RP or M6 mk II

thunder storm wrote:

BirdShooter7 wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

MAC wrote:

nnowak wrote:

Until they are not.

M system without the sigma 56 and 16 is a non-starter imo.

And I have the EF 24 F2.8 IS for my RP which is small and has 4 stop IS and gives me no desire for the siggy 16

And I'l be getting the RF 85 F2 IS so I'll not be getting the siggy 56, even if the M5II with IBIS comes out

so one invests in these siggys and then a new m body comes out and there is a monkey wrench thrown in - been there, hate it, never again if I can avoid it

With RF lenses Canon is providing in-body firmware updates for the RF lenses. One has the security and confidence of Canon as the first part mfg. RF for me is forever gear.

In my opinion, Canon does not care about supporting sigma sales and will monkey wrench sigma without a blink of the eye

There's a risk, but the risk there won't ever be a new M 32Mp flagship with integrated viewfinder and IBIS is a bigger risk if you ask me.

For full frame: it works with bodies up to the R5. So yeah, there's a risk compatibility will be broken with the successor of the R5. But if you and I are able to afford the R5 after 4 or 5 years, and will shooting it for 5 years more we're talking about 9 or 10 years. Yes, lenses can live for 20 years, but they aren't up to date for 20 years. After 10 years there will be better options again.

Again: Canon needs Sigma, as without Sigma Sony becomes too attractive. Note: there's not a single native f/1.4 prime from Canon for the RF-mount. Coincidence? Canon needs Sigma. You can't be attractive with native f/1.2 primes and f/2.0 zooms only.

Look at Saab: if you only do the premium stuff you will go bankrupt. You need a package varying from Porsche to Skoda. Canon does both the Porsche part of the RF primes (f/1.2) and the Skoda part (f/1.8 or f/2.0), but they simply leave the Volkswagen/Seat part of the primes to Sigma. The competition with Sony and others simply dictates Canon can't play the games of yesterday anymore without hurting themselves, at least not as rough as they used to do.

I doubt Canon sees it that way.

Canon doesn't want to keep it that way for ever, but for now it's the least bad thing they can do to stay attractive compared to Sony. And Canon does this for EF protocols only, and once they have time Canon eventually will make RF f/1.4 options, being more attractive because no adapter. Canon does cripple all the EF lenses with build in IS (even their own brand), and the won't give away the RF protocols, that's for sure. So the openness is naturally limited in time, as at some point no adapter and good stabilization is always more attractive in the long run. It's exactly what Canon needs: enough lenses available for the system for now, while still having the most attractive first party options in the future.

If you call in and ask Canon they offer the solution of the EF adapter to fill holes in the lineup, not products from a competitor.  They have filled out the EF lineup quite well and are using like-native compatibility to their advantage.