Interview with Canon

https://phototrend.fr/2023/03/interview-canon-cpplus-2023/

"Tokura noted that while industry attention and hype is unsurprisingly focused on mirrorless models, DSLRs still make up 30% of global sales, and with that also come a lot of DSLR lens sales. While the company is clearly focusing research and development on mirrorless models, they do intend to continue production to meet the market demand for the time being."

On RF lens licensing to 3rd parties: "Kiyomi noted that Canon has no overarching policy on this and that it is handled on a "case-by-case basis," with each possibility evaluated for how it complements or competes with the company's own plans and offerings. Tokura elaborated on this by noting the company is currently in discussions with other manufacturers, though he didn't specify which brands."

This direction of Canon on RF lenses seem similar to Nikon's policy of only supporting licensing for complementary lenses from selected companies.

RDM5546 wrote:

https://phototrend.fr/2023/03/interview-canon-cpplus-2023/

"Tokura noted that while industry attention and hype is unsurprisingly focused on mirrorless models, DSLRs still make up 30% of global sales, and with that also come a lot of DSLR lens sales. While the company is clearly focusing research and development on mirrorless models, they do intend to continue production to meet the market demand for the time being."

On RF lens licensing to 3rd parties: "Kiyomi noted that Canon has no overarching policy on this and that it is handled on a "case-by-case basis," with each possibility evaluated for how it complements or competes with the company's own plans and offerings. Tokura elaborated on this by noting the company is currently in discussions with other manufacturers, though he didn't specify which brands."

This direction of Canon on RF lenses seem similar to Nikon's policy of only supporting licensing for complementary lenses from selected companies.

Or he could be saying that Canon's lawyers send "cease and desist" letters to 3rd parties on a case-by-case basis, and that got translated as "negotiation."
He did not say it was Canon's goal to make 3rd party lenses possible.

RDKirk wrote:

RDM5546 wrote:

https://phototrend.fr/2023/03/interview-canon-cpplus-2023/

"Tokura noted that while industry attention and hype is unsurprisingly focused on mirrorless models, DSLRs still make up 30% of global sales, and with that also come a lot of DSLR lens sales. While the company is clearly focusing research and development on mirrorless models, they do intend to continue production to meet the market demand for the time being."

On RF lens licensing to 3rd parties: "Kiyomi noted that Canon has no overarching policy on this and that it is handled on a "case-by-case basis," with each possibility evaluated for how it complements or competes with the company's own plans and offerings. Tokura elaborated on this by noting the company is currently in discussions with other manufacturers, though he didn't specify which brands."

This direction of Canon on RF lenses seem similar to Nikon's policy of only supporting licensing for complementary lenses from selected companies.

Or he could be saying that Canon's lawyers send "cease and desist" letters to 3rd parties on a case-by-case basis, and that got translated as "negotiation."
He did not say it was Canon's goal to make 3rd party lenses possible.

Thats the way I see this whole matter going down.

A third party uses AF protocols that are either unlicensed or copied EF or RF protocols? Cease and desist.

MF lens that uses the RF mount? Perfectly fine (even as seen with the most recent addition, that communicates over the RF mount).

I would have to imagine if a third party developed their own AF protocols it would be entirely fine with canon.

A side note that I have yet to see answered, how long did it take from the introduction of the EF mount for third party AF lenses to appear?

Gam3r01 wrote:

A side note that I have yet to see answered, how long did it take from the introduction of the EF mount for third party AF lenses to appear?

The very first appearance of compatible lenses was relatively quickly, within five years.

But reliable compatibility didn't come for more than 10 years. Canon EF lenses had significant capabilities that were not apparent until the bodies that exploited them came out.

For instance, Canon lens motors were always extremely efficient electrically, using far less power than the bodies provided. That wasn't noticed and wasn't copied, until Canon downsized the amount of power provided to the lenses (more efficient bodies drawing less power to last longer on a battery). That caused a number of the 3rd party lenses to choke, Sigma being prevalent among them, but it also caught my Tamron 80-200 zoom.

Reliability of 3rd party lenses was troublesome enough that through the 90s and early 2000s, Canon was constantly accused of "changing the EF protocol" to shut out the 3rd party manufacturers. Clearly, however, they had not; the oldest EF lenses worked perfectly with the newest EF-mount cameras.

RDKirk wrote:

Gam3r01 wrote:

A side note that I have yet to see answered, how long did it take from the introduction of the EF mount for third party AF lenses to appear?

The very first appearance of compatible lenses was relatively quickly, within five years.

But reliable compatibility didn't come for more than 10 years. Canon EF lenses had significant capabilities that were not apparent until the bodies that exploited them came out.

For instance, Canon lens motors were always extremely efficient electrically, using far less power than the bodies provided. That wasn't noticed and wasn't copied, until Canon downsized the amount of power provided to the lenses (more efficient bodies drawing less power to last longer on a battery). That caused a number of the 3rd party lenses to choke, Sigma being prevalent among them, but it also caught my Tamron 80-200 zoom.

Reliability of 3rd party lenses was troublesome enough that through the 90s and early 2000s, Canon was constantly accused of "changing the EF protocol" to shut out the 3rd party manufacturers. Clearly, however, they had not; the oldest EF lenses worked perfectly with the newest EF-mount cameras.

Thanks for the insight, I never see this brought up during 3rd party RF discussion. It sounds like third parties could be more warry of how to approach the RF mount/protocols given what they have learned in the past.

I would rather wait some extra time and get a reliable product instead of a rushed one "just because we need it"

Gam3r01 wrote:

RDKirk wrote:

Gam3r01 wrote:

A side note that I have yet to see answered, how long did it take from the introduction of the EF mount for third party AF lenses to appear?

The very first appearance of compatible lenses was relatively quickly, within five years.

But reliable compatibility didn't come for more than 10 years. Canon EF lenses had significant capabilities that were not apparent until the bodies that exploited them came out.

For instance, Canon lens motors were always extremely efficient electrically, using far less power than the bodies provided. That wasn't noticed and wasn't copied, until Canon downsized the amount of power provided to the lenses (more efficient bodies drawing less power to last longer on a battery). That caused a number of the 3rd party lenses to choke, Sigma being prevalent among them, but it also caught my Tamron 80-200 zoom.

Reliability of 3rd party lenses was troublesome enough that through the 90s and early 2000s, Canon was constantly accused of "changing the EF protocol" to shut out the 3rd party manufacturers. Clearly, however, they had not; the oldest EF lenses worked perfectly with the newest EF-mount cameras.

Thanks for the insight, I never see this brought up during 3rd party RF discussion. It sounds like third parties could be more warry of how to approach the RF mount/protocols given what they have learned in the past.

I would rather wait some extra time and get a reliable product instead of a rushed one "just because we need it"

The RF mount features extremely tight and complex software coordination between body and lens computers...probably a proprietary operating system.  I suspect it's a tough nut to crack without stepping on Canon's IPs.

RDKirk wrote:

Gam3r01 wrote:

A side note that I have yet to see answered, how long did it take from the introduction of the EF mount for third party AF lenses to appear?

The very first appearance of compatible lenses was relatively quickly, within five years.

But reliable compatibility didn't come for more than 10 years. Canon EF lenses had significant capabilities that were not apparent until the bodies that exploited them came out.

For instance, Canon lens motors were always extremely efficient electrically, using far less power than the bodies provided. That wasn't noticed and wasn't copied, until Canon downsized the amount of power provided to the lenses (more efficient bodies drawing less power to last longer on a battery). That caused a number of the 3rd party lenses to choke, Sigma being prevalent among them, but it also caught my Tamron 80-200 zoom.

Reliability of 3rd party lenses was troublesome enough that through the 90s and early 2000s, Canon was constantly accused of "changing the EF protocol" to shut out the 3rd party manufacturers. Clearly, however, they had not; the oldest EF lenses worked perfectly with the newest EF-mount cameras.

Until around 2008 lenses from third party makers were definitely substandard in my opinion. This multi vendor transition was over 20 years after after the introduction of the EF mount. The situation remarkably different today. Third party lenses can sharper, better as well as cheaper than the EF equivalents. My 50, 85 and 135 Sigma Art lenses in EF mount are excellent examples. They are much and heavier but low in price than the Canon equivalent focal length products. There are tradeoffs in pros and cons of each but it a marketplace that is much more competitive. As long as Canon has RF lenses that are better than the competition in meeting my preferences I still prefer the Canon so far. I wish Canon would be quicker in getting more lens options into the market. RF-S choices in particular very limited. I have to use adapted EF lenses due to these shortages. These adapted lenses are bigger and weigh more than RF-S lenses would.