I’m honestly so glad that this news came out. I’ve been waffling between Canon and Sony, with the biggest drawback to Canon being the lack of available RF mount lenses. I likely would have gone with Canon and waited (indefinitely) for some 3rd party lenses to come out. Sony is about to sell another a7iv!
Main reason I switched completely from canon to sony in 2019. Its just dumb at this point if you wanna praise canon still with this type of bs they pull. Welcome to the family! My favorite purchase besides my A7s3.
Hardware sadly is also basically dependent upon what type of client work one does, and sometime one will almost be forced to pick and choose (or worse switch) from one hardware to another. Consider the big four companies... Sony, Canon, Nikon, and Fuji. For some other people that might need the gear, even consider m43. Best to rent first, then make buying decisions from there
I've got the Tamron 35 150 f2-2.8 lens and it's absolutely superb, actually sharper than my 2 GM zoom lenses. Sony would probably never make that lens and if they did it would probably be £3,000. 3rd party options are such a win for the customer
I was thinking of adding a Canon R5 to my kit. However, with no aftermarket lenses available, I won't consider Canon. I see a large number of aftermarket and native lenses for Canon's competitors. I don't like limitations. This is a declining market, and unless Canon is about to start making smartphones, they better recognize the foolishness of their ways. Canon, you are aggravating your potential buyers, just to make a few extra bucks. How foolish!
Yeah I was also thinking of upgrading to a R5 or R6 in a few months but having seen the recent moves from Canon I will just consider another camera brand. It a shame as I always was a Canon shooter and absolutely loves their bodies, but if there is no good 3rd party option I guess I will have to switch to a different, more customer-friendly, ecosystem.
Tony you've inspired me to make my own video about this subject - something I've been tempted to do for a very long time, and the huge weight of comments it's picked up within 24 hours have certainly said a lot about how Canon's customers really feel. Thanks for having the cojones to publish this.
Hi Chris, I am a great fan of your channel, and this one too... I have to agree with Tony that this is going to be Canon's undoing. I have always preferred Canon's footage to Sony, but Sony has made their cameras far more desirable in the past few years. For the past 10 years I have been using Canon 5Ds - the 2, 3 and 4... but when they discontinued them, and went with their new line... I simply made the business decision that to shell out another $25K + on Canon gear - especially the lenses, is simply not a viable option for me. Especially since I operate in South Asia where budgets for videography are a fraction of that in the USA or Europe. And even now Sony has some great Lenses that are out of my price range, but at least I will always buy the Sony camera bodies, and where possible use Sony Lenses, but failing that, I have some great Sigma lens options - and so do most of my customers.
I recently bought an R5 with the expectation that the market would naturally expand with 3rd party products, lenses, etc... Had I known I was blindly investing into closed proprietary product ecosystem I certainly would NOT have gone with the R5. This is a bait and switch in my opinion - obviously there are no rules that state companies must allow for others to use their tech, but if you consider that the industry operates with 3rd party adoption over decades and decades, the argument could be made that this market adoption rate is as close to a given as could be expected. I feel like Canon owes it to their customers to disclaim their product strategy when it is this impactful to the way the product can be used in the market, as the market typically operates.
It's a big, big mistake for Canon not to give access to 3rd Parties to build RF lenses... And already now some of the most exciting lenses will be first launched for Sony platform. I just upgraded to Canon R some weeks ago... If I had this info some month ago I would have left to Sony or Nikon
@@andylaauk I use Canon cameras and EF lenses for 20 years now and I started and stayed with Canon cameras BECAUSE of the lens choices! Now Sony has the cheaper lenses and more variety, literally the opposite of 10 years ago. I would love to stay with Canon long-term, but I don't find the optics I want here anymore!
Samyang, Viltrox and others are known for copying patented designs, ignoring copyright law and making profit off the work of other people. Canon puts money into R&D and makes money off licensing their researched and tested designs. A monopoly is never good, but what Viltrox is doing is the equivalent of me taking your photos, putting them on iStock under my own name and then complaining that you're stopping me from earning some money when you take out a copyright claim against me. For better or worse, copyright law and the patent industry is what it is.
I was with Canon for about 20 years, and last two years I was waiting for something similar to R6 but with 24-30Mpx. But twelve hours after your video I ordered Sony a7 IV. Because I don't want to be vendor-locked by a bunch of marketologists/lawyers, instead I'll contribute to a more open economy and more client-oriented competitor. P.S. I love Sigma Art lenses.
I've been shooting Canon for ~15 years, starting with a point and shoot, then a rebel, then a 6D, 5D IV, finally to my current combo of an R5 and an RP. I've resisted any urge to switch systems to this point, but the lack of third party RF lenses is infuriating. To this point, I'd assumed it was just a matter of time before we'd see offerings on the market - to hear Canon is actively blocking third party manufacturers absolutely makes me second guess making any investment in the RF system. This maneuver is so incredibly short-sighted by Canon and is absolutely a deterrent to not only people wanting to buy into the RF system, but also to people sticking with the RF mount.
Currently shooting with a Canon 5D Mark IV and was planning to upgrade to an R5 sometime within the next 8 or so months, but now I'm second guessing that decision and may give Sony a closer look. For me personally, it goes beyond simply forcing me into Canon glass for native RF mount, more frustrating to me is the almost "bully" mentality that Canon is apparently displaying with this. I'm also concerned that if there isn't competition within the RF mount realm, what's to stop Canon from charging even more crazy money for lenses in the future? Very concerning Canon.
I have been using all my EF L lenses on the R5 w/adapter with great success. So I don’t see why so many are going ballistic over an issue that Canon addressed with great care.
I shoot both (literally only canon for the R5C + 5.2mm vr). Most of my pictures with sony for weddings, I have to turn down some of the sharpness. I'd highly look into the a7IV, swamps the canon R5 and if you shoot video, canon made so many mistakes on it.
My dad gave me his old Canon T3i, which is how I got into photography. When I wanted something better, I went to the 7D Mark II. Earlier this year I got an M6 Mark II. I've been using a mix of 3rd party and Canon lenses on all of them, and I was saving to buy the R7 next, but now I think I'm going to spend some time seriously evaluating some other cameras; the Fujifilm X-T4 in particular. The fact that Tamron and Sigma already offer lenses for X mount is a crucial factor in that consideration.
I remember buying the a6300 and researching lenses. I was looking for that perfect balance between image quality and affordability. At that time, nothing came close to Sigma’s 30mm f/1.4. Even after all these years, Sigma’s APS-C prime trinity is revered. So revered Sigma decided to extend the compatibility to Canon’s EF-M (basically extending the mount’s life for another 1.5 years). Third party brands matter, they actually keep the user loyal to a certain mount.
@@Davitor1 stop making the same comment everywhere. What crap are you talking about. There are 3rd party lenses that are very good. Lenses from big brands don't always mean quality
@@Davitor1 There might be some truth to it sure (wouldn't call them crap though like you) but my Samyang 35mm f/1.4 is great. The first party sony g/gm lenses are most likely better but if I already get 80% (probably even more tbh) of the quality for less than 50% of the price why would I go with first party lenses when I cannot afford them anyway?.
Thanks for this timely video. I've been a Canon shooter for 15 plus years and have been saving up to make the switch to mirrorless and buy the R5. The only thing holding me back has been trying to get some clarification on the compatibility of 3rd party lenses. Sorry Canon, now, someone else is getting my $7,000.00 budget!
I usually upgrade my camera body about every 5 years. For the last 18 years I have been a Canon user. On my last upgrade I picked up an R5 body. Had I known that Canon would abandon it's customer base by preventing 3rd party lens manufacturers from making RF mount lenses, I would have never purchased this body. Before this becomes common knowledge, I am considering selling my R5 while it still has some market value and switch to Sony. Sony is likely a better choice anyway and certainly more loyal to it's customer base.
Sony is no more loyal than Cannon. They used to use the "A" mount from Minolta (was full frame 35mm film). If you bought a half dozen lenses for a A-77II, they will not work on an A-7 of any variant, (even though many lenses were designed for full frame). They made an adaptor, but it has limited function. You want a new camera, fine. You buy all new glass. Will they do this again in the future? Who knows. They can change their mounts anytime they fancy.
@@DannyB-cs9vx Mounts change, and with the A-mount to E-mount switch it happened because they went from SLR bodies to mirrorless, which is the exact same reason Canon and Nikon had for their mount changes and is a perfectly valid technical justification for creating a new mount. Besides, it's not like A-mount was somehow short-lived: the first form of it came out in 1985 and the final lens came out in 2015 while the final camera body came out in 2016 (E-mount was introduced in 2010, so that's a five year transition period, while Canon dropped EF like a bad habit almost instantly once RF was out). And, as you said, they made (imperfect but still available) adapters. That's not PERFECT support, but it's nothing to sneeze at. And, importantly, it's a far cry from Canon actively preventing third parties from making lenses for their current mount, which they have been doing since its introduction a few years ago. Mount changes aren't fun but they're inevitable whenever a massive shift happens in how the sensor, lens and viewfinder interact, but there's nothing inevitable about intentionally blocking third parties to crush competition and ensure the only options are Canon's own fantastic-but-expensive lenses.
@@navis5284 As Tony pointed out in the video, this is less than ideal. These adapted lenses are often much bigger than a native mirrorless lens. Also the new mirrorless lenses are usually better performers. AND, companies like Sigma and Tamron are putting out new mirrorless lenses that don't exist in EF or RF mounts.
@@sethsez Cannon is free to license their tech to anyone they wish or not. How long has the EF been around? You got your monies worth. That is the message you give me. The person buying the Sony "A"mount lenses in 2015 got a good deal right? The 2016 camera was a great deal as well. Instant obsolescence. Sony was real loyal to them. I still use the camera. For what I do it works just fine. Instead of buying the new "E" mount camera, I bought Olympus 4/3.
I just had this conversation with high school kid that wanted to purchase their first camera. He was considering the Canon R6 and Sony A7iii. I gave him pros and cons for each. And the biggest con I had with Canon was not having third party glass. Once he seen the price difference he was really considering Sony.
I have been using the A7 III after having used Canon for well over 40 years and I love it. The price point and availability of lots and lots of own brand and third party lenses will open a wide spectrum of opportunities for anyone who wants to take the step to mirrorless.
I went through the same decision process when moving from APS-C few years back. Canon's bodies were not better enough to compensate for prices of lenses and lack of accessible glass. With Sony you can grow and have access to great quality glass for less.
@@Davitor1 I don't know about that. I have owned a load of L-glass and always used the high end film bodies, my last being an EOS 1N. I just think that Sony fits the timeframe a lot better. The brand is much more interactive with consumers and like Tony said, they seem to like it when they are challenged by third parties. I find that Canon becomes more and more arrogant. An attitude which is not very becoming in a market that is heavily on the decline. A lot of their bread and butter (point and shoot and low end DSLR) was already killed by the smartphone industry. So why become such a snob in the part of the industry that still generates some revenue?
Wow I’m so glad I stumbled on this. I’ve been slowly building funds to replace my Eos 6D and was going to go for an R5 with adapter initially to reuse my large Tamron glass selection but slowly rebuild up 3rd party dedicated RF lenses as Canons aren’t priced for consumers imo. This is an absolute deal breaker for me so I’ll be looking at other platforms. Nice one canon.
I have been loyal to Canon since I owned an AE-1 35mm film camera. I currently have the R5. It was a stretch for my budget to upgrade to that body. The thought that Canon is willfully blocking third party lens manufacturing makes me feel betrayed by a company that I have advocated and defended in the past. My loyalty is not being rewarded.
Yours is a poor strategy. The lenses are all important. I personally know 2 people who bought R5 bodies, but coulsnt afford Canon R mount lenses, so are using adapted 3rd party lenses. The image quality of those tamron telephotos are no where near the quality of Canon RF glass, or, L series EF glass. And, I can sense thier frustration. Glass is always the most important.
@@nordic5490 agreed. Third party glass is perfect for the mom tographers for their shoots in the park, but not the professional shooter with longevity in mind.
@@coryhultquist580 Obviously you didn't bother watching this video, Tony clearly states that he and Chelsea never would have gotten into pro photography had it not been for those "mom photographer" lenses. There are many photographers who have done the same.
Thank god I bought a Sony. At the decision-making stage, I was thinking about Canon. The lack of third-party lenses was one of the biggest factors in my decision. Now I definitely do not regret it.
I shoot on 3 different systems,,, canon, Sony A7 and Nikon z7. I love the Sony’s ergonomics but the color space can be difficult to deal with… Canon and Nikon seem to look better right out of the can
@@scotthamilton1054 I can agree for Nikon, and of {not mentioned} Fuji - but Canon? I know that a lot of people are talking about "Canon colors" - but for me Canon pictures directly from camera are kind of washed out, lacking colors. I agree that Sony FF is quite eye-candy, but I confess, I like it, and from experience - a lot of people likes it too.
What I love in Sony - is the fact that you can put practically any lens on those cameras. From good old Minolta MD or Konica, through more obscure lenses like adapted Yashinon, Meritar, up to old projector lenses. And 3rd party lenses base is absolutely HUGE :) with really awesome stuff, just to mention Sigma Art series
@@piorun23 Sony bought the camera business from Minolta when Minolta decided to focus on other products. I shot Minolta film for decades but don't like Sony as company so I went with Canon for digital. I can't afford all of Canon's own lenses so I have a Sigma too. I would like to upgrade my current camera processor is from 2014 but this attitude from Canon is convincing me to switch to Nikon. (Both my brothers have Nikons and they like them a lot. ) I switched before and it looks like I have to switch again. If they think that brand loyalty is same now as it was with film they are wrong. They are making me think I should not have picked Canon in the first place. (And as for colors, all my Canons do not record yellow, on flowers for example - mums in my case, properly under all their different light settings. )
Hi Tony, my photography knowledge is next to zero: I am buying a camera for my 13 year old son who needs one for school, he's taking GCSE Photography and really getting into it. We're looking at the Canon 250D, and he really wants that one (I really want to get the 200D!) We can't help noticing that Canon has deliberately disabled a pin in the hot shoe mount which apparently blocks it from using third party gear. What you describe in the video is real, so thank you for speaking up. Canon is the culture when it comes to photography, and moves such as these speak volumes in a manner I don't think it wants to speak. We'll be fine, we'll muddle through with used gear, I'm sure. But a clear message is being sent to people who want to start and over the long term, they will respond accordingly. Thanks again for this video, we appreciate it.
I don't mind Canon doing this as long as Canon plans to license their RF-mount to third parties. If this is the case in future I'd stay with Canon. My first camera was a Canon AE-1 Program and (after some Minolta cameras) I was very pleased to inverst in a new Canon R6 and some native RF glass. I still enjoy using the R6 and my new glass. As I was never invested in (old) EF lenses I don't know whether I should invest in third party EF glass (like a Sigma 150-600) or wait until something similar is available for the RF-mount. The RF-mount is rather new and I guess Canon isn't making "a big mistake" (as Tony said in this video) but Canon (as no.1) will establish a license system for the RF-mount. Third parties will be hesitant at first but if they want to make their profits also in RF glass they'll have to accept licenses! 🤔
I was on the fence between going from Canon to Sony. Because I'd be making that decision for the rest of my life - switching once is bad enough. If Canon does not have Sigma lenses but Sony does, then I don't have to make that decision anymore - it will have been made for me...
I switched from my Canon 6d to Sony a7iii when that first came out and I never looked back. I'm very disappointed in Canon's choice. Without 3rd party lense I honestly could never have progressed on my photography journey and would mainly have been bound by the nifty fifty those many years back. The 3rd parties are making things interesting ie Tamron releasing the 35-150 f 2-2.8 and 20-40mm 2.8. I hope down the road canon reconsiders but for the time being, I am very happy with Sony and their ability to deliver on what we actually requests 😀
You hit the nail on the head with this video Tony. Canon has really produced a compelling product lineup with their RF mount, but buyers need to be aware of what they're getting into. Good on you for raising the issue. This summer my friend who was shooting Nikon DSLR's professionally for many years decided to switch to a mirrorless system and had narrowed down his choices down to Sony and Canon. He asked me what I thought, and once I mentioned this 3rd party lens issue and showed him the difference in price (and he got to try them both out) he chose Sony.
Been a Canon shooter for over 15 yrs and I love Canon glass but I also loved that in many cases I could turn to 3rd party like Sigma and Tamron to obtain similar and in many cases, better quality for less. I switched to fully mirrorless last year but kept using I old EF lenses with an adaptor. The Idea was that RF glass is very expensive so I'll hold out cause there should be some RF third party glass in the horizon, I mean Sigma and Tamron have been killing it over at Sony. Surely there is some of that goodness coming this way right?... I think Canon is making a big mistake.
@@apjgraphix it could be Canon's plan is to just wait a while before they allow 3rd party lenses. The thinking would go something like... While the mount is new they want to have only Canon options so they can cash in on the "early" adopters who are usually more willing to pay more. If I was a betting person though I'd guess they are either going to open that door soon or they never will. If they never allow 3rd party lenses, then perhaps the thinking is... they see themselves as the premium brand the way Apple does and they want to curate the experience from end to end and charge a premium price for a premium experience. With the canceling of the m-mount and now this, it's clear that Canon is not the consumer friendly option (were they ever though?).
@@DennisKapatos The problem is if Canon is too late in getting the early adopters. The facts are, even PRO photographers will not buy into a limited glass system when their glass gets old. EF lenses will soon be obsolete. New photographers will get an affordable system and once they have money, will get into a higher upgraded system of that BODY. They will not change to a new BODY/SYSTEM. Therefore, only a VERY limited amount of people will buy into Canon's new restrictive system. That will not be enough to make them profitable and in the long run, will hurt them.
Sigma Art lenses have always been my go to lenses for Canon, this change could cause a lot of us Canon users to sway away from upgrading our equipment and still keep the Canon brand in our camera bags. It's a bad idea because there is a market they might be detering from buying new Canon gear with third-party lenses.
Same here, this is good to know since my 7D Mark II is starting to show its age, and I use Sigma's 18-35mm and 50-100mm F/1.8 DC Art lenses as well as their 100-400mm F/5-63 DG Contemporary Lens. I would be uncomfortable upgrading to a mirrorless system if I cannot get a Sigma adaptor to convert the SLR lenses to a mirrorless system.
Totally agree! Love those Signa ART lenses. They’ve been some of my favourite lenses I’ve ever had. I think Canon is shooting themselves in the foot, pardon the pun. There are still lots of people who haven’t yet made the big switch from DSLR to mirrorless. And when we do, suddenly the decades-long lock-in breaks and if Canon won’t be loyal to its users, Sony and Nikon have some amazing camera systems and glass options too. Seeing this video helps me along my path to switching away from Canon.
This is really shocking and I’m surprised that Canon has restricted the adaptability of third party lens. I too was considering R5. Though I have canon prime but I also use third party lenses. Hoping that canon would consider their loyal customers’ suggestions.
You are correct about part of it... "A company or set of companies" has restricted third party lenses. But the corporate answer is: it's Sigma and Leica. But also items such as licensing costs from companies such as Canon and Nikon have not helped.
Canon do not care about people, they (like all huge companies) only care about profit. They don't care if they lose loyal customers, they have more coming around the corner.
EF mount unexpectedly became popular with film productions. It was a great thing, as all of the sudden there were so many lenses out there that could be used, from professional cine to amateur photo ones, and so many cameras, including Arri Alexas embraced it. As cine cameras also get smaller, I was expecting the RF to follow in its steps (RED Komodo actually has RF mount), but Canon has to be less restrictive for this to happen. Otherwise the industry just might move on with another mount.
That would really set Canon back. I can see it happening and them having to claw their way back from it. I’m assuming there is massive R&D in cameras like there is in any other tech product.
I've been shooting mostly Canon cameras ever since I got into photography as a teenager 38 years ago. As a collector, I have purchased hundreds of Canon cameras and lenses over the years. I'm a fan of mirrorless cameras due to their smaller size (body and glass) and adaptability to vintage glass. However, I too am concerned about the lack of 3rd party RF mount lenses. I am concerned enough that I've been considering Sony rather than buying pro RF mount cameras and lenses. I want to be able to use some of the cool new mirrorless lenses coming from Sigma.
Sony shooter, here. Sigma lenses are wonderful. I have the 24mm f/1.4 Art and the 70mm f/2.8 Macro Art lenses. Both are tack sharp. The AF on the 70 is a bit flakey, but who trusts AF for macro? AF on the 24mm is very good. Build quality on both is very good. They feel "professional" in the hand and in use. And both of them together cost me less than the 24mm f/1.4 G master would have. Rumor has it that Sigma is about to release a DN version of their 50mm f/1.4 Art lens. For those unfamiliar with Sigma-speak, DN lenses are designed specifically for mirrorless, not just DSLR lenses with a tube stuck on the end. If it comes in with typical Art series pricing, it will probably be in the $800-900 range, comfortably under all of Sony's G and G master lenses.
I have been drooling over Canon bodies and glass ever since I bought my first camera, my M50, two years ago. But with how they simply left the EF-M mount out in the cold and now this, I'm seriously not enthused about choosing the RF mount when I upgrade to a full frame body. Panasonic was looking really good, even with the pretty slim selection of Panasonic glass, but now I'm looking at investing in an S5 with the 24-70 S Pro a lot harder than I was. Canon is industry leading, but with anti-consumer practices like this, I think their market share is going to take a pretty big hit.
Fellow m50 owner here. As I learn more and will eventually want a bigger better camera body this news ensures Canon isn’t in consideration. The sigma 30mm contemporary on the ef-m mount is a great lens that I have really enjoyed and I picked it up at half the price of the canon ef-m 32mm.
I have had an AE-1, then AE-1 program. Power shots and the 24mm cartrage camera nightmare too. I was finally going to move up to a full frame dlsr but after this I am looking at trading all my Canon equipment for Sony.
@@amermeleitor So far I believe Sony is the best you can get. Samyang, Tamron, Sigma are doing magic on the E-mount, and Sony isn't sitting around and coming with impressive lenses as well for professionals and for people starting up like their great "normal" primes 35mm, 50mm, 85mm f/1.8. You can as well getaway with APS-C lenses if you are into video and have crop mode (outside A7Siii, FX9/FX6/FX3). Nikon Z9 is brilliant as well but you must always go after where are all the lenses you want and need and most mounts aren't as diverse and ready as E-Mount, ironically to Canon and Nikon that used to laugh at mirrorless and Sony.
I bought the R5 right when it came out and I have progressively gotten more and more frustrated by my purchase. Everything from the over-heating issue and how they resolved it to the lack of lenses, including the lack of third party options. I started my career on Nikon with a sigma lens. It legit jumpstarted my career as well. The game Canon is playing feels gross and makes me want to switch to another brand like Sony, even though I can afford Canon‘a lens now, and already own several.
This is exactly why I went with the A7IV over the R6. For me and many others, lens selection and support is the most important factor when it comes to buying a body.
Thank you Tony. I was deciding between Sony A74 or the Canon R5 and this makes the decision really simple. I'm going with Sony. I can afford good glass but competition is good as it keeps pushing Sony to bring the very best glass to the market. There is nothing to push Canon. Canon if you are reading this, you made a bad choice, good luck with that. Hello Sony, I will shortly be a new customer. P.s. Why not Nikon? I've owned many Nikons in the past and loved them, but your latest model is too big and heavy, and you cannot quite match the autofocus of the Sony. The future choices for me are Sony or Nikon and never Canon.
Canon requirements are higher than Sony hence higher cost. Canon cameras and lenses are all assembled and made in Japan for quality control. Sony does have cameras made in Japan but only there Pro-video equipment.
@@metasploitstudios2257 I don't do phone photography, but, was shocked to see a 20x30 inch i phone picture at a neighbours house. Every bit as good as my panasonic G9 produces.
I left Canon for Nikon in the 80s when they changed their lens mount to make it easier to accommodate the new autofocus feature. This caused anyone with a new camera body to have to buy all new lenses to fit the new bodies. In the 2000s they introduced APS-C lenses for the new digital cameras. These small sensor lenses would not mount on full-frame bodies so, again, customers had to buy all new lenses when they upgraded to FF. All this time Nikon made their lenses work on all their cameras. Is it any wonder Canon sells so many lenses. One thing you can always count on from Canon is they consider themselves number one and the customer will always be number two..
Nikon is blocking any 3rd party lenses that directly compete with lenses that Nikon is making. Sony is blocking autofocus from working when a teleconverter is placed between a Sony body and a 3rd party lens. To me, Sony is the least bad of the 3, but all are extremely anti-consumer.
Totally agree with you, Tony! For most of my photography "career" (I'm more of a "serious hobbyist" than a professional) I've enjoyed using Canon point-and-shoots, Rebels, 7D's, etc. But when I upgraded from my Canon DSLR to mirrorless about a year ago, I switched to Sony. One of the big reasons why? Sony has an abundance of third-party professional quality glass available. I was able to get an A7 iii and Sigma 24-70 f2.8 for roughly $2,000 less than the Canon equivalent. As much as I enjoyed Canon cameras, for someone who's not a professional, that was far too much to be able to justify. I know that at the time I upgraded the RF system was still relatively new but I had a feeling that it would be quite a while (if ever) before Canon let third-party manufacturers sell autofocus lenses - which as it turns out looks to be the case. Now I'm more than happy with my Sony setup, and Canon has essentially lost me as a customer.
I know so many photographers who switched to Sony pretty recently, and one big reason for all of them was there's SO much more lenses to choose from. I wonder how a company like Canon is thinking to survive in the future without the strong support of third-party lens manufacturers for their system.
@@southerncharity7928 Well, as already Tony is explaining in this video, adapting old SLR glass is anything else than a 100% replacement for dedicated mirrorless lenses.
The price of 10 bit video has kept me away from Sony. I have a Panasonic gh6 and really love it for both stills and especially video and now with internal prores at all video resolutions it's just a fabulous option.
I'm an engineer and always look for inexpensive compatibility. I bought a 6D a few years ago because it was the cheapest full frame body that I could find at Costco. It came with the nice kit L lens that was great for learning. Now I feel more comfortable with my kid photos. I'm not a professional or live from photography, it's simply a tool to record my kids life. But I've had a growth in my artistic skills and now I take photos of my kids from the stand point of a street photographer. Sometimes I do really real street photography 🤣. So I've been looking for and buying vintage lenses that give me new looks and styles. Even now I'm looking for something affordable that can just wow people. So blocking my ability to do the same after my 6D dies will just keep me from buying into the R series. I'm sure I can continue buying old 5D MII until I pass LOL.
I feel actively deceived! Canon apparently intentionally hesitated to clearly communicate their policy on the now supposedly exclusive RF mount, keep it vague so that people believe what was well established in the EF system would continue with RF - 3rd party lens availability. I fully expected the new mount to be 'open' for third parties to manufacture lenses for as well. Not for one second did I think that the RF mount would be a closed system when purchasing my R5! Having been with Canon for 25 years I was used to the EF mount being "open" as in allowing others to manufacture lenses for it. I was aware that Canon didn't actively share they protocol for AF like Sony did, but that's it. I held out until the R5 arrived and then I told myself "finally, that looks pretty good". I actively decided to stay with Canon for many years not only but also BECAUSE OF the much broader ED lens choice also from 3rd party makers. I was certain the same would continue for RF mount. Until then I'd keep using my EF glass and slowly transition when needed. I feel actively deceived and thus ripped off by Canon because they did NOT publicly state their mount was gonna be closed to third party. Instead they said nothing and allow few AF lenses like the Samyang AF 85mm F1.4 RF to exist and be sold for quite some time. I accuse them for actively deceiving everyone by allowing these sales to continue for some time so that a lot of people kept buying RF cameras who expected the 3rd party vendors would broadly enter the RF lens market any time now. If Canon did harshly force this issue two years ago and people were aware of their stance before the R5 and R6 even got announced, I'm sure I wouldn't have purchased another Canon camera. I would have guessed though that due to 'common law' their vagueness on the issue could be seen as deceitful to the customers. No matter the legal implications, if they remain and enforce their position on their RF lens exclusivity I'm done with them. I'll give them half a year to come to their senses. Let's see how this plays out!
I agree, Canon has every right to prevent 3rd party lens manufacturers from developing RF glass. Canon also has every right to charge extravagant prices for crappy quality RF glass. Canon also has every right to treat customers who spent a fortune investing in the RF system with the utmost arrogance thinkable. Canon should not forget that at the end of the day customers have every right to choose what they want to buy down the road.
Canon's RF glass is generally excellent... Class leading and innovative. Nothing crappy about it. Arguably, their RF lenses are the best Canon has ever made, and that's saying a lot. But much of it is also pricey. Not all... There's some reasonably priced stuff, too. And they cover the "necessities" pretty well. Even so, there are a lot of gaps in the system, which 3rd party manufacturers could full, at least temporarily. But, other manufacturers are making great glass, too. Sony has been upgrading a lot of their lenses lately. Nikon has always been a superb lens maker. Even 3rd party like Sigma and Tamron are probably making the best they ever have, plus there are some new 3rd party makers producing excellent stuff.
RF glass is excellent but for the quality. I own 3 L class RF lenses out of which 2 have serious quality issues. I wonder if it is only me with an average of only .333. Am I just unlucky? I do not think so. I am ready to look seriously into alternatives.
Being a wedding photographer the Canon RF system always seemed highly appealing to me. I‘m a Fuji user and I always will be. But sooner or later I will also start getting a FF system just because of the better low light capabilities. I have been tiptoeing around the R6, since I have already tested it and I loved the overall experience. Not having third party options at all absolutely makes this a non starter for me. I‘m pretty sure that Canon will regret this decision in the near future. Nikon is catching up and if Panasonic comes out with a phase detect AF camera Canon will lose market shares.
This is also the same story for me! Moving from Fuji to FF for the same reasons, was about to buy 2x Canon R6's and have just bought 2x Sony A7 IV. I would have preferred to go the Canon route, but not at those lens prices and I refuse to use an adaptor and carry large DSLR glass. Canon are shooting themselves in the foot.
@@edwinmccracken2686 Canon requirements are higher than Sony. Canon cameras and lenses are all assembled and made in Japan for quality control. Sony does have cameras made in Japan but only there Pro-video equipment.
This is insane. I actually thought as Canon was basically migrating everyone to RF they'd allow 3P lenses on so people could get cheap "starter" lenses while Canon would make the premium expensive ones. Instead they're just locking down the mount and only allowing native glass.
I started with a Canon AE-1 and followed the company up to the R5 Mark ll. But the it was time for a change, because the cameras lacked longer video record times and lenses became too expensive for the given quality. Today I own three SONY cameras. The FX-3 being the most expensive. Canon could have had all the alpha 7 users if the had listened to their customers.
I have an R5 and love it. However, if I had known that I would not be able to buy 3rd party lenses for it I probably would have gone with Sony. I "assumed" and was wrong. Too much invested now to change. However, when recommending gear to friends I will point out this "BIG" IMHO (Opinion) drawback. Thanks for the video. Keep up the good work!
I honestly love the RF glass, I shoot canon since I started, love the colours I get from them I own a R, a R6 and I pre ordered an R7 2 days after the release and it never came in stock, neither my store or canon had any clue about when it would be available. (ok pandemic etc...) But what kills it, Like you said I am also so frustrated to see other mounts getting cool new glass, I am building a business and don't have much money to buy RF pro options I do get good results with EF canon or 3rd party but I can tell the difference when it come to image stabilization and image quality (even my variable aperture 24-105 RF is better in studio than the older EF lenses). I needed a 3rd body quickly so I've cancelled my pre-order and ordered myself an A7RIII, got a really good results with the samyang 24-70 and a viltrox 85 II, I'm now considering building a Sony ecosystem over making investment into canon pro glass.
My father pre-ordered the R7 in May, he was supposed to have it in mid-june. Fast forward to today, he still hasn't received it and he just learnt the news about lenses. He's cancelling his pre-order and switching to Sony.
I am so glad I found this video! I just ordered my first Canon mirrorless last month. To save a couple bucks I got a refurbished one directly from the Cannon website. Unfortunately, it was DOA. Their customer service was good, but made me go back to the drawing board on cameras as that one was no longer available. As a non-professional, low cost lens options are critical as I won't be investing $10k in my setup. Really appreciate this info.
Such an important video, thanks Tony. I’ve been longing for some of the tasty third party glass we see on Sony like the Sigma 35 1.2, the new 24 1.4 etc, it gets so many people into the camp and allows them to consider going name brand at a later date. I love native RF glass, being lucky enough to own the 85 1.2, the 50 1.2 and the 70-200 2.8, but would love to see some better value options especially in the wide angles!
If I had known this a month ago, I doubt I would've upgraded to my R5. Sure, I run L-glass for the more serious stuff, but not having the possibility to get a less expensive 3rd party lens for trying out new styles of photography that I'm not willing to spend thousands of dollars on just yet ... yeah, that sucks. Sure, I can still buy EF-glass and run with an adapter, and maybe I will, but I shouldn't have to.
I tried the Sigma EF 35mm f/1.4 and while I liked the results, the adapted combo was not what I was looking for. I'm planning to rent the RF 35mm from Canon, but it's not a tremendously exciting lens-and when they do release a premium 35mm prime, I doubt it'll be affordable...
I've been researching my next camera body upgrade and Canon has been in strong consideration up until now. If I can't get third party glass, that puts them near or at the bottom of the list for me. If Canon isn't giving serious consideration to how many photographers are going to avoid Canon bodies because of this decision, then they're making a serious error.
It makes me genuinely upset i bought a R6. I had some EF glass to adapt and was looking forward to when RF 3rd party stuff released to fill out the rest of my arsenal. I'm considering selling off my kit and switching over to sony soon. I had my eye on that 28-70 F2 and was saving for it - an amazing canon 1st party lens. But now i won't be picking up anything else for the RF or EF mount.
This is the very reason I transitioned to Sony. It was difficult to make the decision (who wants change?), but very glad I did. Not only do I feel I can get quality glass from 3rd party lenses, but I learned the transition was much easier than I thought it would be. Canon has good gear, but so does Sony.
I left Canon because Believed they didn't support or were interested in a photographer like me. My main body is now a Sony A7RIV. I have two Sony and two sigma lenses. For street and a light pocketable camera I have a compact Fuji rangefinder style body and a couple of lenses. With the X-H2(s) Fuji now bosses the crop frame segment. As a solution / set up this really works for me. I couldn't recreate the set up for the same money with Canon.
Great video Tony, you hit the nail on the head in this one. I'm really confused when I see people defending Canon here, and saying it won't affect them because they don't buy sigma lenses, which is just false. Lack of competition will affect everyone, including Canon themselves. This is not a minor issue and there needs to be a discussion about this.
A couple of months ago I was comparing full frame options. I’ve always had Canon gear and didn’t care for some of Sony’s design decisions in the past. However, I just couldn’t swallow the cost of Canon’s RF lenses and noticed that Tamron wasn’t offering any RF options, so I looked at dozens of comparison reviews that ruled out Nikon (likely also the same 3rd party lockout) and chose the Sony A7IV plus Tamron lenses (I could have adapted the EF lenses but there isn’t a weather sealed adapter for Sony and there were reports of adapted lens performance hits). I’ve been truly amazed at the image quality and the ease of switching to Sony from Canon. If there was rumor of Canon letting in 3rd party lens manufacturers, then my choice may have been different. Canon lost a customer.
I am researching in photography for about a week now, because I am very interested in it and today I felt like it could be a hobby for my life. I am collecting as much information as I can before I am investing in it and I have to say that these facts make me feel bad about investing in a canon body. Thanks for making this video.
This video comes just in time for me. It is finally time to upgrade from my 7D Mark II but now with this news I doubt I will be going with Canon since lenses like the sigma 18-35mm f1.8 is a staple in my bag. Historically I had bought 5 Canon DSLR bodies and st least 7-8 L lenses and a handful of Sigma lenses. Time to look at the Sony or Nikon systems I suppose. Huge mistake Canon!!
Do you have the correct place to contact Canon? If you could drop the proper email/mailing address to address "complaints/concerns" with their products, that would be great. (I tried finding this online- didn't find what seemed to be the correct recipient.)
Been a Canon guy for 20 years. Recently serious consideration for going with Sony. This might be the nail in the coffin, as I've been looking at the R7 lately, but maybe not if this is Canon's future.
For some of us, its just a hobby and we have to make compromises when looking at all the components of a camera, from the batteries, chargers, body, lens through to the flash and other accessories. I love my canon camera, but I can't afford the pro lenses and this just prices me out of the market. I really was considering staying with canon for my next camera, because of the compatibility of the gear I already own, but if there is no option for less expensive sharp lenses then I would seriously question whether Canon is the right choice.
Canon EF 70-200 f/4 L IS II USM vs RF 70-200 f/4 L IS. RF version is not lighter but more compact. Pulled out to 200 its approximately the same length. Well, I prefer internal zoom - of course I would love to have the compactness. When it comes to the AF, some reviews state that RF glass is a tat faster... not exactly sure about that, may be reasonable. However, there is fantastic EF glass out there and the adapter works like a charm. Its rather the other way round, older EF glass gets new life breathen into it when used on a mirrorless. That said: I would love to see third party glass, e.g. a Sigma 35 f/1.4 ... that would be so nice.
For me this is a deal breaker plain and simple. Happily I make my living in the IT world and photography is a passion - I am, you may say, an advanced amateur who has bought tons of new & used camera equipment. Although my main focus is film I love my weird and wonderful new Chinese & Japanese lenses to go with my Sony mirror less systems. I also have a bunch of East & West German 30's & 40's glass which I treasure. Since I started off as a Canon user and still enjoy my EOS Elan 7 systems I had thought about buying one of Canons new cameras but now that isn't gonna happen. There is no way that Canon can ever provide the lens options for their new cameras that Sony can. It is a business decision and they will either profit or be hurt by it. In the IT world I learned to like "open source" and if Canon is now a "closed source" system them I'm out. So sad, too bad, time to move on -
I was at WexPhoto/Calumet considering upgrading from a 5D Mk4 to the new R5 or R6 and they implied I could use my old L series lenses with a ring adaptor. I've not looked into it to see if there is any cropping or negative sides to this yet though.
I have only bought my R6 last year which was a huge upgrade that I’m really happy with, even though I only got a 24-70 EF due to the crazy RF lens prices. But at the time I already got really annoyed with Canon for apparently preventing adobe to release profiles for CR3. And now they prevent third party lenses? Not cool! If they patented it, why not license it to others? That will make them some money while still potentially opening up good optics for smaller budgets.
Does your 24-70EF give a better image on your R6 than it did on the DSLR you upgraded from? If it does why bother ever getting RF glass anyway when any noticeable difference maybe not worth the thousands of dollars to upgrade.
I understood the problem with cr3 colors is just Adobe. I know many people using DxO PureRAW to deal with noise and colors before heading into Adobe. Personally I'm using DxO PhotoLab instead of Adobe.
When I began with DSLR photography around 2005, I went for Canon. I've had the 10D, 350D, 400D, 450D, 70D, 7D, 5D, 5DII, 6D and so on bodies. But when I bought my first mirrorless, the Sony NEX-3 when it came out in 2010, I immediately fell in love with the smaller form factor and the abilities it offered. I've had 5N, A5100, A7II, A6400, A7RII, A7III, etc. and in the meantime I've sold all the Canon gear I've had (the bodies and lenses such as 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, 200L f2.8 II, 85 f1.4, etc.) around 2015. Third party lenses made Sony more affordable with up-to-date lenses. They make the whole market competitive and nowadays you can get a lens of your taste/habit/needs. When Canon and Nikon and the rest came out with their mirrorless systems it looked like there is a possibility to ever change my set to a different brand. But with such an inconvenient draw, I have lost - and I think a lot of other people too - my interest in Canon forever (or at least for a long period). If they behave like this, that would make their system less interesting for many people and that's not really helping with their market share. Versatility (and price of course) has a big impact at what system we all choose.
I’ve done a few videos on this over the last 2 years and after the info from the last 2 weeks I think it’s time to move on from Canon. I have really enjoyed my R5 but I don’t think I’m willing to be ok with Canon selling their L glass for SOOO much more than Sonys flagship equivalent and not allowing 3rd party. Now Canon is flat out bullying these companies. I think it’s time to move on to Sony.
Sony might have a crap rep for software updates and anti-consumer practices, but at least the ecosystem is somewhat healthy. I am rocking a Sigma 28-70 and it's really my dream combo for 80% of all the situations. I can't imagine doing that with just Sony glass.
@WhistleBit: I watched that conference. They claim 50% gain in low light capabilities! Meanwhile big cameras have been stagnant for years and stacked sensors are even slightly worse than normal BSI ones when it comes to image quality.
Canon requirements are higher than Sony hence higher cost. Canon cameras and lenses are all assembled and made in Japan for quality control. Sony does have cameras made in Japan but only there Pro-video equipment.
This is eye opening. I've been a long time Canon user, started with an AE-1. Had the 7d and now use the 7d2 and was ready to upgrade to mirror less. Actually in been thinking of getting the R6, my first full frame camera. I like the low light capabilities. Maybe I should rethink my next purchases. If I have to start over with lenses...
I started with an AE-1 as well. When I converted to digital the decision was what model of Canon to get. My wife and I have bodies several times over the years . I use a 60D and she has a full frame. Our lense collection is a mix of Canon and third party lenses. We are thinking about getting a mirrorless body. If Canon doesn't allow anyone else to make RF lenses, it doesn't make sense to continue with Canon. Sony, with an open source mentally, does make sense. Sony will have a new customer.
You're making an excellent point. Third-party lenses are great for consumers, but some camera makers are not that happy about them. They look at the "total lifetime revenue" from a consumer and third-party lenses eat away from it. Question as to the preamble to your video - how the Canon "trinity" was priced out of your range. Would more affordable prime lenses be a good path (as they typically create great photo and are rather fast at a lower pricepoint), or did you need a zoom?
I am retired and really enjoy my photography. I have a DSLR (Canon 80D) and mostly Tamron lenses because I cannot afford the more expensive Canon lenses. I was thinking to upgrade to the new R7 but will not if the only R lenses are Canon. I was wondering why Tamron was not announcing lenses for the R series (they have Sony versions) and now I know why. Thanks Tony for your timely info.
Two weeks ago I was about to purchase a Canon EOS M50 II, as an amateur upgrading from an Olympus E620 I thought this was a good choice. I have now, after seeing this and other RUclips clips, decided that I had made the wrong choice, so I have purchased a Fujifilm X-T200. Thank you Tony & Chelsea for the heads up about the lens issue.
I've owned 2 Canon cameras (T3i and now a M50), but never Canon glass except the kit lens. But 3rd party let me put more budget into getting a better body at the time. But after their misstep on EOS M and now this, the M50 will be my last Canon body. And this comes as strictly a hobbyist, which Canon apparently doesn't want as a customer.
Intel stopped AMD, Zilog, Cyrix etc from selling Intel socket compatible CPUs. You can always buy AMD motherboards with AMD sockets if you want to buy AMD CPUs. Intel did NOT want to go bankrupt. Same with Canon. Go and buy other camera bodies if all you want is to use NON-Canon lenses.
I started with 3rd party glass(Sigma/Tamron) along with the Canon kit lenses. I couldn't afford Canon L glass - until within the last 5 years. I have had 3rd party for 20 years until last year where I sold my last piece. Always been a Canon shooter and have images printed/published over a million times a month. I mentor dozens of people and they have all bought 3rd party based on my referral. I have converted/convinced to stay with over a dozen people to Canon just in the past year. Most of these people only have 3rd party glass, but long - as I did - for white lenses to be mounted on their bodies. But for now, 2 or 3 good lenses spanning a broad range of focal lengths are better portfolio builders than just 1 great one. I wouldn't have gotten where I am today without the 3rd party options.
Intel refused to go bankrupt so stopped AMD, Zilog, Cyrix etc from selling Intel socket compatible CPUs Same with Canon. Sony owns 15% of Tamron. Sigma makes own cameras. Why should Canon license RF mount to UNFAIR competitors?
Great video Tony, appreciate the candour. I will say this, I had two R5's and an R6 and an R. I've been with Canon for over a decade. After the overheating, the 30 minute record limit on prosumer cameras (R5 and R6), I honestly had enough and sold everything Canon and moved to Sony, never thought I'd say this, but Sony has been nothing but a blessing. Super happy with it, no record limit, beautiful image (especially from the later models), higher DR and just so intuitive to use.
i felt the same, bought a canon m50 with the intent of going into the canon ecosystem via efm-ef adapter and glass but after the last shenanigans over the past 2 years i went to sony and couldnt be happier.
I’m really getting tired of seeing all these new great lenses in my price range and sadly knowing that I won’t be able to take advantage of any of them. This is really making me think me think about selling all my canon gear and going to Sony. Not for now but for the future.
Intel stopped AMD, Zilog, Cyrix etc from selling Intel socket compatible CPUs. Did Intel set itself up for a monumental fall? Third party can always make their own motherboards and own sockets. Third party lens makers should make their own Camera bodies...
@@Ramage7070 Sony sacked 20,000 workers in Japan and closed down their lens factory. So Sony's GM offerings are most probably just rebadged cheap lenses since Sony owns 15% of Tamron.
@@set3777 All lens brands have manufacturing elsewhere. Like Olympus made by Sigma or something like that. Zeiss has some lnenses made in a Japanese subsidiary. Basically one doesn't have one's own manufacturing these days. But Sigma does.
@@pizzablender Exclude Canon from your "ALL" conjecture. Canon Cameras and their L lenses are made by Canon own factories in Japan. Some cheaper Canon lenses made by Canon own factories in Taiwan and Malaysia.
I’ve been using Canon gear since the 70’s when I became my schools Photography. From an AE-1, A-1, 50D, 7D and now the 7R based on the reviews here. I have my collection of EF glass, some L quality, great Tamron lenses. I was assuming Canon would license the RF mount to sigma and Tamron. I started looking at going all RF mount and selling all my old gear. That’s a 100% change. I’m still in my return window until October with Best Buy. Am I better to start clean with Sony?
@@Salar_Sh The issue with Sony is that they don't seem to have anything that compares to the R7 for Sports photography in the under $2000 body range. The R7 with 15 FPS for the mechanical shutter is unmatched. You do have the smaller sensor and maybe an R6 Mark II if it was out, but the R7 right now has more FPS until you get to the top-of-the-line Canon R3 and the Sony 1. But those are over $5500. I'm not shooting for a living to afford that. In shooting homecoming pictures this weekend it was interesting to see (at least in Lightroom on my Dell 33" 4K monitor) the images from my EF Tamron 17-50 F2.8 didn't look noticeably different than my new Canon RF 70-200 L F2.8. Though the Canon in FPS tests was way faster than the Tamron lens -- but that is 12-14 years old.
@WhistleBit I have the new iPhone 14 Pro Max and it is great. I used it alongside my R7 for Homecoming photos of our daughter and our grandsons playing soccer/flag football leagues. Having the intimacy of a great zoom lens, like the Canon RF 70-200 isn't possible with any phone.
I was thinking of upgrading from my M50 to the R7, but now I think I’ll wait and see. Apparently Canon isn’t really interested in the hobbyist photographer market. Sony or Nikon are starting to look like a better option.
I was in the same position for a couple of years. I waited for the M50 mkII with more pixels (didn't happen). Then the rumoured M7 with specs similar to M6 mkII but with dual card slots. Again, didn't appear, but the R7 did. I decided that if I had to buy full-frame glass, I might as well own a full-frame camera. I now own a Sony A7IV, with Viltrox 85mm f1.8 mkII and Samyang 35mm f2.8 to use while I save for a Sony 200-600. I got the 33mp sensor I wanted. I got dual card slots. I got a lot of clever video stuff I may never need, but I also got to choose what lenses I fit. Imagine buying a car off Canon and only being allowed one brand of fuel to be used in them because of how much money they spent on developing their engine? That ain't gonna work longterm. It may not work short term either. Before the pandemic, the M50 was the best selling camera in Japan, and very popular elsewhere. It was small, as were/are the lenses, all of which made the APS-C based "M" system easily affordable. Now Canon believes it can push its customer base to a full frame mount and with the cost of more expensive full frame lenses. That would be bad enough, but to limit choice on which lenses too? Doesn't seem like a winners strategy.....
Or even (gasp) Pentax/Ricoh. Still shooting with an ancient K10D over 44,500 shutter actuations with some nice lenses. 70-200mm f2.8, 28-70mm f2.8, a few 50mm f1.7, 85mm f1.4, 28mm f2.8. Yes one day I'll buy a new camera, but it is still going strong touch wood. Canon are just trying to maximize the after-market lens sales. It is a very anti-competitive means of doing business. They will lose a lot of prospective buyers into the Canon user base. Does the Canon R5 not accept the T-mount system to mount any lens or has that feature been removed from the R series?
Absolutely spot on. Thanks for making it loud. I do think that part of EF success were third party lenses, and definitely same for e mount. Rf without 3rd party glass can't be recommended. I am locked with canon due to all my EF and RF glass, but I can't recommend it to a starting photographer. I actually see myself building new setup around emount (RF glass is so expensive that this is financialy viable option). I am not so sure about Nikon, there aren't many z mount lenses.
Just switched from Canon to Nikon. You can actually use EF and sony E mount glass and F mount glass all with adapters. And the AF on all of the adapters is actually very good if you buy the right ones. Fringer EF adapter, Megadap ETZ21 E mount adapter and of course the official Nikon FTZ adapter. But there aren't many native Z mount options.
I'm heavily vested with Canon. I started with Canon in 1995 with a Rebel II and a kit lens. I moved up to an Elan 7E while dreaming of the A2E and EOS1. Today, in my camera bags are the 7dMkII, 5dMkII, 5dMkIV, EOS R and was considering either an R7 or R5. My lenses include EF 24-70f2.8 L, EF 70-200f2.8L, 50mm f1.4 USM, 18-135 IS STM (bought for a hike), 100-400 f4-5.6L, and the 500mm f4 L IS II. I also have Canon couple of 600 RT flash units. Pricing of the RF mount lenses has been an issue for me. They simply want too much for the RF glass. Is it better? Perhaps in a lab test. I have always been a vocal champion for Canon to newcomers to the hobby and craft. I always felt that they offered more at the entry level and put things in an attainable price point for beginners. I got into photography in 90s. Canon's ability to use EF mounts on film and early digital and then across full and crop sensors made sense. They are losing their way. If they can't make their products more affordable, then they at least need to provide a means to newcomers to be able to afford lenses. That means allowing third party lens makers to make RF mount lenses. They are being shortsighted when they should be playing the long game. I think many of us thought Sony would show-up, play a few rounds, make a half hearted effort and then exit the game. Sony is proving itself to be playing the long game. Canon cannot think of itself as Leica. Why? How many Leica owners do you know and if you do know some, how extensive of a kit do they have? My guess is few and limited.
12:50 yes! I can't think of a single canon ef lens that doesn't have horrible astigmatism or coma for astrophotography. or at least not one that compares in value to sigma/samyang's offerings. newer RF are much better but for anyone still on an older canon DSLR shooting astrophotography, we know the importance of third party glass. sigma 40mm f1.4 for example is one of the BEST lenses ever made.
"Canon is competing against itself..." I think you hit the jackpot here! Canon is on it 3rd gens of mirrorless bodies, but it has yet to complete its mirrorless lens lineup. The question is why? One possibility is the Canon's DSLR and EF lines are probably competing against its mirrorless platform. Now, Canon mirrorless users will have no choice but to rely on EF lenses via adapter to get the jobs done. It's very unlikely anyone would leave a system after spending several grants on a body just because... Canon wants to keep the DSLR market alive for as long as possible while keeping their mirrorless users at bait.
I feel totally BETRAYED, and taken advantage of.. I am an Amateur Photographer who has bought an R5, R6 AND an R7... I have been looking forward to seeing what goodies Tamron, Sigma et al were going to produce for the RF mount. My two favourite wildlife lenses were the EF100-400, and my trusty Tamron 150-600. Now I find that my Tamron doesn't reliably focus on the RF bodies, and Canon have closed the door on a Tamron successor. I have been jealously watching the never ending parade of E mount Quality glass for Sony, and an equal amount for Nikon and others, and now we're told that we're stuck with a few very good, but over priced RF lenses. OK Canon...You won't catch me twice...I'm out of here!
First off Tony.. thank you for making this video. Dear Canon.. you're a great company and you make great cameras for both video and photo. You don't need to corner the market on your lens mount to maintain being one of the greatest camera companies in the history of planet Earth. Please really think hard about this decision. Between your ease of use, your color science, your internal codecs and autofocus, you are truly an amazing company and produce a one of a kind product. Let the RF glass stand on it's own with the level of quality and native mounting it provides. Let the market decide which lenses are best for the RF mount, whether they be from Canon or a third party, and if Canon's RF glass suddenly doesn't become the superior choice for the RF mount, let that be the catalyst for pushing your lens production even further for quality and color.
Canon requirements are higher than Sony hence higher cost. Canon cameras and lenses are all assembled and made in Japan for quality control. Sony does have cameras made in Japan but only there Pro-video equipment.
I know I felt burned by canon when I was a kid buying my first camera back in the 80's when they switched to the EF mount. That bad experience was a factor in not choosing Canon when I re entered the world of photography decades later. Seeing things like this makes me so glad I never went back to canon. I'd never choose platform that didn't allow me the option of third party gear.
@@mbr5742 Actually Canon`s T80 and T90 supported AF with FD lenses. These FD lenses had an AF motor in them and electrical contacts. But the lenses were quite bulky trying house the AF motor. Also not commercially viable very few AF FD lenses were made.
There were FD to EF adapters just like there are EF to RF adapters. Both moves to a new mount were reasonable and the EF mount lasted extremely long. Kicking 3rd parties out of the RF mount is their first major mistake regarding their mounts so far.
@@mbr5742 Canon has been through most lens mounts in their history. The S Mount Screw mount (1946-64), The R Mount (1959-63) Canon's first breech lock system. The FL Mount (1964-74) The FD Mount Gen 1 (1970-79). The New FD Mount (1979-89). The EF Mount (1987- Present) Canon's first bayonet lens mount.
One of the biggest reasons I went hard into Sony (several thousand in bodies alone at this point) was the range of lens choice. One of the biggest reasons I will not even consider moving to Canon is a lack of choice. Bad shortsighted move Canon. If it's about the money just license the patent like Apple does with Lightning and we can all move on.
I have been exclusively using Canon EOS bodies since my 1000 film camera back in the very early 90s. I have used a combination of Canon and Sigma lenses, as I can't justify spending thousands of pounds. I recently upgraded to an R6 (which I really like) and have been using my existing EF lenses with adaptors. However when it comes to replacing the lenses if I can only choose Canon lenses in future I will have to evaluate whether it's better to move to another system. So instead of buying a Canon camera and a couple of their lenses, with maybe 1 or 2 cheaper Sigma ones, I would likely be buying a Sony camera with a similar combination of lenses.
I purchased the canon R6 with RF 25-105mm f4 L lens and an EF-RF adapter 2 weeks ago before I viewed this video. I do use the adapter with my EF lenses including Canon's 16-35mm f4 L and Tamron's SP 70-300mm f4-5.6 both of which work faultlessly but I am devastated that canon is blocking third parties manufacturing RF lenses especially Sigma and Tamron that I use and have used in the past as quality cheaper alternatives. I am mainly a landscape/wedding photographer so generally using f8 up to f22 and found no problems tack sharp at 100%. The canon EF to RF adapter weighs in at around 100gms and adds 24mm to the lens length so no big deal but the 8 EF contacts are less than the RF's 12 so maybe some loss there? Thanks for this video/report.
I've been researching my first full frame mirrorless - and this story coming out last week has lead to me learning about the Tamron 35-150mm wowzers. I had been ignoring Sony because of their annoying gatekeeping in the 90s (Beta, Memory Stick, MiniDisk etc) - turns out Canon's even more gatekeepy! Ha. So, good timing on the story, my budget goes way further on Sony.
Only reason I went for M43rds was this. I had zero experience with camera but what I knew was lens will always have to be bought. And if I went for sony that's best autofocus I would loose if they just decide to gatewall me. So m43rd with Panasonic olympus blackmagic Xiaomi etc... Were less likely to be at whim of one party
@@shritijdighe5506 lol what? Sonys lens mount is open to the public for free. So you’re saying you went m4/3 because you think at some point Sony may take that away? What makes you think m4/3 won’t do that? I’m not trying to be rude but I just don’t understand the logic..
@@mrwashur1991 i understand what you want to say and how you think I am being ridiculous right? . And yeah Sony is great and ethical too. But I don't want to put all eggs in one basket. Surely m43rd can also do what I said above.... But that would still leave 4 companies as producer for lens. And yeah for M43rds to go that way would require consent of 3 bigshots... Not one. And yeah that time I didn't knew sony was open. But it could have been cannon instead..... Point is not specific company but the monopoly. Did you ever imagined cannon doing this??
A few months ago I've upgraded from my first camera to R6, eagerly waiting for Sigma and Tamron to fill the "middle class" tier of lenses that I feel Canon just does not support whatsoever. Sure, the L lenses are superb, yet an absolute majority of them is cost prohibitive for a hobbyist (and let's be fair, the only reason they cost so much is because there's literally no competition). The non-L options are purposefully made with artificial detriments such as slow and loud autofocus, missing focus rings or mode buttons, variable and ridiculously slow aparatures, even a lens hood somehow becomes a 30 dollar accessory. As far as I know the RF mount doesn't offer a single fast prime with a snappy internal AF that costs less than 2 thousand dollars. I've been super happy with my R6 and just love the feel of Canon gear, but this kind of scammy approach honestly disgusts me. If nothing changes I might end up forced to change the systems like many others did.
Shame you bought something thinking the future would make it meet your needs. Sell the R6 and recoup your funds and buy something that is capable of meeting your needs now.
This kind of action by Canon makes me seriously think about switching to Sony. I did wonder why some 3rd party lenses we're available for Canon. Thanks for the investigation Tony!
Well I’ve made the mistake of recently investing in the R5 then. Photography is only a hobby for me and I’m already struggling to find the lenses I want. I’m literally going online to look at the cost of Sony and Nikon alternatives now.
Some EF-S lenses are incompatible with EF bodies, by extending into the body, where the EF mirror would flip but the EF-S mirror don't. Can third-party work arround the RF patent by making EF-mount lens to only be used with the EF-to-RF adapter, by using the cavity inside the adapter to extend lens elements closer to the sensor. I have some EF lenses, some EF-S lenses and some third-party EF/APS-C, I haven't found anything clear about using EF-S with adapter to RF camera. Will it work with all EF-S lenses? Will it crop or vignette? I prefer vignette, then crop in post processing.
Very thoughtful and well said, I hope Canon will ease up their stance on it. I'm just scared that third party EF lenses and EF to RF adapters will not function as well as it did beforehand with hidden firmware updates, "bricking" my gear, and making them useless. That would be the worst move from them, but they are not that insane, right ?
I'm an entry user and have been using my Sony 3N and Canon M50 all these years since their release and when I was researching into a new camera, I ended up crossing off Canon because they killed off the M series and really restricted the entry to RF/RF-S. I actually went with Fuji because I don't do post editing and just use jpeg sooc and post to my socials and use my fuji instax printer too. I may not be part of a big spending market segmentation but there are probably millions of us around the world that can add quick revenue to their bottom line. Sony definitely is the juggernaut that aimed at consumer and professional without alienating either. Fuji is a niche market that will be like Subaru in the automotive industry. Canon may end up being the next Pentax?
Thanks so much for this video. I'm a 45 year committed Canon user currently using a 6D Mark II that needs replacing. I was looking only at Canon R options for a replacement but am frustrated at the cost and low selection in the RF lenses. I'm now leaning toward the Sony A7 line as an alternative new system. Since I'll need to upgrade everything my brand commitment is less of a priority. Third party lenses have always had a place in my system even though I've used mostly Canon L lenses. The games Canon is playing lens compatibility and having a ridiculous number of R camera options is frustrating me. I'm ready to move on to something more simple and flexible.
Glad you addressed this issue Tony! I’ve been a loyal Canon user for well over 20 years & have been hesitant to buy third party glass because glass normally a lens outlived a camera body. It’s gotten to the point that I can no longer afford to pay these prices!! Recently I purchased a Fuji body & their newest glass. I must say I’m happy with my results, but their low light shooting isn’t the same. But clearly that’s a full frame vs crop sensor issue. I hate to say it but I’m looking at selling my Canon gear & switching to Sony! My question to Canon is what about my 20plus years of loyalty? Isn’t it worth anything? A new lens shouldn’t cost nearly 3K!!!!
The reality, I'm afraid, is that you're only a Canon customer at the point of sale. During the warranty period you're a potential liability. After the warranty has expired, you're nothing to Canon unless and until you're back at the sales counter and purchasing your next piece of Canon gear. :(
I’m honestly so glad that this news came out. I’ve been waffling between Canon and Sony, with the biggest drawback to Canon being the lack of available RF mount lenses. I likely would have gone with Canon and waited (indefinitely) for some 3rd party lenses to come out. Sony is about to sell another a7iv!
Main reason I switched completely from canon to sony in 2019. Its just dumb at this point if you wanna praise canon still with this type of bs they pull. Welcome to the family! My favorite purchase besides my A7s3.
Hardware sadly is also basically dependent upon what type of client work one does, and sometime one will almost be forced to pick and choose (or worse switch) from one hardware to another.
Consider the big four companies... Sony, Canon, Nikon, and Fuji. For some other people that might need the gear, even consider m43. Best to rent first, then make buying decisions from there
Exactly my choice too 😁. Sony have made huge steps these past few years, certainly now with the A7iv, and I can't wait to get my hands on it!
I've got the Tamron 35 150 f2-2.8 lens and it's absolutely superb, actually sharper than my 2 GM zoom lenses. Sony would probably never make that lens and if they did it would probably be £3,000. 3rd party options are such a win for the customer
I was thinking of adding a Canon R5 to my kit. However, with no aftermarket lenses available, I won't consider Canon. I see a large number of aftermarket and native lenses for Canon's competitors. I don't like limitations. This is a declining market, and unless Canon is about to start making smartphones, they better recognize the foolishness of their ways. Canon, you are aggravating your potential buyers, just to make a few extra bucks. How foolish!
Go Fuji!!! I switched because of this problem
Yeah I was also thinking of upgrading to a R5 or R6 in a few months but having seen the recent moves from Canon I will just consider another camera brand. It a shame as I always was a Canon shooter and absolutely loves their bodies, but if there is no good 3rd party option I guess I will have to switch to a different, more customer-friendly, ecosystem.
agree, i would have bought an r5 or r6 but this limitation is ridiculous
Thanks, for sharing. Good luck in your pursuit of changing to a new lens system.
Just remember you will always get what you pay for. Simply put you pay crap you get crap.
Tony you've inspired me to make my own video about this subject - something I've been tempted to do for a very long time, and the huge weight of comments it's picked up within 24 hours have certainly said a lot about how Canon's customers really feel. Thanks for having the cojones to publish this.
Cojones = balls 😁 Cajones = drawers
@@lensalucia (edited) ;-)
Hi Chris!
Hi Chris, I am a great fan of your channel, and this one too... I have to agree with Tony that this is going to be Canon's undoing. I have always preferred Canon's footage to Sony, but Sony has made their cameras far more desirable in the past few years. For the past 10 years I have been using Canon 5Ds - the 2, 3 and 4... but when they discontinued them, and went with their new line... I simply made the business decision that to shell out another $25K + on Canon gear - especially the lenses, is simply not a viable option for me. Especially since I operate in South Asia where budgets for videography are a fraction of that in the USA or Europe. And even now Sony has some great Lenses that are out of my price range, but at least I will always buy the Sony camera bodies, and where possible use Sony Lenses, but failing that, I have some great Sigma lens options - and so do most of my customers.
Canon and Nikon banning third parting lenses has been a huge selling point for Sony.
I recently bought an R5 with the expectation that the market would naturally expand with 3rd party products, lenses, etc... Had I known I was blindly investing into closed proprietary product ecosystem I certainly would NOT have gone with the R5. This is a bait and switch in my opinion - obviously there are no rules that state companies must allow for others to use their tech, but if you consider that the industry operates with 3rd party adoption over decades and decades, the argument could be made that this market adoption rate is as close to a given as could be expected. I feel like Canon owes it to their customers to disclaim their product strategy when it is this impactful to the way the product can be used in the market, as the market typically operates.
It's a big, big mistake for Canon not to give access to 3rd Parties to build RF lenses... And already now some of the most exciting lenses will be first launched for Sony platform. I just upgraded to Canon R some weeks ago... If I had this info some month ago I would have left to Sony or Nikon
I agree. And why I now have a Sony instead of a Canon camera
@@bigAll2000 My god, more Sony fanboys.
@@andylaauk I use Canon cameras and EF lenses for 20 years now and I started and stayed with Canon cameras BECAUSE of the lens choices!
Now Sony has the cheaper lenses and more variety, literally the opposite of 10 years ago. I would love to stay with Canon long-term, but I don't find the optics I want here anymore!
Currently shooting Fuji, I’m looking around after the XH2S came out. One of the strong appeal to Sony is clearly the lens options…..
Samyang, Viltrox and others are known for copying patented designs, ignoring copyright law and making profit off the work of other people. Canon puts money into R&D and makes money off licensing their researched and tested designs. A monopoly is never good, but what Viltrox is doing is the equivalent of me taking your photos, putting them on iStock under my own name and then complaining that you're stopping me from earning some money when you take out a copyright claim against me.
For better or worse, copyright law and the patent industry is what it is.
I was with Canon for about 20 years, and last two years I was waiting for something similar to R6 but with 24-30Mpx. But twelve hours after your video I ordered Sony a7 IV. Because I don't want to be vendor-locked by a bunch of marketologists/lawyers, instead I'll contribute to a more open economy and more client-oriented competitor. P.S. I love Sigma Art lenses.
I've been shooting Canon for ~15 years, starting with a point and shoot, then a rebel, then a 6D, 5D IV, finally to my current combo of an R5 and an RP. I've resisted any urge to switch systems to this point, but the lack of third party RF lenses is infuriating. To this point, I'd assumed it was just a matter of time before we'd see offerings on the market - to hear Canon is actively blocking third party manufacturers absolutely makes me second guess making any investment in the RF system. This maneuver is so incredibly short-sighted by Canon and is absolutely a deterrent to not only people wanting to buy into the RF system, but also to people sticking with the RF mount.
I couldn't agree more! I hope they hear us, loud and clear.
Currently shooting with a Canon 5D Mark IV and was planning to upgrade to an R5 sometime within the next 8 or so months, but now I'm second guessing that decision and may give Sony a closer look. For me personally, it goes beyond simply forcing me into Canon glass for native RF mount, more frustrating to me is the almost "bully" mentality that Canon is apparently displaying with this. I'm also concerned that if there isn't competition within the RF mount realm, what's to stop Canon from charging even more crazy money for lenses in the future? Very concerning Canon.
I have been using all my EF L lenses on the R5 w/adapter with great success. So I don’t see why so many are going ballistic over an issue that Canon addressed with great care.
bro... get you a sony, use cinematch, boom. done. =]
If you have lost of ef lens then it makes sense to just buy the ef to rf adaptor, but newer lenses seem to be smaller lighter and sharper.
I shoot both (literally only canon for the R5C + 5.2mm vr). Most of my pictures with sony for weddings, I have to turn down some of the sharpness. I'd highly look into the a7IV, swamps the canon R5 and if you shoot video, canon made so many mistakes on it.
@@Drcraigfreeman9280 Why not sony A1? Sony can flawlessly use all the EF glass, while Nikon converts to just about nothing. Also good luck getting one
My dad gave me his old Canon T3i, which is how I got into photography. When I wanted something better, I went to the 7D Mark II. Earlier this year I got an M6 Mark II. I've been using a mix of 3rd party and Canon lenses on all of them, and I was saving to buy the R7 next, but now I think I'm going to spend some time seriously evaluating some other cameras; the Fujifilm X-T4 in particular. The fact that Tamron and Sigma already offer lenses for X mount is a crucial factor in that consideration.
Sony sips coffee: No, it's not a mistake. Keep on doing that!
Zun Tzu
Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake. - Napoleon Bonaparte
@@careylymanjones Ah my bad thought it was from art of war
I remember buying the a6300 and researching lenses. I was looking for that perfect balance between image quality and affordability. At that time, nothing came close to Sigma’s 30mm f/1.4. Even after all these years, Sigma’s APS-C prime trinity is revered. So revered Sigma decided to extend the compatibility to Canon’s EF-M (basically extending the mount’s life for another 1.5 years). Third party brands matter, they actually keep the user loyal to a certain mount.
Just remember you will always get what you pay for. Simply put you pay for crap you get crap.
@@Davitor1 stop making the same comment everywhere. What crap are you talking about. There are 3rd party lenses that are very good. Lenses from big brands don't always mean quality
@@Davitor1 i have 2 of the 3 sigma lenses for the M mount and i consider them superior to Canon's primes.
@@Davitor1 There might be some truth to it sure (wouldn't call them crap though like you) but my Samyang 35mm f/1.4 is great. The first party sony g/gm lenses are most likely better but if I already get 80% (probably even more tbh) of the quality for less than 50% of the price why would I go with first party lenses when I cannot afford them anyway?.
@@Davitor1 you are surely not suggesting that Sigma lenses, especially in the art series are crap? That is simply not true
Thanks for this timely video. I've been a Canon shooter for 15 plus years and have been saving up to make the switch to mirrorless and buy the R5. The only thing holding me back has been trying to get some clarification on the compatibility of 3rd party lenses. Sorry Canon, now, someone else is getting my $7,000.00 budget!
I don't think it's "you" who should be saying "Sorry." But I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for Canon's corporate greed to waiver.
I usually upgrade my camera body about every 5 years. For the last 18 years I have been a Canon user. On my last upgrade I picked up an R5 body. Had I known that Canon would abandon it's customer base by preventing 3rd party lens manufacturers from making RF mount lenses, I would have never purchased this body. Before this becomes common knowledge, I am considering selling my R5 while it still has some market value and switch to Sony. Sony is likely a better choice anyway and certainly more loyal to it's customer base.
Sony is no more loyal than Cannon. They used to use the "A" mount from Minolta (was full frame 35mm film). If you bought a half dozen lenses for a A-77II, they will not work on an A-7 of any variant, (even though many lenses were designed for full frame). They made an adaptor, but it has limited function. You want a new camera, fine. You buy all new glass. Will they do this again in the future? Who knows. They can change their mounts anytime they fancy.
@@DannyB-cs9vx Mounts change, and with the A-mount to E-mount switch it happened because they went from SLR bodies to mirrorless, which is the exact same reason Canon and Nikon had for their mount changes and is a perfectly valid technical justification for creating a new mount. Besides, it's not like A-mount was somehow short-lived: the first form of it came out in 1985 and the final lens came out in 2015 while the final camera body came out in 2016 (E-mount was introduced in 2010, so that's a five year transition period, while Canon dropped EF like a bad habit almost instantly once RF was out). And, as you said, they made (imperfect but still available) adapters. That's not PERFECT support, but it's nothing to sneeze at.
And, importantly, it's a far cry from Canon actively preventing third parties from making lenses for their current mount, which they have been doing since its introduction a few years ago. Mount changes aren't fun but they're inevitable whenever a massive shift happens in how the sensor, lens and viewfinder interact, but there's nothing inevitable about intentionally blocking third parties to crush competition and ensure the only options are Canon's own fantastic-but-expensive lenses.
Use the EF-EOS R Adapter for third party glass...
@@navis5284 As Tony pointed out in the video, this is less than ideal. These adapted lenses are often much bigger than a native mirrorless lens. Also the new mirrorless lenses are usually better performers. AND, companies like Sigma and Tamron are putting out new mirrorless lenses that don't exist in EF or RF mounts.
@@sethsez Cannon is free to license their tech to anyone they wish or not. How long has the EF been around? You got your monies worth. That is the message you give me. The person buying the Sony "A"mount lenses in 2015 got a good deal right? The 2016 camera was a great deal as well. Instant obsolescence. Sony was real loyal to them.
I still use the camera. For what I do it works just fine. Instead of buying the new "E" mount camera, I bought Olympus 4/3.
I just had this conversation with high school kid that wanted to purchase their first camera. He was considering the Canon R6 and Sony A7iii. I gave him pros and cons for each. And the biggest con I had with Canon was not having third party glass. Once he seen the price difference he was really considering Sony.
I have been using the A7 III after having used Canon for well over 40 years and I love it. The price point and availability of lots and lots of own brand and third party lenses will open a wide spectrum of opportunities for anyone who wants to take the step to mirrorless.
I went through the same decision process when moving from APS-C few years back. Canon's bodies were not better enough to compensate for prices of lenses and lack of accessible glass. With Sony you can grow and have access to great quality glass for less.
Exactly Sony is for folks who can’t afford Canon.
@@Davitor1 or don’t like the way Canon is operating.
@@Davitor1 I don't know about that. I have owned a load of L-glass and always used the high end film bodies, my last being an EOS 1N. I just think that Sony fits the timeframe a lot better. The brand is much more interactive with consumers and like Tony said, they seem to like it when they are challenged by third parties. I find that Canon becomes more and more arrogant. An attitude which is not very becoming in a market that is heavily on the decline. A lot of their bread and butter (point and shoot and low end DSLR) was already killed by the smartphone industry. So why become such a snob in the part of the industry that still generates some revenue?
Wow I’m so glad I stumbled on this. I’ve been slowly building funds to replace my Eos 6D and was going to go for an R5 with adapter initially to reuse my large Tamron glass selection but slowly rebuild up 3rd party dedicated RF lenses as Canons aren’t priced for consumers imo. This is an absolute deal breaker for me so I’ll be looking at other platforms. Nice one canon.
I have been loyal to Canon since I owned an AE-1 35mm film camera. I currently have the R5. It was a stretch for my budget to upgrade to that body. The thought that Canon is willfully blocking third party lens manufacturing makes me feel betrayed by a company that I have advocated and defended in the past. My loyalty is not being rewarded.
Yours is a poor strategy. The lenses are all important. I personally know 2 people who bought R5 bodies, but coulsnt afford Canon R mount lenses, so are using adapted 3rd party lenses. The image quality of those tamron telephotos are no where near the quality of Canon RF glass, or, L series EF glass. And, I can sense thier frustration.
Glass is always the most important.
You’re right, Nor Dic. He should have never bought a Canon to begin with. Good work proving that to him. 🤪
@@nordic5490 agreed. Third party glass is perfect for the mom tographers for their shoots in the park, but not the professional shooter with longevity in mind.
@@coryhultquist580 Obviously you didn't bother watching this video, Tony clearly states that he and Chelsea never would have gotten into pro photography had it not been for those "mom photographer" lenses. There are many photographers who have done the same.
@@coryhultquist580 I think you'll be surprised by what you can get away with in professional photography
Thank god I bought a Sony. At the decision-making stage, I was thinking about Canon. The lack of third-party lenses was one of the biggest factors in my decision. Now I definitely do not regret it.
Very wise choice!
I shoot on 3 different systems,,, canon, Sony A7 and Nikon z7. I love the Sony’s ergonomics but the color space can be difficult to deal with… Canon and Nikon seem to look better right out of the can
@@scotthamilton1054 I can agree for Nikon, and of {not mentioned} Fuji - but Canon? I know that a lot of people are talking about "Canon colors" - but for me Canon pictures directly from camera are kind of washed out, lacking colors.
I agree that Sony FF is quite eye-candy, but I confess, I like it, and from experience - a lot of people likes it too.
What I love in Sony - is the fact that you can put practically any lens on those cameras. From good old Minolta MD or Konica, through more obscure lenses like adapted Yashinon, Meritar, up to old projector lenses. And 3rd party lenses base is absolutely HUGE :) with really awesome stuff, just to mention Sigma Art series
@@piorun23 Sony bought the camera business from Minolta when Minolta decided to focus on other products.
I shot Minolta film for decades but don't like Sony as company so I went with Canon for digital. I can't afford all of Canon's own lenses so I have a Sigma too. I would like to upgrade my current camera processor is from 2014 but this attitude from Canon is convincing me to switch to Nikon. (Both my brothers have Nikons and they like them a lot. )
I switched before and it looks like I have to switch again. If they think that brand loyalty is same now as it was with film they are wrong. They are making me think I should not have picked Canon in the first place. (And as for colors, all my Canons do not record yellow, on flowers for example - mums in my case, properly under all their different light settings. )
Hi Tony, my photography knowledge is next to zero:
I am buying a camera for my 13 year old son who needs one for school, he's taking GCSE Photography and really getting into it.
We're looking at the Canon 250D, and he really wants that one (I really want to get the 200D!)
We can't help noticing that Canon has deliberately disabled a pin in the hot shoe mount which apparently blocks it from using third party gear.
What you describe in the video is real, so thank you for speaking up.
Canon is the culture when it comes to photography, and moves such as these speak volumes in a manner I don't think it wants to speak.
We'll be fine, we'll muddle through with used gear, I'm sure.
But a clear message is being sent to people who want to start and over the long term, they will respond accordingly.
Thanks again for this video, we appreciate it.
This is a deal breaker. After buying my first RF body, this comes a shocker and I would not be recommending Canon until and unless this change
Agreed. No new Canon purchases for me. Might unload the rest of my gear and migrate to Sony. All my dedicated astro cams use Sony sensors.
I don't mind Canon doing this as long as Canon plans to license their RF-mount to third parties. If this is the case in future I'd stay with Canon.
My first camera was a Canon AE-1 Program and (after some Minolta cameras) I was very pleased to inverst in a new Canon R6 and some native RF glass. I still enjoy using the R6 and my new glass. As I was never invested in (old) EF lenses I don't know whether I should invest in third party EF glass (like a Sigma 150-600) or wait until something similar is available for the RF-mount.
The RF-mount is rather new and I guess Canon isn't making "a big mistake" (as Tony said in this video) but Canon (as no.1) will establish a license system for the RF-mount. Third parties will be hesitant at first but if they want to make their profits also in RF glass they'll have to accept licenses! 🤔
I was on the fence between going from Canon to Sony. Because I'd be making that decision for the rest of my life - switching once is bad enough.
If Canon does not have Sigma lenses but Sony does, then I don't have to make that decision anymore - it will have been made for me...
I switched from my Canon 6d to Sony a7iii when that first came out and I never looked back. I'm very disappointed in Canon's choice. Without 3rd party lense I honestly could never have progressed on my photography journey and would mainly have been bound by the nifty fifty those many years back. The 3rd parties are making things interesting ie Tamron releasing the 35-150 f 2-2.8 and 20-40mm 2.8. I hope down the road canon reconsiders but for the time being, I am very happy with Sony and their ability to deliver on what we actually requests 😀
You hit the nail on the head with this video Tony. Canon has really produced a compelling product lineup with their RF mount, but buyers need to be aware of what they're getting into. Good on you for raising the issue. This summer my friend who was shooting Nikon DSLR's professionally for many years decided to switch to a mirrorless system and had narrowed down his choices down to Sony and Canon. He asked me what I thought, and once I mentioned this 3rd party lens issue and showed him the difference in price (and he got to try them both out) he chose Sony.
Funny thing is, I was on the fence of buying an RF camera. Glad I didn't now.
Been a Canon shooter for over 15 yrs and I love Canon glass but I also loved that in many cases I could turn to 3rd party like Sigma and Tamron to obtain similar and in many cases, better quality for less. I switched to fully mirrorless last year but kept using I old EF lenses with an adaptor. The Idea was that RF glass is very expensive so I'll hold out cause there should be some RF third party glass in the horizon, I mean Sigma and Tamron have been killing it over at Sony. Surely there is some of that goodness coming this way right?... I think Canon is making a big mistake.
Nikon Z is actually great for Nikon DSLR user. IMHO Unless he's using it for wild life and sports, maybe only Nikon Z9 is the option for that.
@@apjgraphix it could be Canon's plan is to just wait a while before they allow 3rd party lenses. The thinking would go something like... While the mount is new they want to have only Canon options so they can cash in on the "early" adopters who are usually more willing to pay more. If I was a betting person though I'd guess they are either going to open that door soon or they never will. If they never allow 3rd party lenses, then perhaps the thinking is... they see themselves as the premium brand the way Apple does and they want to curate the experience from end to end and charge a premium price for a premium experience. With the canceling of the m-mount and now this, it's clear that Canon is not the consumer friendly option (were they ever though?).
@@DennisKapatos The problem is if Canon is too late in getting the early adopters. The facts are, even PRO photographers will not buy into a limited glass system when their glass gets old. EF lenses will soon be obsolete. New photographers will get an affordable system and once they have money, will get into a higher upgraded system of that BODY. They will not change to a new BODY/SYSTEM. Therefore, only a VERY limited amount of people will buy into Canon's new restrictive system. That will not be enough to make them profitable and in the long run, will hurt them.
Sigma Art lenses have always been my go to lenses for Canon, this change could cause a lot of us Canon users to sway away from upgrading our equipment and still keep the Canon brand in our camera bags. It's a bad idea because there is a market they might be detering from buying new Canon gear with third-party lenses.
Same here. I think I'll stick to DSLR for now. Was considering the EOS R 😢
Same here, this is good to know since my 7D Mark II is starting to show its age, and I use Sigma's 18-35mm and 50-100mm F/1.8 DC Art lenses as well as their 100-400mm F/5-63 DG Contemporary Lens. I would be uncomfortable upgrading to a mirrorless system if I cannot get a Sigma adaptor to convert the SLR lenses to a mirrorless system.
@@bryanwhite2685 I think the 6D Mark II is looking like a better option for me now. Won't want to be trapped into a lens system
I have 4 Sigma Art Primes and 2 Zooms. all EF. Love them.
Totally agree! Love those Signa ART lenses. They’ve been some of my favourite lenses I’ve ever had.
I think Canon is shooting themselves in the foot, pardon the pun. There are still lots of people who haven’t yet made the big switch from DSLR to mirrorless. And when we do, suddenly the decades-long lock-in breaks and if Canon won’t be loyal to its users, Sony and Nikon have some amazing camera systems and glass options too. Seeing this video helps me along my path to switching away from Canon.
This is really shocking and I’m surprised that Canon has restricted the adaptability of third party lens. I too was considering R5. Though I have canon prime but I also use third party lenses. Hoping that canon would consider their loyal customers’ suggestions.
You are correct about part of it...
"A company or set of companies" has restricted third party lenses. But the corporate answer is: it's Sigma and Leica.
But also items such as licensing costs from companies such as Canon and Nikon have not helped.
Canon do not care about people, they (like all huge companies) only care about profit. They don't care if they lose loyal customers, they have more coming around the corner.
EF mount unexpectedly became popular with film productions. It was a great thing, as all of the sudden there were so many lenses out there that could be used, from professional cine to amateur photo ones, and so many cameras, including Arri Alexas embraced it. As cine cameras also get smaller, I was expecting the RF to follow in its steps (RED Komodo actually has RF mount), but Canon has to be less restrictive for this to happen. Otherwise the industry just might move on with another mount.
That would really set Canon back. I can see it happening and them having to claw their way back from it. I’m assuming there is massive R&D in cameras like there is in any other tech product.
The easiest way would be to collect 10$ from every third party lens sold. Bingo for everyone.
I didn't plan to switch to Canon anytime soon and now I'm definitely not as long as they're having these politics on their RF mount. Just no!
I've been shooting mostly Canon cameras ever since I got into photography as a teenager 38 years ago. As a collector, I have purchased hundreds of Canon cameras and lenses over the years. I'm a fan of mirrorless cameras due to their smaller size (body and glass) and adaptability to vintage glass. However, I too am concerned about the lack of 3rd party RF mount lenses. I am concerned enough that I've been considering Sony rather than buying pro RF mount cameras and lenses. I want to be able to use some of the cool new mirrorless lenses coming from Sigma.
Sony shooter, here. Sigma lenses are wonderful. I have the 24mm f/1.4 Art and the 70mm f/2.8 Macro Art lenses. Both are tack sharp. The AF on the 70 is a bit flakey, but who trusts AF for macro? AF on the 24mm is very good. Build quality on both is very good. They feel "professional" in the hand and in use. And both of them together cost me less than the 24mm f/1.4 G master would have.
Rumor has it that Sigma is about to release a DN version of their 50mm f/1.4 Art lens. For those unfamiliar with Sigma-speak, DN lenses are designed specifically for mirrorless, not just DSLR lenses with a tube stuck on the end. If it comes in with typical Art series pricing, it will probably be in the $800-900 range, comfortably under all of Sony's G and G master lenses.
I have been drooling over Canon bodies and glass ever since I bought my first camera, my M50, two years ago. But with how they simply left the EF-M mount out in the cold and now this, I'm seriously not enthused about choosing the RF mount when I upgrade to a full frame body. Panasonic was looking really good, even with the pretty slim selection of Panasonic glass, but now I'm looking at investing in an S5 with the 24-70 S Pro a lot harder than I was. Canon is industry leading, but with anti-consumer practices like this, I think their market share is going to take a pretty big hit.
Canon would as well struggle to compete against even Panasonic and L-Mount alliance in the long run.
For the price the Panasonic S5 is the best camera, but I don't know if L mount alliance would allow third party lenses
Fellow m50 owner here. As I learn more and will eventually want a bigger better camera body this news ensures Canon isn’t in consideration. The sigma 30mm contemporary on the ef-m mount is a great lens that I have really enjoyed and I picked it up at half the price of the canon ef-m 32mm.
I have had an AE-1, then AE-1 program. Power shots and the 24mm cartrage camera nightmare too. I was finally going to move up to a full frame dlsr but after this I am looking at trading all my Canon equipment for Sony.
@@amermeleitor So far I believe Sony is the best you can get. Samyang, Tamron, Sigma are doing magic on the E-mount, and Sony isn't sitting around and coming with impressive lenses as well for professionals and for people starting up like their great "normal" primes 35mm, 50mm, 85mm f/1.8. You can as well getaway with APS-C lenses if you are into video and have crop mode (outside A7Siii, FX9/FX6/FX3). Nikon Z9 is brilliant as well but you must always go after where are all the lenses you want and need and most mounts aren't as diverse and ready as E-Mount, ironically to Canon and Nikon that used to laugh at mirrorless and Sony.
I bought the R5 right when it came out and I have progressively gotten more and more frustrated by my purchase. Everything from the over-heating issue and how they resolved it to the lack of lenses, including the lack of third party options. I started my career on Nikon with a sigma lens. It legit jumpstarted my career as well. The game Canon is playing feels gross and makes me want to switch to another brand like Sony, even though I can afford Canon‘a lens now, and already own several.
This is exactly why I went with the A7IV over the R6. For me and many others, lens selection and support is the most important factor when it comes to buying a body.
Thank you Tony. I was deciding between Sony A74 or the Canon R5 and this makes the decision really simple. I'm going with Sony. I can afford good glass but competition is good as it keeps pushing Sony to bring the very best glass to the market. There is nothing to push Canon. Canon if you are reading this, you made a bad choice, good luck with that. Hello Sony, I will shortly be a new customer. P.s. Why not Nikon? I've owned many Nikons in the past and loved them, but your latest model is too big and heavy, and you cannot quite match the autofocus of the Sony. The future choices for me are Sony or Nikon and never Canon.
@WhistleBit Are you high on something. 😂
@WhistleBit LMAO.....I hope this is a joke.
Your gonna love the a7iv. Sony has come a long way
Canon requirements are higher than Sony hence higher cost. Canon cameras and lenses are all assembled and made in Japan for quality control. Sony does have cameras made in Japan but only there Pro-video equipment.
@@metasploitstudios2257 I don't do phone photography, but, was shocked to see a 20x30 inch i phone picture at a neighbours house. Every bit as good as my panasonic G9 produces.
Canon is really making me think about jumping to Sony for the longest time because of this issue. It's a sad situation.
I left Canon for Nikon in the 80s when they changed their lens mount to make it easier to accommodate the new autofocus feature. This caused anyone with a new camera body to have to buy all new lenses to fit the new bodies. In the 2000s they introduced APS-C lenses for the new digital cameras. These small sensor lenses would not mount on full-frame bodies so, again, customers had to buy all new lenses when they upgraded to FF. All this time Nikon made their lenses work on all their cameras. Is it any wonder Canon sells so many lenses. One thing you can always count on from Canon is they consider themselves number one and the customer will always be number two..
Nikon is blocking any 3rd party lenses that directly compete with lenses that Nikon is making.
Sony is blocking autofocus from working when a teleconverter is placed between a Sony body and a 3rd party lens.
To me, Sony is the least bad of the 3, but all are extremely anti-consumer.
Totally agree with you, Tony! For most of my photography "career" (I'm more of a "serious hobbyist" than a professional) I've enjoyed using Canon point-and-shoots, Rebels, 7D's, etc. But when I upgraded from my Canon DSLR to mirrorless about a year ago, I switched to Sony. One of the big reasons why? Sony has an abundance of third-party professional quality glass available. I was able to get an A7 iii and Sigma 24-70 f2.8 for roughly $2,000 less than the Canon equivalent. As much as I enjoyed Canon cameras, for someone who's not a professional, that was far too much to be able to justify. I know that at the time I upgraded the RF system was still relatively new but I had a feeling that it would be quite a while (if ever) before Canon let third-party manufacturers sell autofocus lenses - which as it turns out looks to be the case. Now I'm more than happy with my Sony setup, and Canon has essentially lost me as a customer.
@WhistleBit LOL
@WhistleBit Guess who make the sensor... ah, yes, sony lmao
@WhistleBit You have no clue about what you are talking about, so fun.
I know so many photographers who switched to Sony pretty recently, and one big reason for all of them was there's SO much more lenses to choose from.
I wonder how a company like Canon is thinking to survive in the future without the strong support of third-party lens manufacturers for their system.
Pretty sure there is way more canon glass. Especially when you can seamlessly use EF glass on which goes back to 1987. Lol
@@southerncharity7928 That's the problem, they are aging glass.
I think so too - perhaps since I am one of those who have made the switch
@@southerncharity7928 Well, as already Tony is explaining in this video, adapting old SLR glass is anything else than a 100% replacement for dedicated mirrorless lenses.
The price of 10 bit video has kept me away from Sony. I have a Panasonic gh6 and really love it for both stills and especially video and now with internal prores at all video resolutions it's just a fabulous option.
I'm an engineer and always look for inexpensive compatibility. I bought a 6D a few years ago because it was the cheapest full frame body that I could find at Costco. It came with the nice kit L lens that was great for learning. Now I feel more comfortable with my kid photos. I'm not a professional or live from photography, it's simply a tool to record my kids life. But I've had a growth in my artistic skills and now I take photos of my kids from the stand point of a street photographer. Sometimes I do really real street photography 🤣. So I've been looking for and buying vintage lenses that give me new looks and styles. Even now I'm looking for something affordable that can just wow people. So blocking my ability to do the same after my 6D dies will just keep me from buying into the R series. I'm sure I can continue buying old 5D MII until I pass LOL.
I feel actively deceived!
Canon apparently intentionally hesitated to clearly communicate their policy on the now supposedly exclusive RF mount, keep it vague so that people believe what was well established in the EF system would continue with RF - 3rd party lens availability.
I fully expected the new mount to be 'open' for third parties to manufacture lenses for as well.
Not for one second did I think that the RF mount would be a closed system when purchasing my R5!
Having been with Canon for 25 years I was used to the EF mount being "open" as in allowing others to manufacture lenses for it. I was aware that Canon didn't actively share they protocol for AF like Sony did, but that's it.
I held out until the R5 arrived and then I told myself "finally, that looks pretty good".
I actively decided to stay with Canon for many years not only but also BECAUSE OF the much broader ED lens choice also from 3rd party makers. I was certain the same would continue for RF mount. Until then I'd keep using my EF glass and slowly transition when needed.
I feel actively deceived and thus ripped off by Canon because they did NOT publicly state their mount was gonna be closed to third party. Instead they said nothing and allow few AF lenses like the Samyang AF 85mm F1.4 RF to exist and be sold for quite some time. I accuse them for actively deceiving everyone by allowing these sales to continue for some time so that a lot of people kept buying RF cameras who expected the 3rd party vendors would broadly enter the RF lens market any time now. If Canon did harshly force this issue two years ago and people were aware of their stance before the R5 and R6 even got announced, I'm sure I wouldn't have purchased another Canon camera.
I would have guessed though that due to 'common law' their vagueness on the issue could be seen as deceitful to the customers.
No matter the legal implications, if they remain and enforce their position on their RF lens exclusivity I'm done with them.
I'll give them half a year to come to their senses. Let's see how this plays out!
@WhistleBit I own a Samyang 85mm F1.4, it has autofocus and works great...
I agree with every single word
I agree, Canon has every right to prevent 3rd party lens manufacturers from developing RF glass. Canon also has every right to charge extravagant prices for crappy quality RF glass. Canon also has every right to treat customers who spent a fortune investing in the RF system with the utmost arrogance thinkable.
Canon should not forget that at the end of the day customers have every right to choose what they want to buy down the road.
nice statement, dude.
the rf isnt crappy though?
Canon's RF glass is generally excellent... Class leading and innovative. Nothing crappy about it. Arguably, their RF lenses are the best Canon has ever made, and that's saying a lot.
But much of it is also pricey.
Not all... There's some reasonably priced stuff, too. And they cover the "necessities" pretty well. Even so, there are a lot of gaps in the system, which 3rd party manufacturers could full, at least temporarily.
But, other manufacturers are making great glass, too. Sony has been upgrading a lot of their lenses lately. Nikon has always been a superb lens maker. Even 3rd party like Sigma and Tamron are probably making the best they ever have, plus there are some new 3rd party makers producing excellent stuff.
RF glass is excellent but for the quality. I own 3 L class RF lenses out of which 2 have serious quality issues. I wonder if it is only me with an average of only .333. Am I just unlucky? I do not think so. I am ready to look seriously into alternatives.
“crappy quality RF Glass”?? I own 8 RF lens
All are exceptional, what RF lens are you using ?
Killing the third party glass market puts me out of the canon scene. Yikes!
Being a wedding photographer the Canon RF system always seemed highly appealing to me. I‘m a Fuji user and I always will be. But sooner or later I will also start getting a FF system just because of the better low light capabilities. I have been tiptoeing around the R6, since I have already tested it and I loved the overall experience. Not having third party options at all absolutely makes this a non starter for me.
I‘m pretty sure that Canon will regret this decision in the near future. Nikon is catching up and if Panasonic comes out with a phase detect AF camera Canon will lose market shares.
I am excited to see what the next gen Panasonic FF will bring when they update their AF tech
This is also the same story for me! Moving from Fuji to FF for the same reasons, was about to buy 2x Canon R6's and have just bought 2x Sony A7 IV. I would have preferred
to go the Canon route, but not at those lens prices and I refuse to use an adaptor and carry large DSLR glass. Canon are shooting themselves in the foot.
@@edwinmccracken2686 Canon requirements are higher than Sony. Canon cameras and lenses are all assembled and made in Japan for quality control. Sony does have cameras made in Japan but only there Pro-video equipment.
I've been using Fuji for a year and I love it 💕💕✨
This is insane. I actually thought as Canon was basically migrating everyone to RF they'd allow 3P lenses on so people could get cheap "starter" lenses while Canon would make the premium expensive ones. Instead they're just locking down the mount and only allowing native glass.
And the native glass isn't so premium either
I started with a Canon AE-1 and followed the company up to the R5 Mark ll. But the it was time for a change, because the cameras lacked longer video record times and lenses became too expensive for the given quality. Today I own three SONY cameras. The FX-3 being the most expensive. Canon could have had all the alpha 7 users if the had listened to their customers.
I have an R5 and love it. However, if I had known that I would not be able to buy 3rd party lenses for it I probably would have gone with Sony. I "assumed" and was wrong. Too much invested now to change. However, when recommending gear to friends I will point out this "BIG" IMHO (Opinion) drawback. Thanks for the video. Keep up the good work!
I honestly love the RF glass, I shoot canon since I started, love the colours I get from them I own a R, a R6 and I pre ordered an R7 2 days after the release and it never came in stock, neither my store or canon had any clue about when it would be available. (ok pandemic etc...)
But what kills it, Like you said I am also so frustrated to see other mounts getting cool new glass, I am building a business and don't have much money to buy RF pro options I do get good results with EF canon or 3rd party but I can tell the difference when it come to image stabilization and image quality (even my variable aperture 24-105 RF is better in studio than the older EF lenses).
I needed a 3rd body quickly so I've cancelled my pre-order and ordered myself an A7RIII, got a really good results with the samyang 24-70 and a viltrox 85 II, I'm now considering building a Sony ecosystem over making investment into canon pro glass.
My father pre-ordered the R7 in May, he was supposed to have it in mid-june. Fast forward to today, he still hasn't received it and he just learnt the news about lenses.
He's cancelling his pre-order and switching to Sony.
I am so glad I found this video! I just ordered my first Canon mirrorless last month. To save a couple bucks I got a refurbished one directly from the Cannon website. Unfortunately, it was DOA. Their customer service was good, but made me go back to the drawing board on cameras as that one was no longer available. As a non-professional, low cost lens options are critical as I won't be investing $10k in my setup. Really appreciate this info.
Such an important video, thanks Tony.
I’ve been longing for some of the tasty third party glass we see on Sony like the Sigma 35 1.2, the new 24 1.4 etc, it gets so many people into the camp and allows them to consider going name brand at a later date.
I love native RF glass, being lucky enough to own the 85 1.2, the 50 1.2 and the 70-200 2.8, but would love to see some better value options especially in the wide angles!
If I had known this a month ago, I doubt I would've upgraded to my R5. Sure, I run L-glass for the more serious stuff, but not having the possibility to get a less expensive 3rd party lens for trying out new styles of photography that I'm not willing to spend thousands of dollars on just yet ... yeah, that sucks. Sure, I can still buy EF-glass and run with an adapter, and maybe I will, but I shouldn't have to.
I tried the Sigma EF 35mm f/1.4 and while I liked the results, the adapted combo was not what I was looking for. I'm planning to rent the RF 35mm from Canon, but it's not a tremendously exciting lens-and when they do release a premium 35mm prime, I doubt it'll be affordable...
@@ColinRobertson_LLAP You can bet your house the RF 35mm 1.2/1.4 will be EXTREMELY expensive.
I've been researching my next camera body upgrade and Canon has been in strong consideration up until now. If I can't get third party glass, that puts them near or at the bottom of the list for me. If Canon isn't giving serious consideration to how many photographers are going to avoid Canon bodies because of this decision, then they're making a serious error.
It makes me genuinely upset i bought a R6. I had some EF glass to adapt and was looking forward to when RF 3rd party stuff released to fill out the rest of my arsenal. I'm considering selling off my kit and switching over to sony soon. I had my eye on that 28-70 F2 and was saving for it - an amazing canon 1st party lens. But now i won't be picking up anything else for the RF or EF mount.
@WhistleBit Are you paid by apple to spread such non sense ? If not, this is sad
This is the very reason I transitioned to Sony. It was difficult to make the decision (who wants change?), but very glad I did. Not only do I feel I can get quality glass from 3rd party lenses, but I learned the transition was much easier than I thought it would be. Canon has good gear, but so does Sony.
I left Canon because Believed they didn't support or were interested in a photographer like me. My main body is now a Sony A7RIV. I have two Sony and two sigma lenses.
For street and a light pocketable camera I have a compact Fuji rangefinder style body and a couple of lenses. With the X-H2(s) Fuji now bosses the crop frame segment.
As a solution / set up this really works for me. I couldn't recreate the set up for the same money with Canon.
Great video Tony, you hit the nail on the head in this one. I'm really confused when I see people defending Canon here, and saying it won't affect them because they don't buy sigma lenses, which is just false. Lack of competition will affect everyone, including Canon themselves. This is not a minor issue and there needs to be a discussion about this.
A couple of months ago I was comparing full frame options. I’ve always had Canon gear and didn’t care for some of Sony’s design decisions in the past. However, I just couldn’t swallow the cost of Canon’s RF lenses and noticed that Tamron wasn’t offering any RF options, so I looked at dozens of comparison reviews that ruled out Nikon (likely also the same 3rd party lockout) and chose the Sony A7IV plus Tamron lenses (I could have adapted the EF lenses but there isn’t a weather sealed adapter for Sony and there were reports of adapted lens performance hits). I’ve been truly amazed at the image quality and the ease of switching to Sony from Canon. If there was rumor of Canon letting in 3rd party lens manufacturers, then my choice may have been different. Canon lost a customer.
I am researching in photography for about a week now, because I am very interested in it and today I felt like it could be a hobby for my life. I am collecting as much information as I can before I am investing in it and I have to say that these facts make me feel bad about investing in a canon body.
Thanks for making this video.
This video comes just in time for me. It is finally time to upgrade from my 7D Mark II but now with this news I doubt I will be going with Canon since lenses like the sigma 18-35mm f1.8 is a staple in my bag. Historically I had bought 5 Canon DSLR bodies and st least 7-8 L lenses and a handful of Sigma lenses. Time to look at the Sony or Nikon systems I suppose. Huge mistake Canon!!
Go for sony. Im using canon for last 10 years and very much disappointed with their monopoly
I was thinking about converting to Canon RF because of the great Canon line-up. But hearing this, I think it is a deal breaker.
Yes, don’t do the mistake several of us did. Choose Sony if third party lenses are important for your work
Hearing what? Literally zero information. Tony has turned into a hack yelling at the clouds.
Do you have the correct place to contact Canon? If you could drop the proper email/mailing address to address "complaints/concerns" with their products, that would be great.
(I tried finding this online- didn't find what seemed to be the correct recipient.)
Been a Canon guy for 20 years. Recently serious consideration for going with Sony. This might be the nail in the coffin, as I've been looking at the R7 lately, but maybe not if this is Canon's future.
Wait for an a6xx refresh before you purchase is what I would suggest
For some of us, its just a hobby and we have to make compromises when looking at all the components of a camera, from the batteries, chargers, body, lens through to the flash and other accessories. I love my canon camera, but I can't afford the pro lenses and this just prices me out of the market. I really was considering staying with canon for my next camera, because of the compatibility of the gear I already own, but if there is no option for less expensive sharp lenses then I would seriously question whether Canon is the right choice.
Canon EF 70-200 f/4 L IS II USM vs RF 70-200 f/4 L IS. RF version is not lighter but more compact. Pulled out to 200 its approximately the same length. Well, I prefer internal zoom - of course I would love to have the compactness. When it comes to the AF, some reviews state that RF glass is a tat faster... not exactly sure about that, may be reasonable. However, there is fantastic EF glass out there and the adapter works like a charm. Its rather the other way round, older EF glass gets new life breathen into it when used on a mirrorless.
That said: I would love to see third party glass, e.g. a Sigma 35 f/1.4 ... that would be so nice.
For me this is a deal breaker plain and simple. Happily I make my living in the IT world and photography is a passion - I am, you may say, an advanced amateur who has bought tons of new & used camera equipment. Although my main focus is film I love my weird and wonderful new Chinese & Japanese lenses to go with my Sony mirror less systems. I also have a bunch of East & West German 30's & 40's glass which I treasure. Since I started off as a Canon user and still enjoy my EOS Elan 7 systems I had thought about buying one of Canons new cameras but now that isn't gonna happen. There is no way that Canon can ever provide the lens options for their new cameras that Sony can. It is a business decision and they will either profit or be hurt by it. In the IT world I learned to like "open source" and if Canon is now a "closed source" system them I'm out. So sad, too bad, time to move on -
Im a canon shooter and was looking to upgrade from a dslr to mirrorless but im having second thoughts now being on a budget.
I was at WexPhoto/Calumet considering upgrading from a 5D Mk4 to the new R5 or R6 and they implied I could use my old L series lenses with a ring adaptor. I've not looked into it to see if there is any cropping or negative sides to this yet though.
Canon has a lot of really slow lenses in the RF line. I was hoping for less expensive but much faster lenses from, say, Sigma.
I have only bought my R6 last year which was a huge upgrade that I’m really happy with, even though I only got a 24-70 EF due to the crazy RF lens prices.
But at the time I already got really annoyed with Canon for apparently preventing adobe to release profiles for CR3.
And now they prevent third party lenses? Not cool!
If they patented it, why not license it to others? That will make them some money while still potentially opening up good optics for smaller budgets.
Does your 24-70EF give a better image on your R6 than it did on the DSLR you upgraded from? If it does why bother ever getting RF glass anyway when any noticeable difference maybe not worth the thousands of dollars to upgrade.
I understood the problem with cr3 colors is just Adobe. I know many people using DxO PureRAW to deal with noise and colors before heading into Adobe. Personally I'm using DxO PhotoLab instead of Adobe.
When I began with DSLR photography around 2005, I went for Canon. I've had the 10D, 350D, 400D, 450D, 70D, 7D, 5D, 5DII, 6D and so on bodies. But when I bought my first mirrorless, the Sony NEX-3 when it came out in 2010, I immediately fell in love with the smaller form factor and the abilities it offered. I've had 5N, A5100, A7II, A6400, A7RII, A7III, etc. and in the meantime I've sold all the Canon gear I've had (the bodies and lenses such as 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, 200L f2.8 II, 85 f1.4, etc.) around 2015. Third party lenses made Sony more affordable with up-to-date lenses. They make the whole market competitive and nowadays you can get a lens of your taste/habit/needs. When Canon and Nikon and the rest came out with their mirrorless systems it looked like there is a possibility to ever change my set to a different brand. But with such an inconvenient draw, I have lost - and I think a lot of other people too - my interest in Canon forever (or at least for a long period). If they behave like this, that would make their system less interesting for many people and that's not really helping with their market share. Versatility (and price of course) has a big impact at what system we all choose.
I’ve done a few videos on this over the last 2 years and after the info from the last 2 weeks I think it’s time to move on from Canon. I have really enjoyed my R5 but I don’t think I’m willing to be ok with Canon selling their L glass for SOOO much more than Sonys flagship equivalent and not allowing 3rd party. Now Canon is flat out bullying these companies. I think it’s time to move on to Sony.
Sony might have a crap rep for software updates and anti-consumer practices, but at least the ecosystem is somewhat healthy. I am rocking a Sigma 28-70 and it's really my dream combo for 80% of all the situations. I can't imagine doing that with just Sony glass.
@@piotrgraniszewski8544 Mostly everyone that I know that shoots Sony has more Sigma glass than Sony glass LOL
@WhistleBit: I watched that conference. They claim 50% gain in low light capabilities! Meanwhile big cameras have been stagnant for years and stacked sensors are even slightly worse than normal BSI ones when it comes to image quality.
Canon requirements are higher than Sony hence higher cost. Canon cameras and lenses are all assembled and made in Japan for quality control. Sony does have cameras made in Japan but only there Pro-video equipment.
@@Davitor1: which is why I prefer Sigma lenses.
This is eye opening. I've been a long time Canon user, started with an AE-1. Had the 7d and now use the 7d2 and was ready to upgrade to mirror less. Actually in been thinking of getting the R6, my first full frame camera. I like the low light capabilities. Maybe I should rethink my next purchases. If I have to start over with lenses...
I started with an AE-1 as well. When I converted to digital the decision was what model of Canon to get. My wife and I have bodies several times over the years . I use a 60D and she has a full frame. Our lense collection is a mix of Canon and third party lenses. We are thinking about getting a mirrorless body. If Canon doesn't allow anyone else to make RF lenses, it doesn't make sense to continue with Canon. Sony, with an open source mentally, does make sense. Sony will have a new customer.
You're making an excellent point. Third-party lenses are great for consumers, but some camera makers are not that happy about them. They look at the "total lifetime revenue" from a consumer and third-party lenses eat away from it.
Question as to the preamble to your video - how the Canon "trinity" was priced out of your range. Would more affordable prime lenses be a good path (as they typically create great photo and are rather fast at a lower pricepoint), or did you need a zoom?
Sigma glass in particular has always stood out to me as being the same if not better in some cases. Especially with the art line up.
I am retired and really enjoy my photography. I have a DSLR (Canon 80D) and mostly Tamron lenses because I cannot afford the more expensive Canon lenses. I was thinking to upgrade to the new R7 but will not if the only R lenses are Canon. I was wondering why Tamron was not announcing lenses for the R series (they have Sony versions) and now I know why. Thanks Tony for your timely info.
Two weeks ago I was about to purchase a Canon EOS M50 II, as an amateur upgrading from an Olympus E620 I thought this was a good choice. I have now, after seeing this and other RUclips clips, decided that I had made the wrong choice, so I have purchased a Fujifilm X-T200. Thank you Tony & Chelsea for the heads up about the lens issue.
I've owned 2 Canon cameras (T3i and now a M50), but never Canon glass except the kit lens. But 3rd party let me put more budget into getting a better body at the time. But after their misstep on EOS M and now this, the M50 will be my last Canon body. And this comes as strictly a hobbyist, which Canon apparently doesn't want as a customer.
Intel stopped AMD, Zilog, Cyrix etc from selling Intel socket compatible CPUs.
You can always buy AMD motherboards with AMD sockets if you want to buy AMD CPUs.
Intel did NOT want to go bankrupt.
Same with Canon. Go and buy other camera bodies if all you want is to use NON-Canon lenses.
I started with 3rd party glass(Sigma/Tamron) along with the Canon kit lenses. I couldn't afford Canon L glass - until within the last 5 years. I have had 3rd party for 20 years until last year where I sold my last piece. Always been a Canon shooter and have images printed/published over a million times a month. I mentor dozens of people and they have all bought 3rd party based on my referral. I have converted/convinced to stay with over a dozen people to Canon just in the past year. Most of these people only have 3rd party glass, but long - as I did - for white lenses to be mounted on their bodies. But for now, 2 or 3 good lenses spanning a broad range of focal lengths are better portfolio builders than just 1 great one. I wouldn't have gotten where I am today without the 3rd party options.
Intel refused to go bankrupt so stopped AMD, Zilog, Cyrix etc from selling Intel socket compatible CPUs
Same with Canon.
Sony owns 15% of Tamron. Sigma makes own cameras.
Why should Canon license RF mount to UNFAIR competitors?
Great video Tony, appreciate the candour. I will say this, I had two R5's and an R6 and an R. I've been with Canon for over a decade. After the overheating, the 30 minute record limit on prosumer cameras (R5 and R6), I honestly had enough and sold everything Canon and moved to Sony, never thought I'd say this, but Sony has been nothing but a blessing. Super happy with it, no record limit, beautiful image (especially from the later models), higher DR and just so intuitive to use.
i felt the same, bought a canon m50 with the intent of going into the canon ecosystem via efm-ef adapter and glass but after the last shenanigans over the past 2 years i went to sony and couldnt be happier.
@@baqcasanke seems to be most people these days bro
I’m really getting tired of seeing all these new great lenses in my price range and sadly knowing that I won’t be able to take advantage of any of them. This is really making me think me think about selling all my canon gear and going to Sony. Not for now but for the future.
With the outrageous prices of the rf native lenses and banning of third party, canon is setting itself up for a monumental fall.
Intel stopped AMD, Zilog, Cyrix etc from selling Intel socket compatible CPUs. Did Intel set itself up for a monumental fall?
Third party can always make their own motherboards and own sockets.
Third party lens makers should make their own Camera bodies...
Yeah Canon's f2.8 line up is a massive $200 more that Sony's GM offerings.
@@Ramage7070 Sony sacked 20,000 workers in Japan and closed down their lens factory. So Sony's GM offerings are most probably just rebadged cheap lenses since Sony owns 15% of Tamron.
@@set3777 All lens brands have manufacturing elsewhere. Like Olympus made by Sigma or something like that. Zeiss has some lnenses made in a Japanese subsidiary. Basically one doesn't have one's own manufacturing these days. But Sigma does.
@@pizzablender Exclude Canon from your "ALL" conjecture.
Canon Cameras and their L lenses are made by Canon own factories in Japan. Some cheaper Canon lenses made by Canon own factories in Taiwan and Malaysia.
I’ve been using Canon gear since the 70’s when I became my schools Photography. From an AE-1, A-1, 50D, 7D and now the 7R based on the reviews here. I have my collection of EF glass, some L quality, great Tamron lenses.
I was assuming Canon would license the RF mount to sigma and Tamron. I started looking at going all RF mount and selling all my old gear.
That’s a 100% change. I’m still in my return window until October with Best Buy. Am I better to start clean with Sony?
I'd switch to Sony. I'll be switching from Nikon.
@@Salar_Sh The issue with Sony is that they don't seem to have anything that compares to the R7 for Sports photography in the under $2000 body range. The R7 with 15 FPS for the mechanical shutter is unmatched. You do have the smaller sensor and maybe an R6 Mark II if it was out, but the R7 right now has more FPS until you get to the top-of-the-line Canon R3 and the Sony 1. But those are over $5500. I'm not shooting for a living to afford that.
In shooting homecoming pictures this weekend it was interesting to see (at least in Lightroom on my Dell 33" 4K monitor) the images from my EF Tamron 17-50 F2.8 didn't look noticeably different than my new Canon RF 70-200 L F2.8. Though the Canon in FPS tests was way faster than the Tamron lens -- but that is 12-14 years old.
@WhistleBit I have the new iPhone 14 Pro Max and it is great. I used it alongside my R7 for Homecoming photos of our daughter and our grandsons playing soccer/flag football leagues. Having the intimacy of a great zoom lens, like the Canon RF 70-200 isn't possible with any phone.
I was thinking of upgrading from my M50 to the R7, but now I think I’ll wait and see. Apparently Canon isn’t really interested in the hobbyist photographer market. Sony or Nikon are starting to look like a better option.
I was in the same position for a couple of years. I waited for the M50 mkII with more pixels (didn't happen). Then the rumoured M7 with specs similar to M6 mkII but with dual card slots. Again, didn't appear, but the R7 did. I decided that if I had to buy full-frame glass, I might as well own a full-frame camera. I now own a Sony A7IV, with Viltrox 85mm f1.8 mkII and Samyang 35mm f2.8 to use while I save for a Sony 200-600. I got the 33mp sensor I wanted. I got dual card slots. I got a lot of clever video stuff I may never need, but I also got to choose what lenses I fit. Imagine buying a car off Canon and only being allowed one brand of fuel to be used in them because of how much money they spent on developing their engine? That ain't gonna work longterm. It may not work short term either.
Before the pandemic, the M50 was the best selling camera in Japan, and very popular elsewhere. It was small, as were/are the lenses, all of which made the APS-C based "M" system easily affordable. Now Canon believes it can push its customer base to a full frame mount and with the cost of more expensive full frame lenses. That would be bad enough, but to limit choice on which lenses too? Doesn't seem like a winners strategy.....
Or even (gasp) Pentax/Ricoh. Still shooting with an ancient K10D over 44,500 shutter actuations with some nice lenses. 70-200mm f2.8, 28-70mm f2.8, a few 50mm f1.7, 85mm f1.4, 28mm f2.8.
Yes one day I'll buy a new camera, but it is still going strong touch wood.
Canon are just trying to maximize the after-market lens sales.
It is a very anti-competitive means of doing business. They will lose a lot of prospective buyers into the Canon user base.
Does the Canon R5 not accept the T-mount system to mount any lens or has that feature been removed from the R series?
Absolutely spot on. Thanks for making it loud. I do think that part of EF success were third party lenses, and definitely same for e mount. Rf without 3rd party glass can't be recommended. I am locked with canon due to all my EF and RF glass, but I can't recommend it to a starting photographer. I actually see myself building new setup around emount (RF glass is so expensive that this is financialy viable option). I am not so sure about Nikon, there aren't many z mount lenses.
Just switched from Canon to Nikon. You can actually use EF and sony E mount glass and F mount glass all with adapters. And the AF on all of the adapters is actually very good if you buy the right ones. Fringer EF adapter, Megadap ETZ21 E mount adapter and of course the official Nikon FTZ adapter. But there aren't many native Z mount options.
Just remember the most important rule, you pay crap you get crap.
I'm heavily vested with Canon. I started with Canon in 1995 with a Rebel II and a kit lens. I moved up to an Elan 7E while dreaming of the A2E and EOS1. Today, in my camera bags are the 7dMkII, 5dMkII, 5dMkIV, EOS R and was considering either an R7 or R5. My lenses include EF 24-70f2.8 L, EF 70-200f2.8L, 50mm f1.4 USM, 18-135 IS STM (bought for a hike), 100-400 f4-5.6L, and the 500mm f4 L IS II. I also have Canon couple of 600 RT flash units. Pricing of the RF mount lenses has been an issue for me. They simply want too much for the RF glass. Is it better? Perhaps in a lab test. I have always been a vocal champion for Canon to newcomers to the hobby and craft. I always felt that they offered more at the entry level and put things in an attainable price point for beginners. I got into photography in 90s. Canon's ability to use EF mounts on film and early digital and then across full and crop sensors made sense. They are losing their way. If they can't make their products more affordable, then they at least need to provide a means to newcomers to be able to afford lenses. That means allowing third party lens makers to make RF mount lenses. They are being shortsighted when they should be playing the long game. I think many of us thought Sony would show-up, play a few rounds, make a half hearted effort and then exit the game. Sony is proving itself to be playing the long game. Canon cannot think of itself as Leica. Why? How many Leica owners do you know and if you do know some, how extensive of a kit do they have? My guess is few and limited.
12:50 yes! I can't think of a single canon ef lens that doesn't have horrible astigmatism or coma for astrophotography. or at least not one that compares in value to sigma/samyang's offerings. newer RF are much better but for anyone still on an older canon DSLR shooting astrophotography, we know the importance of third party glass. sigma 40mm f1.4 for example is one of the BEST lenses ever made.
"Canon is competing against itself..." I think you hit the jackpot here! Canon is on it 3rd gens of mirrorless bodies, but it has yet to complete its mirrorless lens lineup. The question is why? One possibility is the Canon's DSLR and EF lines are probably competing against its mirrorless platform. Now, Canon mirrorless users will have no choice but to rely on EF lenses via adapter to get the jobs done. It's very unlikely anyone would leave a system after spending several grants on a body just because... Canon wants to keep the DSLR market alive for as long as possible while keeping their mirrorless users at bait.
Another company who was scared of competing with itself was Kodak. We all know what happened to them.
I feel totally BETRAYED, and taken advantage of.. I am an Amateur Photographer who has bought an R5, R6 AND an R7... I have been looking forward to seeing what goodies Tamron, Sigma et al were going to produce for the RF mount. My two favourite wildlife lenses were the EF100-400, and my trusty Tamron 150-600. Now I find that my Tamron doesn't reliably focus on the RF bodies, and Canon have closed the door on a Tamron successor. I have been jealously watching the never ending parade of E mount Quality glass for Sony, and an equal amount for Nikon and others, and now we're told that we're stuck with a few very good, but over priced RF lenses. OK Canon...You won't catch me twice...I'm out of here!
First off Tony.. thank you for making this video.
Dear Canon.. you're a great company and you make great cameras for both video and photo. You don't need to corner the market on your lens mount to maintain being one of the greatest camera companies in the history of planet Earth. Please really think hard about this decision. Between your ease of use, your color science, your internal codecs and autofocus, you are truly an amazing company and produce a one of a kind product. Let the RF glass stand on it's own with the level of quality and native mounting it provides. Let the market decide which lenses are best for the RF mount, whether they be from Canon or a third party, and if Canon's RF glass suddenly doesn't become the superior choice for the RF mount, let that be the catalyst for pushing your lens production even further for quality and color.
Canon requirements are higher than Sony hence higher cost. Canon cameras and lenses are all assembled and made in Japan for quality control. Sony does have cameras made in Japan but only there Pro-video equipment.
I know I felt burned by canon when I was a kid buying my first camera back in the 80's when they switched to the EF mount. That bad experience was a factor in not choosing Canon when I re entered the world of photography decades later. Seeing things like this makes me so glad I never went back to canon. I'd never choose platform that didn't allow me the option of third party gear.
The FD to EF move was resonably because it gave Autofokus (basically not doable with FD)
@@mbr5742 Actually Canon`s T80 and T90 supported AF with FD lenses. These FD lenses had an AF motor in them and electrical contacts. But the lenses were quite bulky trying house the AF motor. Also not commercially viable very few AF FD lenses were made.
There were FD to EF adapters just like there are EF to RF adapters. Both moves to a new mount were reasonable and the EF mount lasted extremely long. Kicking 3rd parties out of the RF mount is their first major mistake regarding their mounts so far.
@@hvacguy84 And needed batteries in the lens IIRC
@@mbr5742 Canon has been through most lens mounts in their history. The S Mount Screw mount (1946-64), The R Mount (1959-63) Canon's first breech lock system. The FL Mount (1964-74) The FD Mount Gen 1 (1970-79). The New FD Mount (1979-89). The EF Mount (1987- Present) Canon's first bayonet lens mount.
Recently purchased an R6. Had I known this I 100% would have gone with a different brand
One of the biggest reasons I went hard into Sony (several thousand in bodies alone at this point) was the range of lens choice.
One of the biggest reasons I will not even consider moving to Canon is a lack of choice.
Bad shortsighted move Canon. If it's about the money just license the patent like Apple does with Lightning and we can all move on.
I have been exclusively using Canon EOS bodies since my 1000 film camera back in the very early 90s. I have used a combination of Canon and Sigma lenses, as I can't justify spending thousands of pounds. I recently upgraded to an R6 (which I really like) and have been using my existing EF lenses with adaptors. However when it comes to replacing the lenses if I can only choose Canon lenses in future I will have to evaluate whether it's better to move to another system. So instead of buying a Canon camera and a couple of their lenses, with maybe 1 or 2 cheaper Sigma ones, I would likely be buying a Sony camera with a similar combination of lenses.
I purchased the canon R6 with RF 25-105mm f4 L lens and an EF-RF adapter 2 weeks ago before I viewed this video. I do use the adapter with my EF lenses including Canon's 16-35mm f4 L and Tamron's SP 70-300mm f4-5.6 both of which work faultlessly but I am devastated that canon is blocking third parties manufacturing RF lenses especially Sigma and Tamron that I use and have used in the past as quality cheaper alternatives. I am mainly a landscape/wedding photographer so generally using f8 up to f22 and found no problems tack sharp at 100%. The canon EF to RF adapter weighs in at around 100gms and adds 24mm to the lens length so no big deal but the 8 EF contacts are less than the RF's 12 so maybe some loss there?
Thanks for this video/report.
I've been researching my first full frame mirrorless - and this story coming out last week has lead to me learning about the Tamron 35-150mm wowzers. I had been ignoring Sony because of their annoying gatekeeping in the 90s (Beta, Memory Stick, MiniDisk etc) - turns out Canon's even more gatekeepy! Ha. So, good timing on the story, my budget goes way further on Sony.
Only reason I went for M43rds was this.
I had zero experience with camera but what I knew was lens will always have to be bought. And if I went for sony that's best autofocus I would loose if they just decide to gatewall me.
So m43rd with Panasonic olympus blackmagic Xiaomi etc... Were less likely to be at whim of one party
@@shritijdighe5506 lol what? Sonys lens mount is open to the public for free. So you’re saying you went m4/3 because you think at some point Sony may take that away? What makes you think m4/3 won’t do that? I’m not trying to be rude but I just don’t understand the logic..
@@mrwashur1991 i understand what you want to say and how you think I am being ridiculous right? . And yeah Sony is great and ethical too.
But I don't want to put all eggs in one basket.
Surely m43rd can also do what I said above.... But that would still leave 4 companies as producer for lens.
And yeah for M43rds to go that way would require consent of 3 bigshots... Not one.
And yeah that time I didn't knew sony was open.
But it could have been cannon instead..... Point is not specific company but the monopoly.
Did you ever imagined cannon doing this??
A few months ago I've upgraded from my first camera to R6, eagerly waiting for Sigma and Tamron to fill the "middle class" tier of lenses that I feel Canon just does not support whatsoever.
Sure, the L lenses are superb, yet an absolute majority of them is cost prohibitive for a hobbyist (and let's be fair, the only reason they cost so much is because there's literally no competition).
The non-L options are purposefully made with artificial detriments such as slow and loud autofocus, missing focus rings or mode buttons, variable and ridiculously slow aparatures, even a lens hood somehow becomes a 30 dollar accessory.
As far as I know the RF mount doesn't offer a single fast prime with a snappy internal AF that costs less than 2 thousand dollars.
I've been super happy with my R6 and just love the feel of Canon gear, but this kind of scammy approach honestly disgusts me. If nothing changes I might end up forced to change the systems like many others did.
Shame you bought something thinking the future would make it meet your needs. Sell the R6 and recoup your funds and buy something that is capable of meeting your needs now.
That really sucks, have been using Canon DSLR since 10D and have been thinking to go for RF-mount... But not anymore.
This kind of action by Canon makes me seriously think about switching to Sony. I did wonder why some 3rd party lenses we're available for Canon. Thanks for the investigation Tony!
Well I’ve made the mistake of recently investing in the R5 then. Photography is only a hobby for me and I’m already struggling to find the lenses I want. I’m literally going online to look at the cost of Sony and Nikon alternatives now.
Yep you bought the wrong camera thinking the future would make it meet your needs. No one to blame but you.
Some EF-S lenses are incompatible with EF bodies, by extending into the body, where the EF mirror would flip but the EF-S mirror don't.
Can third-party work arround the RF patent by making EF-mount lens to only be used with the EF-to-RF adapter, by using the cavity inside the adapter to extend lens elements closer to the sensor.
I have some EF lenses, some EF-S lenses and some third-party EF/APS-C,
I haven't found anything clear about using EF-S with adapter to RF camera.
Will it work with all EF-S lenses?
Will it crop or vignette? I prefer vignette, then crop in post processing.
Very thoughtful and well said, I hope Canon will ease up their stance on it. I'm just scared that third party EF lenses and EF to RF adapters will not function as well as it did beforehand with hidden firmware updates, "bricking" my gear, and making them useless. That would be the worst move from them, but they are not that insane, right ?
Looks like they are already doing it. Some lenses like sigma 150-600mm has so many issues with canon r6 after flimware update.
@@arrowgaming1175 sigma has update the lens on RF bodies, either using Dock or get into their service centre
I'm an entry user and have been using my Sony 3N and Canon M50 all these years since their release and when I was researching into a new camera, I ended up crossing off Canon because they killed off the M series and really restricted the entry to RF/RF-S. I actually went with Fuji because I don't do post editing and just use jpeg sooc and post to my socials and use my fuji instax printer too. I may not be part of a big spending market segmentation but there are probably millions of us around the world that can add quick revenue to their bottom line. Sony definitely is the juggernaut that aimed at consumer and professional without alienating either. Fuji is a niche market that will be like Subaru in the automotive industry. Canon may end up being the next Pentax?
Thanks so much for this video. I'm a 45 year committed Canon user currently using a 6D Mark II that needs replacing. I was looking only at Canon R options for a replacement but am frustrated at the cost and low selection in the RF lenses. I'm now leaning toward the Sony A7 line as an alternative new system. Since I'll need to upgrade everything my brand commitment is less of a priority. Third party lenses have always had a place in my system even though I've used mostly Canon L lenses. The games Canon is playing lens compatibility and having a ridiculous number of R camera options is frustrating me. I'm ready to move on to something more simple and flexible.
Glad you addressed this issue Tony! I’ve been a loyal Canon user for well over 20 years & have been hesitant to buy third party glass because glass normally a lens outlived a camera body. It’s gotten to the point that I can no longer afford to pay these prices!! Recently I purchased a Fuji body & their newest glass. I must say I’m happy with my results, but their low light shooting isn’t the same. But clearly that’s a full frame vs crop sensor issue. I hate to say it but I’m looking at selling my Canon gear & switching to Sony! My question to Canon is what about my 20plus years of loyalty? Isn’t it worth anything? A new lens shouldn’t cost nearly 3K!!!!
The reality, I'm afraid, is that you're only a Canon customer at the point of sale. During the warranty period you're a potential liability. After the warranty has expired, you're nothing to Canon unless and until you're back at the sales counter and purchasing your next piece of Canon gear. :(
We're consumers, not customers to them. I keep forgetting.