Re: Friday rant: The future of Canon RF and 3rd party lenses
1
Alastair Norcross wrote:
boldcolors wrote:
Does anyone know if Canon officially claimed that they will not tolerate any 3rd party lenses for the RF mount? I mean...the R was released many years ago by now and we still have no native mount alternatives other than Canons own superexpensive glass. Or the cheapo kit-alternatives which seem to be mediocre at best.
You lost all credibility right there. None of the non-L primes is mediocre.
lenses with stepper motors have mediocre af, that's why tamron, nikon, sigma, etc. have all started using linear voice coil af motors.
where are the rf-mount lenses with linear voice coil af?
sony has to compete with sigma and tamron, and e-mount owners benefit from that, greatly.
I have seen many amazing results from the 800 F11 (lots of YouTube videos from great wildlife photographers).
yes, canon has a solid history of decent cheap entry glass, but where do you go from there to get improved p.q. and real focus motors?
100-500+1.4x: $3200 = 700mm f/10, but you can't use the wide end
200-600+1.4x: $2550 = 840mm f/9
canon has never made a 600mm superzoom with af.
the new sigma 60-600 looks like a great lens, with voice coil af, but i don't see how it will compete with the 200-600, which is unmatched in any brand or mount, so why did sigma make it? can't use a 1.4x with it on e-mount, and nikon promised their own 200-600 three years ago, so they won't allow it on z-mount, unless perhaps it's re-popped under the nikon name.
in the end, the market will decide for itself which approach is best.
milc lenses with af:
e-mount: 179
mft: 78
x-mount: 71
L-mount: 61
z-mount: 47
rf-mount: 40