Is Canon shooting themselves in the foot by blocking third party lens manufacturers?

Oct 6, 2022

John Aldred

John Aldred is a photographer with over 20 years of experience in the portrait and commercial worlds. He is based in Scotland and has been an early adopter – and occasional beta tester – of almost every digital imaging technology in that time. As well as his creative visual work, John uses 3D printing, electronics and programming to create his own photography and filmmaking tools and consults for a number of brands across the industry.

Is Canon shooting themselves in the foot by blocking third party lens manufacturers?

Oct 6, 2022

John Aldred

John Aldred is a photographer with over 20 years of experience in the portrait and commercial worlds. He is based in Scotland and has been an early adopter – and occasional beta tester – of almost every digital imaging technology in that time. As well as his creative visual work, John uses 3D printing, electronics and programming to create his own photography and filmmaking tools and consults for a number of brands across the industry.

Join the Discussion

Share on:

This is something I’ve been thinking about ever since word broke that Canon essentially ordered Viltrox to stop making autofocus RF mount lenses. In response, Viltrox didn’t just stop making autofocus RF mount lenses, but all RF mount products altogether. Samyang/Rokinon also seems to have faced a similar challenge from Canon last year when they pulled all of their autofocus RF mount lenses.

Is Canon potentially stifling their own growth amongst camera users by doing so, though? I think they probably are and I’m not the only one who thinks so. In a recent and rare opinion video, Christopher Frost made a number of good points about Canon’s potential place in the future mirrorless landscape and they align quite well with some of my own thoughts over the last few weeks.

YouTube video

Canon has historically been known as one of the most third-party compatible brands out there. In the DSLR days, you could adapt pretty much anything to Canon EF mount cameras. While adapting lenses to fit on EF mount had already been happening for a while, things really came to a head in 2008 with the release of the Canon 5D Mark II. Suddenly, we had a DSLR capable of shooting decent video. No, it wasn’t the first, that was the Nikon D90, but the 5D Mark II was the first to offer 1080p and full manual exposure control.

But Canon’s EF mount lenses at the time weren’t really all that great for video at the time. To be fair, most of the competition’s current model lenses at the time weren’t really designed for video, either because until that point, video hadn’t really been much of a thought when it came to designing photography lenses. Aperture control on most wasn’t great (Nikon had already begun ditching the aperture ring) and the manual focus rings of autofocus lenses also weren’t that accurate for things like pulling focus (not quite focus by wire, but not far off), so many people opted to use older manual focus lenses – particularly old Nikon AI lenses.

It was very easy to adapt pretty much anything to an EF mount body and the 5D Mark II became a huge hit, one of the biggest turning points in digital camera history. And the vast majority of those I knew at the time who’d switched from their bulky standard definition camcorders and broadcast style cameras to 5D Mark II bodies were doing so with adapted lenses.

Even for photographers, though, there was a pretty huge 3rd party lens market. Sigma, Tokina and Tamron were all fairly big players back then – especially in the lower budget markets – and many photographers I knew shot with “off-brand” EF mount lenses from those companies.

With the switch from DSLRs to mirrorless, things changed a little. Sony ditched their A mount DSLTs and went to E mount mirrorless with what was then a ridiculously short flange distance. The biggest complaint about Sony E mount in its early days (for at least 2 or 3 years) was the lack of lenses. But because of the short flange distance, it was easy to adapt pretty much anything to the E mount.

The most popular adaptation was Canon EF mount lenses due to their highly electronic nature. Nikon was still mostly mechanical back then, with a lever to control the aperture and a lot of lenses still requiring a focus motor in the camera itself and while you could mount them to Sony E bodies through adapters, you were pretty much 100% manual when it came to aperture and focus control (ideal for the video folks, though!).

The adaptability of Sony bodies, along with many third-party E mount lenses popping up on the market meant that Sony managed to not only get a serious foothold in the camera but became one of the top players, on par with the then dominant Nikon and Canon. Sony has since managed to catch up and has a wide array of their own brand OEM lenses. But there are still plenty of 3rd party lenses out there, with new ones being released all the time, and Sony is still succeeding just fine. Sony isn’t the only one, either. Canon EF mount lenses can also be adapted to Sigma/Panasonic/Leica L mount, Micro Four Thirds, Nikon Z and Fuji X, too.

Canon RF’s mount offers many of the benefits that Sony E did back then. It has the short flange distance, making it hypothetically adaptable to a great many older DSLR lenses and Canon even provides several adapters to let you mount your old EF mount lenses onto the new RF mount cameras. Canon also has the history, expertise and motivation to work on lenses relatively quickly.

The Canon RF mount system was announced in September 2018 with the launch of the Canon EOS R. Here we are, four years later and looking at the Canon UK website, we have 30 RF lenses. For the benefit of the average shooter, if we take out the extreme specialist lenses, like the 5.2mm f/2.8L dual fisheye and the super long (and super expensive) 400mm f/2.8L, 600mm f/4L, 800mm f/5.6L, 1200mm f/8L that only leaves us with 25 lenses. And several of those are sort-of duplicates. There are three 85mm lenses, a 100-400mm and a 100-500mm, a 24-70mm and a 28-70mm, two 24-105mm zooms and two 50mm prime lenses.

This doesn’t really leave a whole lot of variety. And, yeah, sure, you can adapt your EF mount lenses to the RF mount system, but Canon’s pretty much abandoned the entire EF mount ecosystem now. They’re not developing new lenses for it and I’d be surprised if they’re still actively making any EF mount lenses and not just letting existing stocks run out. Most 3rd party manufacturers now have also abandoned EF mount lenses – at least when it comes to autofocus ones – preferring instead to set their sights on mirrorless-specific lenses.

For example, Sigma, probably the largest third-party lens manufacturer on the market, has produced a lot of EF mount lenses over the years as part of their older lineup and their more recent Art series of lenses. Many of them are extremely popular and have been able to stick with photographers across different brands of cameras. But those old DSLR lenses don’t work as effectively as they could when adapted to mirrorless, so Sigma’s been working on their DG DN line to bolster their mirrorless lens lineup (and like everybody else, seemingly abandoned DSLR lenses). This is primarily for L mount cameras – Sigma is part of the L mount alliance – but they’re also releasing them for Sony E mount. No Canon RF (or Nikon Z for that matter) lenses exist from Sigma just yet, though.

Many photographers had been hoping that Canon’s RF mount ecosystem would be as adaptable and versatile as their EF system. And even though I’ve been primarily a Nikon SLR/DSLR shooter for the last couple of decades, I include myself in that group, too. I’m happy with my Nikon DSLRs but they won’t last forever and as they die off and I make the switch to mirrorless (for stills, anyway, I’ve already done it for video with Panasonic MFT), Canon was looking to be the route I’d likely go. It almost certainly won’t be Nikon, although not due to a lack of third-party lenses.

With the recent revelation of Canon’s attitude towards third-party lens manufacturers, though, especially given Canon’s own extremely limited RF mount lens lineup, my thoughts are starting to change. I am but one photographer, although I do currently own 15 Nikon cameras that will all eventually need to be replaced by (not-Nikon) mirrorless bodies and judging from the comments on Christopher’s video, I’m not the only one who’s been thinking this way.

With Sony already challenging Canon’s dominance in many markets, it seems like Canon should be doing everything it can to try to win back some of those old EF mount shooters who went E mount while waiting for Canon to even announce a full-frame mirrorless camera. Exactly what their line of thinking is, though, I’m not sure. I mean, I do get that they want people to buy Canon-branded lenses, but at what cost? If a customer chooses to go with a different company for their camera due to lens availability, they’re still not buying any Canon lenses. So, how does that help them?

I’m really hoping that Canon’s stance is simply a licensing issue and that one day (sooner rather than later) we’ll start to see some third-party autofocus lenses come for Canon RF mount cameras. Because the other option isn’t that great. If Canon’s completely closed off to the idea of any third-party companies ever making autofocus RF mount lenses, that’s going to severely limit Canon’s appeal until their RF mount lens lineup grows to be as large as their EF mount lens lineup used to be. And even then, the lack of third-party lens options will still put many potential customers off.

All I do know is that it’s unlikely I’ll be sticking with Nikon as I make my mirrorless transition and I don’t want to have to buy into Sony!

Has Canon’s decision to block third-party autofocus lens manufacturers affected your decision to buy into the RF mount system?

Filed Under:

Tagged With:

Find this interesting? Share it with your friends!

John Aldred

John Aldred

John Aldred is a photographer with over 20 years of experience in the portrait and commercial worlds. He is based in Scotland and has been an early adopter – and occasional beta tester – of almost every digital imaging technology in that time. As well as his creative visual work, John uses 3D printing, electronics and programming to create his own photography and filmmaking tools and consults for a number of brands across the industry.

Join the Discussion

DIYP Comment Policy
Be nice, be on-topic, no personal information or flames.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

25 responses to “Is Canon shooting themselves in the foot by blocking third party lens manufacturers?”

  1. dracphelan Avatar
    dracphelan

    I was seriously considering switching to RF next year. But, Canon blocking third party lenses changed my mind.

  2. Anthony Kerstens Avatar
    Anthony Kerstens

    Hopefully Canon changes their direction on this. If they want to protect IP they could just license the mount and collect fees per lens manufactured. The current direction is just pissing people off. How many people have had a ton of fun adapting old glass to Canon EF?

    Look at Beta vs VHS. Which format survived that?

  3. Anthony Kerstens Avatar
    Anthony Kerstens

    Hopefully Canon changes their direction on this. If they want to protect IP they could just license the mount and collect fees per lens manufactured. The current direction is just pissing people off. How many people have had a ton of fun adapting old glass to Canon EF?

    Look at Beta vs VHS. Which format survived that?

  4. Arpe Avatar
    Arpe

    I’m not a Canon shooter, but this seems very short-sighted. I would be pissed off I did use Canon.

  5. Burt Johnson Avatar
    Burt Johnson

    I dropped Canon several years ago and switched to Sony, which is SO MUCH BETTER on so many levels. As such, this change does not really affect me now.

    However, if I were deciding which camera system to buy into now, the lack of third party lenses would very definitely be a heavy weight against that vendor. Given that Canon is no longer the best in any category, this limit would strictly knock them out of the running for me…

  6. Thomas Thomas Avatar
    Thomas Thomas

    I’ve been using Canon cameras for 15+ years, analog and digital SLRs and even an EOS M. They’re all good cameras and I’ve been very happy with almost all of them, but this might be the reason to finally make the switch to Sony or Fuji for my next kit, since I’d need to heavily invest into the RF-mount anyway. Sure, EF-lenses can be adapted to RF-mount, but it also works decently with any other mirrorless system, AFAIK. First Canon was late to the mirrorless market and can’t really compete with those who came earlier and now they’re completely ruining it for themselves. This will become a big problem for them, if they don’t find something else to stay (or become) competitive.

  7. Bathews Avatar
    Bathews

    I have been using Canon for over 44 years when I bought my first SLR Canon AE 1 in Japan but as they have now become bullies with there response to third party lens makers I am looking for a new camera maker. I have never been a Nikon fan just because of hand fit and settings access, never wanted a Sony for similar reasons, but as Canon has upset me so much I am now looking at Sony as my new camera system. Canon has lost another professional photographer and will lose more. A very short sighted and bad decision by Canon and in the long run they will pay for it.

  8. Tsets Avatar
    Tsets

    There’s something a bit off with Canon. They struck lucky with 5d and video and the c300 was amazing at the time. But through their weird attitude the totally lost the high end video to Sony with their fs7, fx9 and Venice, as the c300 mk2 was overpriced and clunky. Now that cameras are nothing but housing for a sensor and a bit of algorithm architecture, the mystique and folklore are extremely important in the success of a camera. I can see Fuji gaining ground on both manufacturers with their conservative approach.

  9. John Beatty Avatar
    John Beatty

    Yes, yes, and yes. Oh, and as a long time Canon user….yes.

  10. Jared Ribic Avatar
    Jared Ribic

    How many people complaining about what Canon is doing are iOS users?

    Isn’t it true that hardware to run iOS must be purchased from Apple?

    Don’t get me wrong, although I’m using all Canon lenses, I definitely see the benefit of being open to 3rd party lenses. But also don’t forget the closed architecture systems you already support each time you use an Apple product.

    Why is it OK for Apple, but a bad thing for Canon?

    1. Rick Baumhauer Avatar
      Rick Baumhauer

      I don’t think your analogy really works. Apple is a hardware manufacturer that uses its operating systems to differentiate their hardware from the rest of the market. Generally speaking, people buy Macs/iPhones/iPads because they like the OS, and have to buy Apple hardware to run it. (Also, Apple tried going the OS-licensing route in the 90s, and it almost put them out of business.)

      For your analogy to work, Canon’s lenses would have to effectively be the “operating system” that consumers buy a Canon camera to get access to, and that’s rarely the case. In the camera market, consumers buy into systems of bodies + lenses, with both playing a role in the decision, and having lower cost (or simply more esoteric) 3rd party lenses available generally adds to the attraction of the system. By limiting 3rd party lenses on RF, after allowing them for many years on other mounts, Canon is probably making it more likely that purchasers will go with another camera brand.

      I think there’s a better analogy: if you consider lenses to be analogous to 1990s computer applications, Canon is effectively turning themselves into 1990s Apple. Back then, one of the big considerations was whether you could get the applications you wanted/needed to run on whatever computing platform you were considering. Windows had more applications available, though Apple still had many of the most important (including Microsoft Office). If you could get all of your applications for the Mac, you’d be more likely to stick with Apple or buy in; if not, you’d be more likely to go with Windows. By the same token, if Canon currently has all the lenses that you think you’ll ever want available for RF, there’s no problem, but if there’s a lens you want that Canon doesn’t make (or if some of Canon’s lenses are too expensive for your budget), and it looks like they’re not going to let 3rd parties make lenses for their mount, you’re more likely to take a look at Nikon/Sony/Fuji/etc.

      1. Jared Ribic Avatar
        Jared Ribic

        I see your point. Regarding phones, I was thinking of someone with an Apple phone saying “I really like those new foldable screen phones I see other people using.” and realizing they can’t get that if they stick with iOS, because they’re limited to the hardware that Apple creates.

        But your analogy of the computer software in the ’90s makes sense too.

    2. Kaouthia Avatar
      Kaouthia

      Who says it’s ok for Apple? Louis Rossmann certainly doesn’t.

      https://columbianewsservice.com/2021/05/21/one-mans-fight-for-the-right-to-repair-broken-macbooks/

      And, no, I’m not an iOS user. :)

      1. Jared Ribic Avatar
        Jared Ribic

        Yeah, right to repair has been an issue with Apple for as long as I can remember. I’ve seen some Louis Rossmann videos and I completely agree with where he’s coming from.

        Definitely not saying it’s an OK thing to do (for Apple or Canon), I’m just trying to remind iOS users that they’re already supporting Apple doing the same thing they don’t want Canon doing.

        If Apple would finally switch over to USB-C on their iPhones, that would be something at least!

    3. Yo Momma Avatar
      Yo Momma

      I never traveled the Apple route for the very reason you outline.

  11. cycleguy55 Avatar
    cycleguy55

    I’ve been a Canon shooter for over 45 years. Getting ready to switch to mirrorless and was heading toward Canon, but their current position on restricting 3rd party lens manufacturers has me looking at other platforms. Sony, Nikon and Fuji all in play, with the most likely being Fuji.

    1. BlueBomberTurbo Avatar
      BlueBomberTurbo

      Ironically, Fuji had also blocked third parties until just recently.

  12. Yo Momma Avatar
    Yo Momma

    I’m challenged by this decision. I was in the process of helping my nurse friend move into the digital age. She doesn’t want cheap but not about to head to R5/R3 world, but would like the option to have a couple lenses and would prefer to stay with Canon since that’s what I shoot.. She certainly is not in the RF lens group of buyers, so the conundrum. I may have to point her to another brand maybe Sony.

    I have spent thousands and thousands on L series glass and own quite a few Canon DSLR cameras including a 1DX MK II, along with an M5, RP, and R5. But the only RF glass I own is the 24-105 F4. I’m retired now and certainly can’t afford to abandon all my L glass for the sake of saying I have RF glass. I think Canon is alienating new buyers with this move.

  13. vogateer Avatar
    vogateer

    I had been saving to buy an R6, but unless Canon changes their stance on third-party lenses, I’m not buying an RF body. It’s a real shame, too, because I have six Canon lenses for my 5D, including a few L lenses.

    Now I guess I have to look into switching to Sony. It’s so annoying that Canon is pushing me away with their vendor lock-in strategy.

  14. Allan Wilson Avatar
    Allan Wilson

    I already bought into the Canon RF system…just a couple of lenses, but $3500 worth. I had been waiting for Sigma and Tamron to offer some RF AF lenses for some other use cases since the canon brand rf lenses are really expensive. Guess that’s not going to happen. I’ve been watching the latest camera body releases from Sony to see if something comes out to coax me over to them. To me Canon is shooting themselves in the foot somewhat.

  15. DIYP community member Avatar
    DIYP community member

    Seeing as the RF mount can so easily take adapted lenses, in particular EF lenses with full autofocus, and there is such a HUGE range of EF lenses including third parties, I don’t really see this is a big deal

    1. BlueBomberTurbo Avatar
      BlueBomberTurbo

      You’re not getting the performance, image quality, or innovations of modern lenses. That’s the issue at hand.

  16. DIYP community member Avatar
    DIYP community member

    I won’t be surprised that next they’ll be leasing their equipment just like Adobe leases their software. Do I hear anti-trust suit?

  17. SpringfieldPhoto Avatar
    SpringfieldPhoto

    I took the chance and bought an R6. I have been using Canon for over 40years and have 2 %D Mk IVs but I wanted to start a move to mirrorless. The R6 is a good camera but the recent announcements regarding third part lenses have convinced me that I made a mistake. I have put my R6 up for sale and as soon as it is gone I shall be buying a Sony A7 IV. The reason for this is massive range of lenses available for many manufacturers and at multiple price points. Canons arrogant attitude is driving me away. The RF system doesn’t convince me to stay.

  18. Joe Avatar
    Joe

    What does the author mean, “In the DSLR days”? I know mirrorless cameras are popular, but we’re still in the DSLR days. Most consumers don’t know this, but DSLR cameras are still superior in many ways.