p.13 #1 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Comparisons have been done which found
Stabilized body plus stabilized lens - Canon has the clear advantage
Stabilized body plus non stabilized lens - Canon is pretty much the same as the competition
Their advantage comes from them designing IBIS to work alongside lens IS so if you look purely at IBIS, it’s not any better.
Those lenses like the 70-180 are also significantly cheaper. There will always be compromises and many would happily sacrifice lens IS to spend half the price.
AmbientMike wrote:
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.
p.13 #2 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Nikon also uses dual VR. To be honest unless you are really pushing the boundaries I doubt you’d notice much difference. Most of us have used lens VR for years, so adding IBIS makes it even better.
A lot of people would take a 70-180mm that small and light for the price over a giant 70-200mm with VR. I know I would.
Photosbydlee wrote:
Comparisons have been done which found
Stabilized body plus stabilized lens - Canon has the clear advantage
Stabilized body plus non stabilized lens - Canon is pretty much the same as the competition
Their advantage comes from them designing IBIS to work alongside lens IS so if you look purely at IBIS, it’s not any better.
Those lenses like the 70-180 are also significantly cheaper. There will always be compromises and many would happily sacrifice lens IS to spend half the price.
Giving away something for essentially "free" is to remove any possible friction for 3rd parties to develop for your platform.
This may have changed since then but without confirmation it appears to still be the case.
It is possible that Sony withheld key specifications that allows their 1st party lenses to perform better than 3rd parties giving them a competitive edge.
This appears to be the thinking of #3 player Nikon when they secretly licensed their Z mount to Cosina in 2021.
You do not give away free or for a license if you are #1.
p.13 #5 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
jwolfe wrote:
Nikon also uses dual VR. To be honest unless you are really pushing the boundaries I doubt you’d notice much difference. Most of us have used lens VR for years, so adding IBIS makes it even better.
A lot of people would take a 70-180mm that small and light for the price over a giant 70-200mm with VR. I know I would.
Well, yes, if I can turn ISO down a couple stops I'd probably do it. I wouldn't exactly call that pushing the boundaries.
Thom Hogan already lost his mind over this in another article posted recently. Might have even been on this thread. Can't say I'm terribly interested in his opinion on this.
Sep 06, 2022 at 11:01 PM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.13 #6 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Photosbydlee wrote:
Comparisons have been done which found
Stabilized body plus stabilized lens - Canon has the clear advantage
Stabilized body plus non stabilized lens - Canon is pretty much the same as the competition
Their advantage comes from them designing IBIS to work alongside lens IS so if you look purely at IBIS, it’s not any better.
Those lenses like the 70-180 are also significantly cheaper. There will always be compromises and many would happily sacrifice lens IS to spend half the price.
p.13 #7 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
The CIPA worldwide shipment of digital still cameras table below covers the years of 1999 (when records were started being kept), 2010 (all time high) & the past 6 years within the context of worldwide population growth.
As #1 interchangeable lens camera brand in an ever shrinking market, Canon sees 3rd parties as cannibalizing their RF lens sales. If they charge a licensing fee it would never provide the exact same margin as them selling 1st party lenses.
Also there are ways to cheat licensing fees if the charge is on a per unit basis. Extra work for their legal department that does not creat meaningful revenue for Canon.
p.13 #8 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Yeah I don’t have any stabilized lenses now and I do notice a difference if I use a body without IBIS but the difference for general shooting when you don’t have lens IS isn’t noticeable.
I definitely would too, especially since a lens like that for me would be for landscapes so would be on a tripod anyways.
jwolfe wrote:
Nikon also uses dual VR. To be honest unless you are really pushing the boundaries I doubt you’d notice much difference. Most of us have used lens VR for years, so adding IBIS makes it even better.
A lot of people would take a 70-180mm that small and light for the price over a giant 70-200mm with VR. I know I would.
p.13 #9 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Except they are not.
Yes they are No. 1 in total sales. But they are No.2 in mirrorless, which is all that matters in the future. DSLRs are dead. And Sony is gaining steam.
dolina wrote:
The CIPA worldwide shipment of digital still cameras table below covers the years of 1999 (when records were started being kept), 2010 (all time high) & the past 6 years within the context of worldwide population growth.
As #1 interchangeable lens camera brand in an ever shrinking market, Canon sees 3rd parties as cannibalizing their RF lens sales. If they charge a licensing fee it would never provide the exact same margin as them selling 1st party lenses.
Also there are ways to cheat licensing fees if the charge is on a per unit basis. Extra work for their legal department that does not creat meaningful revenue for Canon. ...Show more →
p.13 #10 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
jwolfe wrote:
Except they are not.
Yes they are No. 1 in total sales. But they are No.2 in mirrorless, which is all that matters in the future. DSLRs are dead. And Sony is gaining steam.
I updated the table to reflect "% of worldwide population relative to cameras bought that year"
Sony's E mount started in 2010, a 12 year head start
Canon's RF mount started in 2018, 4 years ago
Sony's dozen years will make them #1 for mirrorless-only as they have a running start.
What we should look for would be who will be #1, #2 & #3 by 2026-onwards.
By then RF, E & Z mounts will have
- 60+ 1st party lens SKUs
- ~9 full frame body SKUs
- ~4 APS-C body SKUs
p.13 #11 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
That’s where the issue comes in, many won’t accept the DSLR is dead and still think there will be a 5DV or 6DIII. For them to be number 1 in the future they need to focus on the present and future which is Mirrorless, DSLR’s and EF are the past.
jwolfe wrote:
Except they are not.
Yes they are No. 1 in total sales. But they are No.2 in mirrorless, which is all that matters in the future. DSLRs are dead. And Sony is gaining steam.
p.13 #12 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Photosbydlee wrote:
That’s where the issue comes in, many won’t accept the DSLR is dead and still think there will be a 5DV or 6DIII. For them to be number 1 in the future they need to focus on the present and future which is Mirrorless, DSLR’s and EF are the past.
From 2018-2022 Canon & Nikon prioritized >80% of announced lens SKUs that are needed by professionals today.
p.13 #13 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Photosbydlee wrote:
That’s where the issue comes in... For them to be number 1 in the future they need to focus on the present and future which is Mirrorless, DSLR’s and EF are the past.
Is there anything about Canon's direction in the past few years that suggests to you they are not doing that?
p.13 #14 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Photosbydlee wrote:
Comparisons have been done which found
Stabilized body plus stabilized lens - Canon has the clear advantage
Stabilized body plus non stabilized lens - Canon is pretty much the same as the competition
Since the "adapted lenses" topic has already long jumped off its tracks...any links to those said "comparisons"?
For discussion, I'll go first, just another pesky little video that helped confirm for me that my decision in dumping Canon was the right move for me...
Canon R6 vs Panasonic GH5 Image Stabilisation. Its not even close. - YouTube
Spoiler alert: Canon didn't win.
Anyhoo, apologies to the OP, but spurious claims require checking.
p.13 #15 · 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.
Canon is likely focused on the electronics, autofocus and software side of it and not the mount itself.
If Canon was to go after anything with an RF mount (without electronics,software,etc) they would need to change the shoot without lens option in camera as putting a dumb adapter on the shutter can still fire when the camera is not aware of a lens attached to the camera.
Things like attaching a microscope, telescope, science equipment, specialized lenses for tv/cinema world might cause some pushback by those institutions if Canon forced a non-sell on any lens mount adapters. At some point an adapter with an RF mount on one side is needed so the lens/device can attach to the camera and it wouldn't go over to well with those folks.
One area Canon could see as a concern with manual focus lenses in a physical RF mount is Tilt+shift and a MPE-65. Being manual focus lenses Canon could if they wished pushback there.
I think Canon is mainly focused on companies using the electronics.
Although I would like to see Zeiss and Voigltander lenses in an RF mount for the foreseeable future I am only buying Canon branded RF lenses. Any 3rd party lenses I add such as lensbaby I buy in an EF mount.
Though if Canon went after the dumb adapters I wouldn't be pleased to not be able to attach my old Canon FD, Nikon F, Leica R and M, Minolta MD and few other specialized lenses to my R5, Ra or future Canon R bodies.
p.13 #16 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Yes, not opening up to third parties when everyone else does. It’s like everyone going Mirrorless but then focusing on DSLR’s still as all other brands will have that competitive advantage and offer something Canon doesn’t which is a large range of lenses designed for Mirrorless at an affordable price.
garyvot wrote:
Is there anything about Canon's direction in the past few years that suggests to you they are not doing that?
Sep 07, 2022 at 03:31 PM
osv2 Offline • • • • [X]
p.13 #17 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
dolina wrote:
Sony's E mount started in 2010, a 12 year head start
Canon's RF mount started in 2018, 4 years ago
no, canon had an eos-m milc on the market in 2012, sony did not have a 12 year head start on canon; sony just saw the big milc picture long before canikon did, but they both started out shooting stills with crop milc cameras within a couple of years of each other.
interestingly, viltrox put 3 ef-m lenses on the market in 2020, did canon cry about that?
dolina wrote:
Sony's dozen years will make them #1 for mirrorless-only as they have a running start.
disagree, if anything canon had a big running start with the vl-mount milc video cameras back in 1991, but of course that was abandoned along with everything else.
this current canon failure wrt licensing the mount is just one symptom of a much bigger canon management problem.
p.13 #18 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Photosbydlee wrote:
Yes, not opening up to third parties when everyone else does. It’s like everyone going Mirrorless but then focusing on DSLR’s still as all other brands will have that competitive advantage and offer something Canon doesn’t which is a large range of lenses designed for Mirrorless at an affordable price.
Canon is protecting its intellectual property. This is essential if they intend to license it in the future.
The speculation I have read is that they want to fill out the RF lens lineup a little more fully before considering licensing, but third-party lenses could be a thing in a year or two. If this is actually their plan, it seems reasonable (from Canon's perspective).
We are all able to vote with our wallets in the meantime.
p.13 #20 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
osv2 wrote:
no, canon had an eos-m milc on the market in 2012, sony did not have a 12 year head start on canon; sony just saw the big milc picture long before canikon did, but they both started out shooting stills with crop milc cameras within a couple of years of each other.
interestingly, viltrox put 3 ef-m lenses on the market in 2020, did canon cry about that?
disagree, if anything canon had a big running start with the vl-mount milc video cameras back in 1991, but of course that was abandoned along with everything else.
this current canon failure wrt licensing the mount is just one symptom of a much bigger canon management problem....Show more →
Are your deliberately being unpleasantly pedantic?
Everything you mentioned at best is nice trivia.
To be in the same vein of being that fussy there are earlier mirrorless mounts like the micro 43 that was announced in 2008.
We can even argue that the Leica M mount is also mirrorless over half a century before everyone else.
