Friday rant: The future of Canon RF and 3rd party lenses

CamerEyes wrote:

JustUs7 wrote:

You will be labeled and slaughtered and called bad names for asking this question in this forum.

Not for the question itself. Only because it’s been discussed ad nauseam. A quick scroll past the first page or so will come up with several other threads on the same topic.

Still, the misconceptions and misinformation floating around on the subject is mind boggling. People think their EF Sigma lenses will suddenly stop working on their Canon DSLR’s. I know someone switching to Nikon (old DSLR to old DSLR) because of this belief. I don’t know them well enough to talk them out of it though.

The OP I think is aware that EF works with RF-mount bodies. When we emphasize that, we ignore the importance of NATIVE lenses.

Why are native lenses important to you?  Is it the presence of the adapter making it less convenient, or do you believe there are compatibility issues, the fact that wide angle lenses on the EF mount can't take advantage of the shorter flange distance, or something else?  Without understanding why you personally consider it important, it's hard to answer.

I bagged a Samyang 14mm 2.8 on RF mount, with auto-focus and somehow still works with both my R7 and R6 Mark II. Very convenient to use, versus my EF16-35mm with an adapter. Got a Canon RF24mm f/1.8 - very convenient to use versus my Canon EF24mm f/2.8 with an adapter, let alone the bigger EF24mm L.

The Samyang is at least arguably less native to the RF mount (in electronic terms) than a Canon EF lens with adapter.  The RF mount was designed to be completely back compatible with EF lenses, and Canon, as first party vendor for both, can ensure that.  The lens strategy all along was to rely on adapted EF lenses while new RF lenses are being designed.  Canon doesn't guarantee that third party lenses are compatible with any of its cameras.