Archive 2022 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.5 #1 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Photosbydlee wrote:
35/1.8's - Owned both lenses, Canon has nicer rendering but the AF motor is trash compared to the Sony
85/2 - Not everyone wants a half macro lens and prefer the faster aperture which the Sony has at f/1.8 and nearly half the price (not to mention the 85mm DN Art is almost the same price as the Canon RF 85mm and is a much better lens)
50/1.8 - The RF lens is a nice size but sharpness isn't as good as the RF 35/85 and has poor STM motor. Sony have the 50mm f/1.8 which is similar and the 55mm f/1.8 which is a phenomenal lens, RF mount has no f/1.4 lens to compare lol
70-200/2.8 - Same for the Sony GM lens which is newer and found to be optically better
Also not to mention all the third party options for Sony which is the main point of this thread, not Canon vs Sony for first party lenses... ...Show more →
85/2: same price here, except Canon is on sale. $100 off if anyone is interested. A lot of 90-105 macro lenses out there the 1:2 might actually be quite useful. 85/1.4 much more expensive. 1.8 vs 2 is pretty minor
35/1.8: I'd probably take the optics over the focus motor. I think most people agree on that point
50/1.8: if there's any lol its that you'd be clamoring for light 3rd party lenses then do 180° and mention Sony 50/1.4. It's huge. $1500 and almost as heavy as 1.2
Check out Philip reeve's old 50 vs 55/1.8 Sony. Pretty much even stopped down. $1k new vs older forgotten 50, 50/1.8 RF could easily be better than the older lens
p.5 #2 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
He runs the sansmirror and dslrbodies sites, ultimately attempting to cover more than just a single brand. He likes to cover industry wide trends, what he thinks companies are doing right, what they are doing wrong. He was pretty far into Nikon, but I believe he's branched out over the years.
AmbientMike wrote:
It's just weird. In recent years I've felt I'm out of touch with the Tokina etc 3rd party lenses from hanging out on here. People have mostly been using OEM. Actually got on my nerves. Thought maybe I need to look somewhere else or even just peruse B&H site to see the options. Now everyone is clamoring for them.
Does Thom Hogan even shoot Canon? Someone posted on the Nikon board that he switched to nikon from fuji. Why is he losing his mind over Canon 3rd party lenses? The 100-400 he uses on landscapes is hardly light
p.5 #3 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
AmbientMike wrote:
Sony had no lenses, supposed to buy Sony. Canon has lenses, supposed to buy Sony due to lack of lenses. Drives me nuts
35/1.8's are about the same, canon less than an ounce heavier but has 1:2.
85/2 has 1:2, probably better than Sony due to that, not much heavier
50/1.8 Rf is extremely light. Sony 1.4 is huge. And expensive. You wonder if people interested in something in between a 50/1.8 & 1.2 have looked at the size of the Sony.
85/1.2: yeah, it's heavy. It's an optical masterpiece.
50/1.2: a bit heavier than the Sony but either lens is heavy about 2 lbs.
70-200/2.8 Rf: light considering aperture and FL.
70-200/4 Rf: light and compact
24-105 L:supposed to be the best 24-105. Not heavy, about 1.5 lbs.
Canon is supposedly going to release 8 lenses per year next 4 years
And I don't see any f/2 mid range zoom in Sony.....
I don't particularly care for Sony bodies (Currently have an A7R III), so I was genuinely looking at the RF mount Canon cameras, I used to own a 7D and would love to go back to a Canon body. There are huge holes, that could have all been addressed by third party brands, that have existing lenses for FE and L mounts.
<20mm Lenses: Plenty of really good and compact native and third party lenses.
24mm GM: No competitor from Canon against the wicked Sony lens.
28mm F/2: No canon 28mm prime, the Sony is not particularly amazing and there are basically no third party options here besides the massive Sigma 28mm f1,4, one of my annoyances of the FE mount.
35mm GM: Ditto as the 24mm GM
40-50mm: Canon doesn't have the spectacular 3rd party manual focus lenses that Sony does here, you could adapt the M mount version of these (save the Loxia's with their brilliant colours), but then you are losing the ability for exif data or magnifying manual assist.
The Sigma 45mm f/2.8 has incredible rendering, and I imagine Sigma would make an RF mount version of that if they could.
Also why are you comparing the the 50mm 1.8 RF with the Zony 50mm f/1.4? Sony has the 50mm 1.8, it's is a better comparison, and the 55mm f/1.8 that is sharper and better corrected than the RF 50mm 1.8.
For me it comes down to making a Sony camera fit my hands better, than switching systems; much simpler to do than get a whole new system that has no third party support and a poor selection of lenses (especially so for primes) to add insult to injury.
Adapted EF/L Lenses don't count because you can adapt them to both Canon and Sony bodies.
Aug 31, 2022 at 01:47 PM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.5 #4 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Butterfingers wrote:
I don't particularly care for Sony bodies (Currently have an A7R III), so I was genuinely looking at the RF mount Canon cameras, I used to own a 7D and would love to go back to a Canon body. There are huge holes, that could have all been addressed by third party brands, that have existing lenses for FE and L mounts.
<20mm Lenses: Plenty of really good and compact native and third party lenses.
24mm GM: No competitor from Canon against the wicked Sony lens.
28mm F/2: No canon 28mm prime, the Sony is not particularly amazing and there are basically no third party options here besides the massive Sigma 28mm f1,4, one of my annoyances of the FE mount.
35mm GM: Ditto as the 24mm GM
40-50mm: Canon doesn't have the spectacular 3rd party manual focus lenses that Sony does here, you could adapt the M mount version of these (save the Loxia's with their brilliant colours), but then you are losing the ability for exif data or magnifying manual assist.
The Sigma 45mm f/2.8 has incredible rendering, and I imagine Sigma would make an RF mount version of that if they could.
Also why are you comparing the the 50mm 1.8 RF with the Zony 50mm f/1.4? Sony has the 50mm 1.8, it's is a better comparison, and the 55mm f/1.8 that is sharper and better corrected than the RF 50mm 1.8.
For me it comes down to making a Sony camera fit my hands better, than switching systems; much simpler to do than get a whole new system that has no third party support and a poor selection of lenses (especially so for primes) to add insult to injury.
Adapted EF/L Lenses don't count because you can adapt them to both Canon and Sony bodies.
I agree Sony has more <50mm primes. But for one thing I have numerous mf 50mm primes that tend to sit there. So I'm not changing systems over those.
The reason I bring up the 50/1.4 is that, for one thing, there's a recent thread on people who want something in between 50/1.2 & 1.8. And it sounds reasonable on the surface. But there's not a lot of in between imo. The Sony 1.4 is 1.5+ lbs $1500. Might as well get the 1.2. Canon already has a superior performance fast 50mm. Plus EF Art.
And it's irritating that they actually put IS in the 24-70/2.8, Sony doesn't have it, it gets virtually no mention, and people start threads complaining about no primes. I'd almost certainly take that over the primes. IBIS probably MUCH better in the Canon, and that inexplicably gets little mention.
I don't use 24mm primes really. At least the one on film sat in my bag. Canon just released 24 rf under 10oz
35/1.4, the EF Canon is really supposed to be top notch. So I don't agree with your assessment here. Rf 1.8 has 1:2 and is apparently good & very light under 10 oz.
I don't think mating 2 different brands of af lens to af body using an adapter made by a 3rd party is going to be seamless. EF-RF apparently is, not surprisingly since Canon made it.
p.5 #5 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Butterfingers wrote:
I don't particularly care for Sony bodies (Currently have an A7R III), so I was genuinely looking at the RF mount Canon cameras, I used to own a 7D and would love to go back to a Canon body. There are huge holes, that could have all been addressed by third party brands, that have existing lenses for FE and L mounts.
<20mm Lenses: Plenty of really good and compact native and third party lenses.
24mm GM: No competitor from Canon against the wicked Sony lens.
28mm F/2: No canon 28mm prime, the Sony is not particularly amazing and there are basically no third party options here besides the massive Sigma 28mm f1,4, one of my annoyances of the FE mount.
35mm GM: Ditto as the 24mm GM
40-50mm: Canon doesn't have the spectacular 3rd party manual focus lenses that Sony does here, you could adapt the M mount version of these (save the Loxia's with their brilliant colours), but then you are losing the ability for exif data or magnifying manual assist.
The Sigma 45mm f/2.8 has incredible rendering, and I imagine Sigma would make an RF mount version of that if they could.
Also why are you comparing the the 50mm 1.8 RF with the Zony 50mm f/1.4? Sony has the 50mm 1.8, it's is a better comparison, and the 55mm f/1.8 that is sharper and better corrected than the RF 50mm 1.8.
For me it comes down to making a Sony camera fit my hands better, than switching systems; much simpler to do than get a whole new system that has no third party support and a poor selection of lenses (especially so for primes) to add insult to injury.
Adapted EF/L Lenses don't count because you can adapt them to both Canon and Sony bodies.
It is rather well known that RF L-series 35mm and 24mm primes are in development (and will come sooner rather than later I should think). In the meantime, there are excellent RF 1.8 primes at those focal lengths to choose from.
Canon has been introducing multiple RF lenses every year since the launch of the platform, many of them best in class. I don't think any major hole will go unfilled for very long, so there are no worries in terms of them competing with Sony and Nikon.
Adapted EF glass works better on Canon than on Sony, so it probably does "count".
Re. third party lenses, time will tell, but I suspect we haven't heard the whole story yet.
Aug 31, 2022 at 03:37 PM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.5 #6 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Another thing, Canon has TS-E 45/2.8, if you want 45mm prime. Also 3rd party 45/1.8 in EF that people seem to like.
I don't like computational imaging but canon has the 16mm rf.
p.5 #7 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
This guy is claiming he was told Tamron will not be making any RF lenses either. Canon already chased Samyang and Viltrox off, Tamron and Sigma won't even bother. Sad. I definitely won't be moving back to the RF system.
p.5 #8 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Dexter75 wrote:
This guy is claiming he was told Tamron will not be making any RF lenses either. Canon already chased Samyang and Viltrox off, Tamron and Sigma won't even bother. Sad. I definitely won't be moving back to the RF system.
If Canon ever license the RF mount with terms that are acceptable to 3rd parties they will release RF glass. Until then the current situation will remain, I doubt we’ll see any reverse engineering at all.
p.5 #9 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
SNJOps wrote:
If Canon ever license the RF mount with terms that are acceptable to 3rd parties they will release RF glass. Until then the current situation will remain, I doubt we’ll see any reverse engineering at all.
Offers and counter-offers. The negotiating process.
p.5 #10 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Tom_W wrote:
Offers and counter-offers. The negotiating process.
That’s assuming there are any negotiations taking place, there might not be any at all. The RF mount was released in 2018 so up until now Canon has not granted any licenses to any 3rd parties. That could change at any moment but it could also be true that Canon intends to continue with the current policy long term if not indefinitely which is what I think but I also hope to be wrong on that.
Sep 01, 2022 at 05:54 AM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.5 #11 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
It'd be great to have 3rd party, definitely prefer it, but Canon comes out with the best 24-105, actually manages to put IS in a 24-70/2.8, probably has far superior IBIS, 28-70 has f/2 (!!!) 85/1.2 looks really great. And there's some interest and excitement but mostly it's a bit of a yawn on FM.
And then people get all excited about.....3rd party lenses. And guess what the answer is? Sony. Again. And primes might be nice but if you have to carry 3 to cover 24-105 it's probably heavier. And how are you really going to cover it right only using 3.
p.5 #12 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
AmbientMike wrote:
It'd be great to have 3rd party, definitely prefer it, but Canon comes out with the best 24-105, actually manages to put IS in a 24-70/2.8, probably has far superior IBIS, 28-70 has f/2 (!!!) 85/1.2 looks really great. And there's some interest and excitement but mostly it's a bit of a yawn on FM.
And then people get all excited about.....3rd party lenses. And guess what the answer is? Sony. Again. And primes might be nice but if you have to carry 3 to cover 24-105 it's probably heavier
It gets old
Depends on the use case and budget For example If someone does a lot of wide angle landscape and or astro-landscape there are very good to excellent options on other systems. Or of someone else wants a range of excellent quality fast primes at lower prices. If both of those regards the RF system is severely lacking.
p.5 #13 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
AmbientMike wrote:
It'd be great to have 3rd party, definitely prefer it, but Canon comes out with the best 24-105, actually manages to put IS in a 24-70/2.8, probably has far superior IBIS, 28-70 has f/2 (!!!) 85/1.2 looks really great. And there's some interest and excitement but mostly it's a bit of a yawn on FM.
And then people get all excited about.....3rd party lenses. And guess what the answer is? Sony. Again. And primes might be nice but if you have to carry 3 to cover 24-105 it's probably heavier. And how are you really going to cover it right only using 3.
I don't disagree; Canon RF lenses are exceptional.
But for many, they're also expensive. I think the concern over lack of third-party lenses is driven by those who feel they should have more choices in the mid-range. Sigma Art lenses, for example, are sometimes half the cost of equivalent first party choices. And then there are those areas where third parties can offer things the first party cannot or will not, like the certain primes to fill a niche. (Canon is unlikely to offer L-series 20mm or 28mm primes, for example.)
So, I get the concern, while at the same time appreciating what Canon actually offers.
(Re. it gets old: I agree, some have beaten this horse to death posting many duplicate comments across multiple threads expressing their outrage... I think we get it.)
p.5 #14 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
AmbientMike wrote:
It'd be great to have 3rd party, definitely prefer it, but Canon comes out with the best 24-105, actually manages to put IS in a 24-70/2.8, probably has far superior IBIS, 28-70 has f/2 (!!!) 85/1.2 looks really great. And there's some interest and excitement but mostly it's a bit of a yawn on FM.
And then people get all excited about.....3rd party lenses. And guess what the answer is? Sony. Again. And primes might be nice but if you have to carry 3 to cover 24-105 it's probably heavier
It gets old
Depends on the use case and budget For example If someone does a lot of wide angle landscape and or astro-landscape there are very good to excellent options on other systems. Or of someone else wants a range of excellent quality fast primes at lower prices. If both of those regards the RF system is severely lacking.
p.5 #15 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Tom_W wrote:
Offers and counter-offers. The negotiating process.
They don't need Canon. Thats why only Samyang, and a few other lower end 3rd party brands even attempted to make RF lenses. Sony owns 20% of Tamron. Sigma and Tamron are making plenty of money with the Sony E mount and now Tamron is making Nikon Z mount lenses and Im sure Sigma won't be far behind. Canon needs to stop their foolish way of thinking they are the only game in town, this isn't 2006 any longer.
I shot Canon from my start in 2005 but their being slow to FF mirrorless caused me to switch to Sony. Then I came back and got the RP and R6, but the lack of affordable, quality lenses forced me to sell both cameras. Im currently on the M system with a couple great primes from Sigma and Viltrox, but I won't be back to the RF system until they allow 3rd party, period.
p.5 #16 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
AmbientMike wrote:
The Thom Hogan article really negative to the point of being inaccurate. He really doesn't seem to like Canon. That said he mentions Sony is largest shareholder in Tamron, if correct that might explain why there aren't Rf Tamron lenses.
The older 3rd party was apparently reverse engineered or something since little or none of the older 3rd party is any good on DSLR bodies other than 1D and maybe other early cameras. Just don't really work properly. 3rd party issues regardless of the reasons aren't new, unfortunately. And Nikon seems to have had a lot of issues on 3rd party, too.
That is absolutely not true. I've shot a ton of Tamron and Sigma lenses on Canon and Nikon and after about the mid 2000s they were perfect. Sigma's art series lenses are used by several of my friends who shoot portraits. One shoots Nikon, the other Canon.
The difference now, is with mirrorless, Sony and now Nikon are licensing their mounts instead of letting 3rd parties reverse-engineer them. Now they get a cut of the sales, and the lenses are guaranteed to work with the new mirrorless AF.
p.5 #17 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
This has really sealed it for me. I don't think I'll ever shoot Canon again now. Their RF lenses that I would be interested in have compromised designs and are obscenely expensive. Without the ability to use 3rd party lenses, as great as the R5/R6/R7 are, they are useless to me in what I shoot without the right glass.
Long term I just don't see this being a good strategy for Canon.
Sep 01, 2022 at 01:58 PM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.5 #18 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
jwolfe wrote:
That is absolutely not true. I've shot a ton of Tamron and Sigma lenses on Canon and Nikon and after about the mid 2000s they were perfect. Sigma's art series lenses are used by several of my friends who shoot portraits. One shoots Nikon, the other Canon.
The difference now, is with mirrorless, Sony and now Nikon are licensing their mounts instead of letting 3rd parties reverse-engineer them. Now they get a cut of the sales, and the lenses are guaranteed to work with the new mirrorless AF.
It is absolutely true. I have a couple old Sigmas including 400/5.6 macro that don't stop down. Sure, by the mid 2000's they started to be fine. But, like I said, the older 3rd party lenses didn't work on any but the oldest digital cameras
Sep 01, 2022 at 03:45 PM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.5 #19 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
You wonder if people complaining about price have looked at Sony. 24-105 L is the same as Sony, except it's better and at least Canon has less expensive options, including EF mount. 85/2 Canon is on sale so it's less than Sony 85/1.8. It's telly pretty comparable imo. 70-350 is a lot more than 55-250
p.5 #20 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
All the new stuff works perfectly. Even though it was designed by reverse engineering. You’re talking ancient history.
AmbientMike wrote:
It is absolutely true. I have a couple old Sigmas including 400/5.6 macro that don't stop down. Sure, by the mid 2000's they started to be fine. But, like I said, the older 3rd party lenses didn't work on any but the oldest digital cameras
