How Much Longer Will You Wait?

[Batdude]

For third party lenses.

Im complete new to the Canon world, and (so far) I think I’m okay with the lenses I have. I actually have not done any paid work since I purchased my new R3 several months ago, so I have put less than 1000 images to it, so if I wanted to resell it with the new lenses I got and go with a different brand I might not lose that much.

I’m not gonna lie, I keep seeing how other camera manufacturers keep coming out with awesome prime lenses and some wide aperture zooms as well, and that’s just awesome man, and I do ask myself if I’m going to be happy with Canon long term because of the lack of excitement due to the restrictions or limitations of not having the option of a wider selection of third party lenses. I mean, how long has it been since Canon came out with the RF mount and do you personally not mind not having the opportunity of using a wider lens selection at a more affordable cost?

Like I said, as of now I’m very happy with my R3, the camera is just beautiful, but, I’m obviously still restricted and that’s just not a cool feeling either you know what I’m saying?

 

[KiloHotelphoto]

Canon makes all the lenses I want so I don't care if any third party autofocus lenses come.

 

[gipper51]

Maybe not the ideal answer to your dilemma, but the entire EF catalog, Canon and all the other brands, is a pretty good "3rd party" set of lenses to pick from. Yes, it's older stuff and requires an adapter for use. That's a small price to pay IMHO, but your mileage may vary. They can be had for pretty cheap prices now and there are plenty of gems. And most of later version Canon brand EF lenses will probably still focus better than the 3rd party lenses for the 'other' system will.

 

[Andy01]

I have owned 3 third party lenses for DSLRs, and have not had great luck with 2 of them;

• Sigma 17-50 f2.8 - bought when I had a 600D, then 70D. Simply not reliably accurate AF - sometimes super sharp and other times just missed. Tried several times to do AFMA on 70D without success. Sold it for a Canon EF 24-105L.
• Samyang 14mm f2.4 XP - great lens on my 6D ii, but simply wouldn't work on either R8 or R10. I bought it thinking it was MF, so AF issues (like the Sigma) shouldn't be an issue, which was correct, but the electronic aperture control was the issue this time. Replaced with my third 3rd party lens.
• Pegear 14mm f2.8 ii - fairly recent, seems like a nice little lens, RF mount, fully manual, relatively cheap. Hopefully being fully manual, lack of compatibility will not be an issue.

So, with a track record like that I prefer to stick with Canon lenses.

 

[Sittatunga]

For third party lenses.

Im complete new to the Canon world, and (so far) I think I’m okay with the lenses I have. I actually have not done any paid work since I purchased my new R3 several months ago, so I have put less than 1000 images to it, so if I wanted to resell it with the new lenses I got and go with a different brand I might not lose that much.
I’m not gonna lie, I keep seeing how other camera manufacturers keep coming out with awesome prime lenses and some wide aperture zooms as well, and that’s just awesome man, and I do ask myself if I’m going to be happy with Canon long term because of the lack of excitement due to the restrictions or limitations of not having the option of a wider selection of third party lenses. I mean, how long has it been since Canon came out with the RF mount and do you personally not mind not having the opportunity of using a wider lens selection at a more affordable cost?

The first RF mount lenses came out seven years ago, to the month. There are about fifty different RF lenses now, they're still appearing at the rate of about five new lenses a year at prices ranging from too cheap to L'ishly expensive. The EF lenses work just as well on RF mount cameras as they do on EF mount cameras and the TS-E lenses are definitely easier to use on RF mount. Second hand EF lenses are generally more affordable than RF lenses, but there's generally not a lot of difference between the new prices of similar EF and RF lenses. I find my RF 10-20mm zoom very exciting (nobody else makes one), I wouldn't be without my tiny, affordable RF 16mm, my pancake RF 28mm or my coat pocket sized RF 100-400mm. I don't think that's just me though. I do have a couple of independent RF mount lenses though, including an 11mm fisheye (there's one gap in Canon's RF range, though I could have bought any one of three more expensive second-hand EF mount fisheyes).

Like I said, as of now I’m very happy with my R3, the camera is just beautiful, but, I’m obviously still restricted and that’s just not a cool feeling either you know what I’m saying?

What's specifically restricting you?

 

[Batdude]

Maybe not the ideal answer to your dilemma, but the entire EF catalog, Canon and all the other brands, is a pretty good "3rd party" set of lenses to pick from. Yes, it's older stuff and requires an adapter for use. That's a small price to pay IMHO, but your mileage may vary. They can be had for pretty cheap prices now and there are plenty of gems. And most of later version Canon brand EF lenses will probably still focus better than the 3rd party lenses for the 'other' system will.

Yes my mileage does indeed vary compared to yours because I have a shut disk in my low back spine, so size and weight does play a huge role for me and the bigger heavier EF lenses with an adapter would not help. I also travel often for photoshoots.

But I do thank you for your explanation about an EF lens being faster than any third party lens. May I ask if that is a fact or are you just saying that?



Thanks.

 

[Alastair Norcross]

As others have said, I'm happy with the lenses Canon is producing. I have far too many lenses, even after selling two of them (the RF 50 F1.2, and the RF 85 F2). I have 16 Canon RF full frame lenses, 1 Canon crop RF-S lens (the RF-S 18-150) and 2 Sigma RF crop lenses (10-18 F2.8, 18-50 F2.8). I'm glad that Sigma was able to bring some crop lenses to the RF mount, but I was pretty happy even with just the Canon RF-S lenses. If third party full frame AF RF lenses come, I'll be happy for those that want them, but I probably won't get any myself. Never say never, of course. It will depend on what comes out. But there's literally zero chance of me changing camera brands. I've shot with friends' Sonys and Nikons. They are fine cameras (as, I'm sure are Panasonics and Fujis, and all the rest). But there's nothing there that I want over Canon.

 

[MAC]

For third party lenses.

Im complete new to the Canon world, and (so far) I think I’m okay with the lenses I have. I actually have not done any paid work since I purchased my new R3 several months ago, so I have put less than 1000 images to it, so if I wanted to resell it with the new lenses I got and go with a different brand I might not lose that much.
I’m not gonna lie, I keep seeing how other camera manufacturers keep coming out with awesome prime lenses and some wide aperture zooms as well, and that’s just awesome man, and I do ask myself if I’m going to be happy with Canon long term because of the lack of excitement due to the restrictions or limitations of not having the option of a wider selection of third party lenses. I mean, how long has it been since Canon came out with the RF mount and do you personally not mind not having the opportunity of using a wider lens selection at a more affordable cost?

Like I said, as of now I’m very happy with my R3, the camera is just beautiful, but, I’m obviously still restricted and that’s just not a cool feeling either you know what I’m saying?

yes, the R3 is sweet!

but those who can't wait for the 5 introduced every year, usually come here and say, I want this one and that one and Canon doesn't have these.

Which ones do you want, that would lead you to switch systems?

 

[PicPocket]

I don't see any real sense in waiting for third party lenses. Whether a lens is third party or not is not a fundamental property of what I can shoot with it, so I really don't care

So, that boils down the real question to whether there is a lens available from a third party on a different mount that I would "need" to be able to make a certain type of image

While this debate was going on, canon came out with quite a few lenses, and I managed to slowly switch from my EF kit to RF ones one by one. Not necessarily one for one replacements, because just like 3rd parties may make some unique lenses, canon has done the same with their RF line too, enough to tempt me

The end result is that at this stage I think I have everything I may need to do every type of photography I like to do. To me, worrying about what else is there isn't as much of a deal then what I can achieve with what I already have

I think you need to ask yourself, what exactly are you missing that is truly limiting you. Then it's a real question

 

[R5D4]

For third party lenses.

Im complete new to the Canon world, and (so far) I think I’m okay with the lenses I have. I actually have not done any paid work since I purchased my new R3 several months ago, so I have put less than 1000 images to it, so if I wanted to resell it with the new lenses I got and go with a different brand I might not lose that much.
I’m not gonna lie, I keep seeing how other camera manufacturers keep coming out with awesome prime lenses and some wide aperture zooms as well, and that’s just awesome man, and I do ask myself if I’m going to be happy with Canon long term because of the lack of excitement due to the restrictions or limitations of not having the option of a wider selection of third party lenses. I mean, how long has it been since Canon came out with the RF mount and do you personally not mind not having the opportunity of using a wider lens selection at a more affordable cost?

Like I said, as of now I’m very happy with my R3, the camera is just beautiful, but, I’m obviously still restricted and that’s just not a cool feeling either you know what I’m saying?

I could care less if there are 3rd party lenses. I've bought a few, regretted them and bought the Canon equivalent. I see them as a sort of worst case purchase if you really really need a lens but can't afford the best.

 

[Messier Object]

Maybe not the ideal answer to your dilemma, but the entire EF catalog, Canon and all the other brands, is a pretty good "3rd party" set of lenses to pick from. Yes, it's older stuff and requires an adapter for use. That's a small price to pay IMHO, but your mileage may vary. They can be had for pretty cheap prices now and there are plenty of gems. And most of later version Canon brand EF lenses will probably still focus better than the 3rd party lenses for the 'other' system will.

Yes my mileage does indeed vary compared to yours because I have a shut disk in my low back spine, so size and weight does play a huge role for me and the bigger heavier EF lenses with an adapter would not help. I also travel often for photoshoots.

But I do thank you for your explanation about an EF lens being faster than any third party lens. May I ask if that is a fact or are you just saying that?

Thanks.

What lenses then do you feel are missing from the current RF lineup and why do you think that a third party manufacturer would produce them if they were allowed ?


Peter

 

[gipper51]

Maybe not the ideal answer to your dilemma, but the entire EF catalog, Canon and all the other brands, is a pretty good "3rd party" set of lenses to pick from. Yes, it's older stuff and requires an adapter for use. That's a small price to pay IMHO, but your mileage may vary. They can be had for pretty cheap prices now and there are plenty of gems. And most of later version Canon brand EF lenses will probably still focus better than the 3rd party lenses for the 'other' system will.

Yes my mileage does indeed vary compared to yours because I have a shut disk in my low back spine, so size and weight does play a huge role for me and the bigger heavier EF lenses with an adapter would not help. I also travel often for photoshoots.

Some of Canon's EF lenses are actually smaller and lighter than their RF equivalents, including 50 f1.2, 85 f1.2, 135 f2. The RF lenses are generally better, but even with adapter the EF versions are lighter. Which version is lighter or not varies by the lenses in question, of course, but it's not a given that the RF version will be lighter than EF+adapter.

But I do thank you for your explanation about an EF lens being faster than any third party lens. May I ask if that is a fact or are you just saying that?

I'm just saying that, but as a generality, most of the better EF lenses released in the last 15 years are extremely fast and accurate, and only got better when mounted on R bodies. I have no proof to direct you toward, but I'd wager in a controlled shootout the percentage of 3rd party glass that have better focusing performance than top EF glass is small.

Thanks.

 

[Batdude]

I don't see any real sense in waiting for third party lenses. Whether a lens is third party or not is not a fundamental property of what I can shoot with it, so I really don't care

So, that boils down the real question to whether there is a lens available from a third party on a different mount that I would "need" to be able to make a certain type of image

But that’s not the “real question” I’m asking. My question is very simple, how long will this go on, not having the option of third party lenses at a more affordable cost. Heck, not necessarily third party lenses, but let’s include more affordable Canon lenses something like the 24 1.4 but more affordable, perhaps even a F2 version. I mean, is every single canon lens I want going to cost me $1600 +?



The Fujifilm 16mm 1.4 I had was one of THE best lenses I have ever used and it never let me down at every single event I did, and is less than $1k.

While this debate was going on, canon came out with quite a few lenses, and I managed to slowly switch from my EF kit to RF ones one by one. Not necessarily one for one replacements, because just like 3rd parties may make some unique lenses, canon has done the same with their RF line too, enough to tempt me

And that’s totally fine and I’m glad and I do see Canon has a lot more RF lenses and now I own one of the lenses I fell in love with some years ago the RF 70-200 F4, but again, that’s not the point here.

The end result is that at this stage I think I have everything I may need to do every type of photography I like to do. To me, worrying about what else is there isn't as much of a deal then what I can achieve with what I already have

I think you need to ask yourself, what exactly are you missing that is truly limiting you. Then it's a real question

Again, more affordable third party options, again an example is a more affordable 24mm prime lens, even a F2 Canon version would be good enough for me for the type of low light photography I do.



Now, per other people’s responses maybe there is an EF version of a less expensive 24mm Canon lens to use with the AF adapter? I will continue doing more research but unfortunately I have to sleep now as I have to get up really early tomorrow so we’ll catch up.

Thank you everybody

--
PicPocket

 

[Thomas Hegna]

I don't see any real sense in waiting for third party lenses. Whether a lens is third party or not is not a fundamental property of what I can shoot with it, so I really don't care

So, that boils down the real question to whether there is a lens available from a third party on a different mount that I would "need" to be able to make a certain type of image

But that’s not the “real question” I’m asking. My question is very simple, how long will this go on, not having the option of third party lenses at a more affordable cost. Heck, not necessarily third party lenses, but let’s include more affordable Canon lenses something like the 24 1.4 but more affordable, perhaps even a F2 version. I mean, is every single canon lens I want going to cost me $1600 +?

The Fujifilm 16mm 1.4 I had was one of THE best lenses I have ever used and it never let me down at every single event I did, and is less than $1k.

While this debate was going on, canon came out with quite a few lenses, and I managed to slowly switch from my EF kit to RF ones one by one. Not necessarily one for one replacements, because just like 3rd parties may make some unique lenses, canon has done the same with their RF line too, enough to tempt me

And that’s totally fine and I’m glad and I do see Canon has a lot more RF lenses and now I own one of the lenses I fell in love with some years ago the RF 70-200 F4, but again, that’s not the point here.

The end result is that at this stage I think I have everything I may need to do every type of photography I like to do. To me, worrying about what else is there isn't as much of a deal then what I can achieve with what I already have

I think you need to ask yourself, what exactly are you missing that is truly limiting you. Then it's a real question

Again, more affordable third party options, again an example is a more affordable 24mm prime lens, even a F2 Canon version would be good enough for me for the type of low light photography I do.

Now, per other people’s responses maybe there is an EF version of a less expensive 24mm Canon lens to use with the AF adapter? I will continue doing more research but unfortunately I have to sleep now as I have to get up really early tomorrow so we’ll catch up.

Thank you everybody

The canon RF 24mm f/1.8 already exists. What do you complain about??? This costs around 500 USD if I’m not mistaken.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1716503-REG/canon_rf_24mm_f_1_8_is.html?c3api=2572%2C138045322040&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=658944934&gbraid=0AAAAAD7yMh2slhit9YLXX9S7UHYM1naUQ&gclid=CjwKCAjwmNLHBhA4EiwA3ts3mTe2j_gB7tNe8sS_JidUq0pMAAORFub9nqldI2kDWN1ehxpi5aatPxoCMdEQAvD_BwE

--
PicPocket

 

[PicPocket]

I don't see any real sense in waiting for third party lenses. Whether a lens is third party or not is not a fundamental property of what I can shoot with it, so I really don't care

So, that boils down the real question to whether there is a lens available from a third party on a different mount that I would "need" to be able to make a certain type of image

But that’s not the “real question” I’m asking. My question is very simple, how long will this go on, not having the option of third party lenses at a more affordable cost. Heck, not necessarily third party lenses, but let’s include more affordable Canon lenses something like the 24 1.4 but more affordable, perhaps even a F2 version.

So the "real" question is then about an affordable 24mm F2 or faster prime. That makes a lot more sense then. Does it matter which manufacturer it comes from? I assume the RF 24mm f/1.8 doesn't work for you?

I mean, is every single canon lens I want going to cost me $1600 +?

The Canon RF lenses I have bought costed from $79 to $3000, (street prices, including canon refurb store) with at least 7 of them costing less than $1600, of which 5 under $1000. So certainly more a case of what is available now and what one wants as against a general theme

The Fujifilm 16mm 1.4 I had was one of THE best lenses I have ever used and it never let me down at every single event I did, and is less than $1k.

Which I think is a first party lens.

Again, more affordable third party options, again an example is a more affordable 24mm prime lens, even a F2 Canon version would be good enough for me for the type of low light photography I do.

I get this. And it's perfectly fair to ask what you are after. It's just that obfuscating that as a different question may or may not end with what you want

Canon has recently come out with some cheaper lenses, and in the spirit of what you are asking, I would also be keen if they would make a cheaper 24mm. If that happens, I won't care that it is a canon lens. And if that doesn't, it's OK to say so and ask for one. After all, that is how things get built

If you just want to stick to your "literal" question, my answer would be that I am not waiting. If we talk about your implied literal question, I can be fairly certain no one here can tell you if and when canon may allow FF third party RF lenses. They never did for EF for 30 years and it was all up to reverse engineering

Now, per other people’s responses maybe there is an EF version of a less expensive 24mm Canon lens to use with the AF adapter? I will continue doing more research but unfortunately I have to sleep now as I have to get up really early tomorrow so we’ll catch up.

That can be a viable option, and you may be very happy with it. At which point, it may or may not remain an issue.

It does help to know that you need a specific lens at a specific price point, then such answers come out. Else we are just debating 3rd party road map which no one has any clue of. We control what we know and can

Thank you everybody

Good luck

--
PicPocket

 

[Andy01]

I have a shut disk in my low back spine, so size and weight does play a huge role for me and the bigger heavier EF lenses with an adapter would not help. I also travel often for photoshoots.

Thanks.

I am curious as to what type of shooting you do ?

You seem to have an interest in shorter prime lenses and lower weight, and yet you bought a R3, which at over 1000g is not exactly a lightweight camera, and perhaps not typically a camera associated with using shorter prime lenses - I have never used one, but my understanding is that R3 was aimed more at sports or wildlife photographers.

A R6 ii is 2/3rds of the weight (350g less) and R8 is another 200g lighter than that - all 3 are 24Mp cameras. The adapter weighs 100g.

Obviously if using a 600mm f4 lens an extra 350g or even 550g (camera weight) is not going to make a difference, but if using something like the above-mentioned RF 24 f1.8 the lens only weighs 280g, so the difference between R3 + this lens (1300g) and R8 + same lens (750g) is huge (weight only) with the R8 + RF 24 f1.8 being smaller and just only ¾ of the weight of R3 body only.

I am not trying to be difficult or smart here, it is just that when I think smaller & lighter, R3 would certainly not be my first choice

Unless, of course, you have a need for a battery grip style camera to switch between portrait & landscape seamlessly (and battery life is critical, though your shutter count would suggest otherwise).

 

[M1k4]

I'm still patiently waiting for

RF 35mm f 1.2 L USM lens. Same quality as RF 85mm f 1.2 L USM please.

 

[KevinRA]

Cost aside, which lenses are still needed from Canon (or licensed 3rd parties)? I can't think of too many.

Cameras - the clear gap is the competitor to the OM-1 - e.g. an R7II with a stacked sensor and no rolling shutter.

Lenses (realistic), would be nice to have!

- 20-105 f/4, wider than the 24 offerings.

- 24-240 with improved IQ

- 300-600 f/4-f/5.6, not a 100-300 with built in TC. (IQ better than the 200-800 and OK with TC's too)

- 600 and 800 f/6.3's light but very sharp primes as per Nikons. (Not the dark f/11s)

- RF 1:1 macro with focal length less than 100mm.

 

[Rock and Rollei]

Well...

As a photographer, I admire Canon's stance on protecting their intellectual property, for a start. Why should others profit from their R&D?

Further, there aren't any lenses from third party manufacturers I actually want at the moment. The two lenses I really want, a TS-R 24mm and an RF 8-15 fisheye zoom, currently aren't made by anyone (except in purely manual form). The EF versions are sufficing.

Finally, several of the Canon Rf lenses I do have not only don't have a third party equivalent, they don't have one from any other camera maker. 600mm and 800mm f11. 10-20 f4 L, my favourite lens.

So currently, I couldn't care less about third party lenses. Canon offers me what I want and need, and other manufacturers don't, even with third party lenses.

 

[TryAgain]

I bought into the Canon RF system knowing that Canon weren't licensing RF lenses to third parties so I'm not complaining. The availability of third party on crop cameras is encouraging and I shall probably buy the Sigma 16-300 at some point.

I would love Canon to make an RF 70-300L lens but no doubt one will appear in time and in the meantime I'll use an EF model with an adapter.

I do wonder if the issue is the move to camera correction of lens aberrations resulting in frequent firmware upgrades to accommodate new lens models. Perhaps Canon is concerned that their ability to keep updating firmware will diminish if they have to keep an eye on maintaining compatibility with a wide range of third party lenses.

My real concern is that history is littered with top notch suppliers in many fields who kept to a closed system only to have competitors who opened their technology to the market overtake them. If Canon continue as a proprietary system I would expect that as time passes more and more people fresh to photography with no back history with Canon will opt for more open systems.

If nothing else the competition from third party suppliers keeps manufacturers on their toes.

Maybe Canon will open the mount to third parties once they have released a fuller range of lenses. I certainly hope so.