my points 1 and 2
4. Having third party lenses is a great thing! Not sure why anyone would be against having options? Not to mention competition help prices stay competitive and keep companies innovating
5. Third party lenses are not just about having cheap alternatives anymore; Canon don't have answers in any mount to my Sigma 14mm f/1.8 and 105mm f/1.4, for example
6. Everyone's preferences are different and that's ok! Just because I don't have an issue with large, bulky lenses as I am after the ultimate image quality my money can buy and using an adapter is not that big of a deal for me (and yes it can be a bit inconvenient at times) doesn't mean someone else can't find large, bulky lenses unnecessary and adapters annoying. Some people act like their opinions and preferences are facts and everyone else that don't agree is wrong
p.12 #10 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Companies aren't my friend but
- when I need to have something fixed it would be nice that I only need to ship it 20km away from me rather than 2,000km away from me.
- it would be nice, when spare parts are available, that turn around is within a business week rather than longer than a business month
Months before COVID the nearest & most convenient branch of Canon's Service Center located beside the expressway's exit shut down. Now I have to travel 10km further into the city to get things done.
This was he side effect of smartphones on digital still camera sales. Canon PH could not support it to keep that branch operational.
This is somewhat related. The previous Nikon PH distributor had difficulty keeping their operations funded because grey market imports flooded the country. The worst part is that grey market customers who bought it from grey importers & who bought their gear directly abroad demonized the local distributor for not honoring international warranty. This resulted in them closing shop nearly a decade ago.
Everyone has a right to have an exclusive monopoly on their creativity & innovations for a certain number of years.
I'm a bird photographer and regardless of intentions "good" people have for my photos I'd want them to pay a standard license fee for my work or I have the option to say "NO" because they think they own the birds.
A restaurant has a right to refuse service when customers bring outside alcohol to their table unless they agree to pay a corkage or they have the right to refuse service outright.
When people want 3rd party lenses then go Sony & now Nikon.
Canon wants to recoup their investment and they have an obligation to maximize profitability.
If given a choice Sony & Nikon would have done the same. They are not your friends.
Sony A & E mount users I know have a unifying common complaint about Sony PH that their service center is oriented towards electronic consumers' concerns and not photographers.
Sure, there's a Sony service center 4km away from me but it specializes on TV and other consumer electronics. The Sony service center for cameras is along the same block as Canon PH's service center that is 30km away from me.
I am sympathetic to Canon because I know how it feels to be taken advantage off.
Yes, Canon's the largest camera brand out there in terms of annual worldwide shipments but in terms of all time high they are but a shadow of their former selves.
A lot of camera brands have
- merged
- sold themselves
- halt operations
And other things system owners would not want to happen like owning an orphaned product.
Lose leaders can sustain operations for so many years before their goods & services degrade.
p.12 #11 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
dolina wrote:
Link expired.
In the past 3rd party lense makers
- reverse engineer the tech in-house
- develop IPs that are legally different enough but functionally near identical to EF mount
- hired ex-Canon engineers or moonlighting Canon engineers to create work rounds
People have leaping to conclusions left and right over this development, but so far there is no evidence that reflects a general change in stance by Canon re. third party lens makers.
It seems that Viltrox at least has been selling an RF-mount autofocus lens that represents that itself as an EF 85mm f/1.8. I can certainly see why Canon might consider this an infringement, particularly if Canon has evidence that they did not reverse engineer the firmware in a clean room environment.
If this interpretation is correct, then this says nothing about what Canon might do if Sigma or Tamron were to release RF lenses, assuming they were developed in the same way that their EF mount lenses were. It is likely, in my view, that Canon would just follow business as usual: i.e., they won't do much if there is no IP infringement.
I am certain that Sigma and Tamron would prefer to have an actual licensing agreement with Canon. But if the Canon R system continues to have great success, they may determine that the R&D effort needed to reverse engineer compatible lenses is worth it at some point.
There is no legal way for Canon to prevent them from selling RF mount lenses if they cannot be proven to infringe Canon's intellectual property. Canon could threaten perhaps, but Sigma at least is big enough to have the resources to defend itself from a frivolous lawsuit I would think.
p.12 #13 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
garyvot wrote:
Thanks for this link.
People have leaping to conclusions left and right over this development, but so far there is no evidence that reflects a general change in stance by Canon re. third party lens makers.
It seems that Viltrox at least has been selling an RF-mount autofocus lens that represents that itself as an EF 85mm f/1.8. I can certainly see why Canon might consider this an infringement, particularly if Canon has evidence that they did not reverse engineer the firmware in a clean room environment.
If this interpretation is correct, then this says nothing about what Canon might do if Sigma or Tamron were to release RF lenses, assuming they were developed in the same way that their EF mount lenses were. It is likely, in my view, that Canon would just follow business as usual: i.e., they won't do much if there is no IP infringement.
I am certain that Sigma and Tamron would prefer to have an actual licensing agreement with Canon. But if the Canon R system continues to have great success, they may determine that the R&D effort needed to reverse engineer compatible lenses is worth it at some point.
There is no legal way for Canon to prevent them from selling RF mount lenses if they cannot be proven to infringe Canon's intellectual property. Canon could threaten perhaps, but Sigma at least is big enough to have the resources to defend itself from a frivolous lawsuit I would think....Show more →
You’re welcome!
Another update according to Canon Rumors is you could be waiting until after 2024 for third party support
p.12 #14 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
garyvot wrote:
Thanks for this link.
People have leaping to conclusions left and right over this development, but so far there is no evidence that reflects a general change in stance by Canon re. third party lens makers.
It seems that Viltrox at least has been selling an RF-mount autofocus lens that represents that itself as an EF 85mm f/1.8. I can certainly see why Canon might consider this an infringement, particularly if Canon has evidence that they did not reverse engineer the firmware in a clean room environment.
If this interpretation is correct, then this says nothing about what Canon might do if Sigma or Tamron were to release RF lenses, assuming they were developed in the same way that their EF mount lenses were. It is likely, in my view, that Canon would just follow business as usual: i.e., they won't do much if there is no IP infringement.
I am certain that Sigma and Tamron would prefer to have an actual licensing agreement with Canon. But if the Canon R system continues to have great success, they may determine that the R&D effort needed to reverse engineer compatible lenses is worth it at some point.
There is no legal way for Canon to prevent them from selling RF mount lenses if they cannot be proven to infringe Canon's intellectual property. Canon could threaten perhaps, but Sigma at least is big enough to have the resources to defend itself from a frivolous lawsuit I would think....Show more →
Yeah, I don't have any problem with Canon actually defending their intellectual property. My whole thing is that Canon should be licensing the mount to third party lens makers. Just make it a small percentage of the lens price, and then Canon makes money on every third party lens sold without having to do anything, and consumers get competition and selection.
p.12 #15 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
This confirms what I thought about Canon’s position. And, this is my opinion, is really the wrong way to approach it. This is going to set off a ton of negative reaction and bad PR. And it just shows the thinking of Canon executives that they are on top of the mountain and no one can challenge them. And that’s just not true anymore.
As much as I hate to admit it, Sony did it right by opening the mount from the beginning by licensing. And Nikon is starting down the same path. That will lead to brand loyalty, happy users and a large ecosystem of options.
Again, my opinion, but this is a bad move.
Photosbydlee wrote:
You’re welcome!
Another update according to Canon Rumors is you could be waiting until after 2024 for third party support
p.12 #16 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
garyvot wrote:
There is no legal way for Canon to prevent them from selling RF mount lenses if they cannot be proven to infringe Canon's intellectual property. Canon could threaten perhaps, but Sigma at least is big enough to have the resources to defend itself from a frivolous lawsuit I would think.
Not a lawyer here, but I am sure Canon has a patent on the RF mount itself. The mechanical parts of it. They either license it, or you have to wait until the patent expires. Same would apply for the software protocol. I think the mount itself is patented, the protocol is a trade secret, that way they don't have to publish it. Someone who's bored can go digging thru the patents that Canon has filed.
p.12 #17 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
stanj wrote:
Not a lawyer here, but I am sure Canon has a patent on the RF mount itself. The mechanical parts of it. They either license it, or you have to wait until the patent expires. Same would apply for the software protocol. I think the mount itself is patented, the protocol is a trade secret, that way they don't have to publish it. Someone who's bored can go digging thru the patents that Canon has filed.
You certainly could be right. So far, Canon hasn't seemed too concerned about manual focus lenses or mount adapters just using the physical bayonet design. Of course, anything could change.
p.12 #19 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
100% agree with everything you said. The thing to note is some will say it will cut into Canon’s profits but Sony hasn’t seen anything negative from this, they’ve done nothing but grown and even beat out Nikon who were number 2 for decades.
Canon has the advantage of DSLR sales but once those wind down, they need to shift it into Mirrorless sales as if all the other FF Mirrorless systems continue to have third party support and a large lens selection, Canon will find themselves get left behind (not doomed or to bankrupt, just lose their position as number one).
jwolfe wrote:
This confirms what I thought about Canon’s position. And, this is my opinion, is really the wrong way to approach it. This is going to set off a ton of negative reaction and bad PR. And it just shows the thinking of Canon executives that they are on top of the mountain and no one can challenge them. And that’s just not true anymore.
As much as I hate to admit it, Sony did it right by opening the mount from the beginning by licensing. And Nikon is starting down the same path. That will lead to brand loyalty, happy users and a large ecosystem of options.
p.12 #20 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
How can you even have this discussion and not discuss IBIS & IS. Borders on the bizarre
I haven't shot this stuff so say what you will but it sounds like Canons IBIS destroys the competition. Weirdly almost no one discusses it and there's a lot of nonsense posted about Canon is behind, isn't innovating etc
A lot of these 3rd party options people want don't have IS. Like the 70-180. So it's probably going to.lose to the f/4 canon most of the time given stabilization also you might want a 1.4 prime if stabilization isn't as good.
