Reading mode: Light Dark

Has Viltrox AF 85/1.8 RF been removed from Viltrox homepage?

Go to last post
I personally don't have a lot of care about the issue for my needs. After 18 months of making changes to my kit I am very satisfied. I can cover every area I really care about. I do have one EF lens in my active kit, the Sigma 14mm f/1.8 I use for night shooting. I would love to have a native RF lens to cover this range and speed. The Sigma is nice, but it is a big and heavy lens. The Canon long fast primes are nice, but I will never spend $6-20K on any lenses.

I am disappointed in Canon's approach to third party lenses. Will be interesting to see how this plays out in the future. Nikon is now opening up to support third parties. As the Z9 tech filters down to less expensive cameras it will be interesting to see how this plays out. Sony has made major jumps in market share and opening up the E mount has be one of the factors. When I see any mirrorless shooter under 40 they all seem to be using Sony.
 
I agree that they will ultimately relent, and I agree customer service is good if you have cps. But I think they will relent too late, and I think they are already quite far behind, even far behind nikon, which is a bit perplexing given how good eos m was.
 
SafariBob said:
I agree that they will ultimately relent, and I agree customer service is good if you have cps. But I think they will relent too late, and I think they are already quite far behind, even far behind nikon, which is a bit perplexing given how good eos m was.
Click to expand...
I dont have CPS, and they made me feel like I was a celebrity or some kind of VIP.

Far behind how? I did specifically say camera body. I dont see where they are behind in any meaningful way and the tracking seems best in class. Outside of bodies, they dont have as many native lens options as Sony, but if course they dont. However, all major bases are covered through the entire range and beyond. For anything else, there are a TON of EF lenses and 3rd party EF lenses which work just as well if not better on R system.
 
c h u n k said:
SafariBob said:
I agree that they will ultimately relent, and I agree customer service is good if you have cps. But I think they will relent too late, and I think they are already quite far behind, even far behind nikon, which is a bit perplexing given how good eos m was.
Click to expand...
I dont have CPS, and they made me feel like I was a celebrity or some kind of VIP.
Click to expand...
happy to hear.
c h u n k said:
Far behind how? I did specifically say camera body.
Click to expand...
the r5 is a fantastic body.
c h u n k said:
I dont see where they are behind in any meaningful way and the tracking seems best in class. Outside of bodies, they dont have as many native lens options as Sony, but if course they dont. However, all major bases are covered through the entire range and beyond.
Click to expand...
the lenses I like:

sony 12-24 f4

tamron 35-150 2-2.8 & 28-200

Sony 200-600

nikon 24-200

nikon 14-24

nikon 400 1.4 tc

I don’t think canon has competitive lenses to those.

i quite like the Rf 35 f2 & 100-500, but the latter is quite expensive and not ideal for my (wildlife) use.

i also like the mp-65, but obviously you can use that on any body, and I prefer af on macros these days due to in camera stacking

i do think the tamron 35-150 f2-2.8 and 50-400 would add a ton of value to the Rf system.
c h u n k said:
For anything else, there are a TON of EF lenses and 3rd party EF lenses which work just as well if not better on R system.

--
**********-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-**********
Some of my photos here: https://flic.kr/ps/2i6XL3
“You're off to Great Places! Today is your day! Your mountain is waiting, So... get on your way!” --Dr. Seuss
Click to expand...
 
More info on this situation has just been posted up on Canon Rumours.

Loading…

www.canonrumors.com
 
SafariBob said:
the lenses I like:

sony 12-24 f4

tamron 35-150 2-2.8 & 28-200

Sony 200-600

nikon 24-200

nikon 14-24

nikon 400 1.4 tc

I don’t think canon has competitive lenses to those
Click to expand...
Canon EF 11-24mm f/4, Sigma EF 12-24mm f/4 (btw, no, there's nothing wrong with EF, and both of these are still in production; I would expect the Canon to remain

Canon RF 24-240mm f/4-6.3

It's true they don't make a 200-600; there are the Tamron/Sigma EF 150-600mm lenses, however.

They also don't make a 400 with an inbuilt TC. But they make a great 400 and you can put a 1.4x on it. Not all use cases are great for that though.

Etc.

The systems do have some differences, which has always been the case. But it seems silly to say that these are holes of photographic things that Canon users can't do.
 
Last edited:
antonio-salieri said:
SafariBob said:
the lenses I like:

sony 12-24 f4

tamron 35-150 2-2.8 & 28-200

Sony 200-600

nikon 24-200

nikon 14-24

nikon 400 1.4 tc

I don’t think canon has competitive lenses to those
Click to expand...
Canon EF 11-24mm f/4, Sigma EF 12-24mm f/4 (btw, no, there's nothing wrong with EF, and both of these are still in production; I would expect the Canon to remain
Click to expand...
really not comparable to the Sony in terms of size, nor bang for buck iq wise.
antonio-salieri said:
Canon RF 24-240mm f/4-6.3
Click to expand...
far below the tamrons and nikon.
antonio-salieri said:
It's true they don't make a 200-600; there are the Tamron/Sigma EF 150-600mm lenses, however
Click to expand...
far below the Sony
antonio-salieri said:
They also don't make a 400 with an inbuilt TC. But they make a great 400
Click to expand...
not that great imo, and I do have a canon 400 2.8.
antonio-salieri said:
and you can put a 1.4x on it.
Click to expand...
i do have a 1.4, but for super teles an integrated tc really is a lifesaver
antonio-salieri said:
Not all use cases are great for that though.
Click to expand...
Agree
antonio-salieri said:
Etc.

The systems do have some differences, which has always been the case. But it seems silly to say that these are holes of photographic things that Canon users can't do.
Click to expand...
Not sure I understand your sentence, but I am not a native speaker. I generally don’t think think canon is competitive with most types of photography I am interested in: landscape, wildlife, portraits. I do think the 8k in the r5 is stellar, and obviously there is a ton of affordable and amazing ef glass, but, I have come to dislike adapting.
 
From the CanonRumors article: "One of the sources said not to expect anything from the third-party manufacturers until late 2024 at the earliest..."

Late 2024 is two years off. Many who bought into the R system may be looking to buy a new body by that time. Assuming Canon has added another 12 lenses to the catalog (current rate of about 6 per year), one wonders if that will be a sufficient quantity of lenses for buyers to stay with the R system and invest in another R body (with still nearly to zero 3rd party RF lenses).
 
Last edited:
SafariBob said:
antonio-salieri said:
SafariBob said:
the lenses I like:

sony 12-24 f4

tamron 35-150 2-2.8 & 28-200

Sony 200-600

nikon 24-200

nikon 14-24

nikon 400 1.4 tc

I don’t think canon has competitive lenses to those
Click to expand...
Canon EF 11-24mm f/4, Sigma EF 12-24mm f/4 (btw, no, there's nothing wrong with EF, and both of these are still in production; I would expect the Canon to remain
Click to expand...
really not comparable to the Sony in terms of size, nor bang for buck iq wise.
SafariBob said:
Canon RF 24-240mm f/4-6.3
Click to expand...
far below the tamrons and nikon.
SafariBob said:
It's true they don't make a 200-600; there are the Tamron/Sigma EF 150-600mm lenses, however
Click to expand...
far below the Sony
SafariBob said:
They also don't make a 400 with an inbuilt TC. But they make a great 400
Click to expand...
not that great imo, and I do have a canon 400 2.8.
SafariBob said:
and you can put a 1.4x on it.
Click to expand...
i do have a 1.4, but for super teles an integrated tc really is a lifesaver
SafariBob said:
Not all use cases are great for that though.
Click to expand...
Agree
SafariBob said:
Etc.

The systems do have some differences, which has always been the case. But it seems silly to say that these are holes of photographic things that Canon users can't do.
Click to expand...
Not sure I understand your sentence, but I am not a native speaker. I generally don’t think think canon is competitive with most types of photography I am interested in: landscape, wildlife, portraits. I do think the 8k in the r5 is stellar, and obviously there is a ton of affordable and amazing ef glass, but, I have come to dislike adapting.
Click to expand...
On the lenses: I admittedly think mostly about primes rather than zooms. So I don't have a ton to say on specific lenses like the 24-240mm or 24-200mm. I don't know if the Nikon one is really better; I just wouldn't have much use for that zoom range (or, rather, for most of it, I use primes, or, alternatively, f/2.8 zooms).

My general point is that the different camera systems have always had some differences in available lenses. There are some things you can get on each of them that you can't get on any other.

On the other hand, it seems very silly to say that Canon cameras aren't useful for landscape, wildlife or portraits... They are plenty good for all of these purposes. So is every camera system. I don't know why Canon should be considered unable to produce competitive photos in these genres... I see many produced using Canon gear in all three.
 
antonio-salieri said:
SafariBob said:
antonio-salieri said:
SafariBob said:
the lenses I like:

sony 12-24 f4

tamron 35-150 2-2.8 & 28-200

Sony 200-600

nikon 24-200

nikon 14-24

nikon 400 1.4 tc

I don’t think canon has competitive lenses to those
Click to expand...
Canon EF 11-24mm f/4, Sigma EF 12-24mm f/4 (btw, no, there's nothing wrong with EF, and both of these are still in production; I would expect the Canon to remain
Click to expand...
really not comparable to the Sony in terms of size, nor bang for buck iq wise.
antonio-salieri said:
Canon RF 24-240mm f/4-6.3
Click to expand...
far below the tamrons and nikon.
antonio-salieri said:
It's true they don't make a 200-600; there are the Tamron/Sigma EF 150-600mm lenses, however
Click to expand...
far below the Sony
antonio-salieri said:
They also don't make a 400 with an inbuilt TC. But they make a great 400
Click to expand...
not that great imo, and I do have a canon 400 2.8.
antonio-salieri said:
and you can put a 1.4x on it.
Click to expand...
i do have a 1.4, but for super teles an integrated tc really is a lifesaver
antonio-salieri said:
Not all use cases are great for that though.
Click to expand...
Agree
antonio-salieri said:
Etc.

The systems do have some differences, which has always been the case. But it seems silly to say that these are holes of photographic things that Canon users can't do.
Click to expand...
Not sure I understand your sentence, but I am not a native speaker. I generally don’t think think canon is competitive with most types of photography I am interested in: landscape, wildlife, portraits. I do think the 8k in the r5 is stellar, and obviously there is a ton of affordable and amazing ef glass, but, I have come to dislike adapting.
Click to expand...
On the lenses: I admittedly think mostly about primes rather than zooms. So I don't have a ton to say on specific lenses like the 24-240mm or 24-200mm. I don't know if the Nikon one is really better; I just wouldn't have much use for that zoom range (or, rather, for most of it, I use primes, or, alternatively, f/2.8 zooms).

My general point is that the different camera systems have always had some differences in available lenses. There are some things you can get on each of them that you can't get on any other.

On the other hand, it seems very silly to say that Canon cameras aren't useful for landscape, wildlife or portraits... They are plenty good for all of these purposes. So is every camera system. I don't know why Canon should be considered unable to produce competitive photos in these genres... I see many produced using Canon gear in all three.
Click to expand...
I can’t speak for primes. Canon is arguably the king of slr lenses, particularly in terms of good value used glass that works well with modern cameras.



it may just be my preferences. I am a less is more kind of guy, and like to have as few lenses as possibly and use them all the time. 5 is a good number.
 
Nothing we dont know, but Northrup chimed in on their channel along with some "Fight the power" calls to action. All we need is a little more noise than we made over that weird multifunction bar on the R to end it. It is Canon so there is no scenario we will suddenly get news of Tamron RF next month, but I wouldnt be surprised if people can push them to change directions a lot faster than this arbitrary late 2024 timeframe.

Northrup video here:


PS - that multifunction bar comment was a joke

--
**********-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-**********
Some of my photos here: https://flic.kr/ps/2i6XL3
“You're off to Great Places! Today is your day! Your mountain is waiting, So... get on your way!” --Dr. Seuss
 
Last edited:
antonio-salieri said:
SNJops said:
More info on this situation has just been posted up on Canon Rumours.

https://www.canonrumors.com/dont-expect-any-third-party-autofocus-lenses-in-the-near-future/
Click to expand...
Rumors are rumors as always, but 2023-24 was about when I expected e.g. Sigma to come out with RF lenses based on their usual clip. Compare EF-M.
Click to expand...
EF-m is not a meaningful comparison.

1. this uses the EF-protocol

2. for everyone it was clear ef-m was sunsetting anyway, so Canon didn't bother. With the R10 and R7 the 16,30,56mm f/1.4 primes are excluded, so no nice portrait prime for crop shooters again.
antonio-salieri said:
(Also, 2024 is not the distant future!)
Click to expand...
 
thunder storm said:
antonio-salieri said:
SNJops said:
More info on this situation has just been posted up on Canon Rumours.

https://www.canonrumors.com/dont-expect-any-third-party-autofocus-lenses-in-the-near-future/
Click to expand...
Rumors are rumors as always, but 2023-24 was about when I expected e.g. Sigma to come out with RF lenses based on their usual clip. Compare EF-M.
Click to expand...
EF-m is not a meaningful comparison.

1. this uses the EF-protocol
Click to expand...
The EF-M mount is still covered by patents in the same way the RF mount is (see https://pdfpiw.uspto.gov/.piw?PageNum=0&docid=09638987, a close parallel to the patent on mount design posted earlier), as well as having a different number of pins; it is not the same, though it is derivative. In any case, a lens physically fitting the RF mount should be able to use the EF protocol (and it's possible that Samyang's/Viltrox's do, although this isn't confirmed).
thunder storm said:
2. for everyone it was clear ef-m was sunsetting anyway, so Canon didn't bother. With the R10 and R7 the 16,30,56mm f/1.4 primes are excluded, so no nice portrait prime for crop shooters again.
Click to expand...
Now? Sure. When Tamron came out with an EF-M lens in 2014, this was not clear by any means.
 
c h u n k said:
Nothing we dont know, but Northrup chimed in on their channel along with some "Fight the power" calls to action. All we need is a little more noise than we made over that weird multifunction bar on the R to end it.
Click to expand...
I like that multifunction bar and miss it on my other cameras. It's a neat control for the viewfinder functions.
c h u n k said:
It is Canon so there is no scenario we will suddenly get news of Tamron RF next month, but I wouldnt be surprised if people can push them to change directions a lot faster than this arbitrary late 2024 timeframe.
Click to expand...
It took two years from the introduction of Sony’s E mount, with Sony pleading for independent lenses to fit the mount and give it some credibility, for Sigma to produce their first E mount lens. We're not going to get licenced Sigma lenses in two years even if Canon, a company with a 60 year old policy of not giving out licences were to give Sigma, a company with a 60 year old policy of not taking out licences (who claim that their production lines are flat out) a licence tomorrow. I think it will take Sigma a bit longer to reverse engineer the RF mount well enough to avoid the patents, but it will take time.
c h u n k said:
Northrup video here:


PS - that multifunction bar comment was a joke

--
**********-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-**********
Some of my photos here: https://flic.kr/ps/2i6XL3
“You're off to Great Places! Today is your day! Your mountain is waiting, So... get on your way!” --Dr. Seuss
Click to expand...
 
Sittatunga said:
c h u n k said:
Nothing we dont know, but Northrup chimed in on their channel along with some "Fight the power" calls to action. All we need is a little more noise than we made over that weird multifunction bar on the R to end it.
Click to expand...
I like that multifunction bar and miss it on my other cameras. It's a neat control for the viewfinder functions.
Sittatunga said:
It is Canon so there is no scenario we will suddenly get news of Tamron RF next month, but I wouldnt be surprised if people can push them to change directions a lot faster than this arbitrary late 2024 timeframe.
Click to expand...
It took two years from the introduction of Sony’s E mount, with Sony pleading for independent lenses to fit the mount and give it some credibility, for Sigma to produce their first E mount lens.
Click to expand...
That was a deliberate movement by Sigma. Adapting an existing lens (the first Sigma E lenses were DSLR lenses with an adaptor integrated) is not that hard. It can be done in 1 year for sure. I believe they waited to see if the E mount gained traction.
Sittatunga said:
We're not going to get licenced Sigma lenses in two years even if Canon, a company with a 60 year old policy of not giving out licences were to give Sigma, a company with a 60 year old policy of not taking out licences
Click to expand...
I think you are not up to date. Sigma now has licenses not only with Sony, but with Fujifilm also.

I'm pretty sure they will be happy to accept a license to sell their Art series to RF users for half the Canon's asking price
Sittatunga said:
(who claim that their production lines are flat out) a licence tomorrow. I think it will take Sigma a bit longer to reverse engineer the RF mount well enough to avoid the patents, but it will take time.
Sittatunga said:
Northrup video here:


PS - that multifunction bar comment was a joke

--
**********-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-**********
Some of my photos here: https://flic.kr/ps/2i6XL3
“You're off to Great Places! Today is your day! Your mountain is waiting, So... get on your way!” --Dr. Seuss
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
antonio-salieri said:
thunder storm said:
antonio-salieri said:
SNJops said:
More info on this situation has just been posted up on Canon Rumours.

https://www.canonrumors.com/dont-expect-any-third-party-autofocus-lenses-in-the-near-future/
Click to expand...
Rumors are rumors as always, but 2023-24 was about when I expected e.g. Sigma to come out with RF lenses based on their usual clip. Compare EF-M.
Click to expand...
EF-m is not a meaningful comparison.

1. this uses the EF-protocol
Click to expand...
The EF-M mount is still covered by patents in the same way the RF mount is (see https://pdfpiw.uspto.gov/.piw?PageNum=0&docid=09638987, a close parallel to the patent on mount design posted earlier), as well as having a different number of pins; it is not the same, though it is derivative. In any case, a lens physically fitting the RF mount should be able to use the EF protocol (and it's possible that Samyang's/Viltrox's do, although this isn't confirmed).
antonio-salieri said:
2. for everyone it was clear ef-m was sunsetting anyway, so Canon didn't bother. With the R10 and R7 the 16,30,56mm f/1.4 primes are excluded, so no nice portrait prime for crop shooters again.
Click to expand...
Now? Sure. When Tamron came out with an EF-M lens in 2014, this was not clear by any means.
Click to expand...
Yes, but that Tamron suffered from broken compatibility several times whereas the Sigma primes didn't.
 
Sittatunga said:
Sittatunga said:
It is Canon so there is no scenario we will suddenly get news of Tamron RF next month, but I wouldnt be surprised if people can push them to change directions a lot faster than this arbitrary late 2024 timeframe.
Click to expand...
It took two years from the introduction of Sony’s E mount, with Sony pleading for independent lenses to fit the mount and give it some credibility,
Click to expand...
Erm, no? E-mount started life as a lighter, less serious system. The A7 was introduced first in 2013, three years later, and after the first Sigma lenses for the mount. However, Sony didn’t “plead” to anyone - right at the beginning of the system, they decided to license the basic mount specs. This was a gamble, but they had A-mount to fall back on if it failed.
Sittatunga said:
for Sigma to produce their first E mount lens.
Click to expand...
Incidentally, the first Sigma primes were made for both E-mount and MFT, and were designed from the ground up for those formats. Mirrorless was still pretty new back then, and everyone was testing whether the concept would succeed. But Sigma’s early arrival is a strong indicator of how good sales were even in 2010, when development for their primes probably began.
Sittatunga said:
We're not going to get licenced Sigma lenses in two years even if Canon, a company with a 60 year old policy of not giving out licences were to give Sigma, a company with a 60 year old policy of not taking out licences (who claim that their production lines are flat out) a licence tomorrow. I think it will take Sigma a bit longer to reverse engineer the RF mount well enough to avoid the patents, but it will take time.
Click to expand...
After this, I don’t think they ever will. Canon are obviously ready to get very litigious, and Sigma won’t want the trouble after they lost against Nikon in 2014. Sony, L-mount, Fujifilm and eventually Nikon probably will represent more than enough sales volume for Sigma to thrive, anyway.
 
I usually go to Canon Watch site for the exact same rumour news. I don’t ever click on the Canon Rumours forced ad clicks.

it’s obvious Canon also wanted to corner the market on RF lenses with the new RF design. How did third party manufacturers ever get permission to make third party EF lenses. Canon just allowed it or the patent expited?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Stig Nygaard
The US-prices of PowerShot V1, EOS R50V and new lenses...
Replies
1
Views
2
dwkdnvr
D
Stig Nygaard
Firmware updates for Sigma RF-S zooms available
Replies
7
Views
8
PicPocket
P
Stig Nygaard
Got the new Samyang RF-S 12mm F2.0 AF
2
Replies
25
Views
26
Sittatunga
S
Stig Nygaard
Meike teasing RF-mount lens with autofocus coming?
Replies
1
Views
2
GrunRad
GrunRad
Stig Nygaard
Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM Z ?
2
Replies
24
Views
25
thunder storm
T

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top