Out of the loop: why is Canon shunning third party lens makers?

I've known that Canon has told third party lens makers not to make lenses for RF mount. Why? Is Canon adopting Apple's philosophy?

Didn’t Fuji do the same thing? Keep their Mount “proprietary” for several years? Fuji, I think, just opened it up (others will correct me should I be wrong).

I’m guessing that why canon is doing this and Fuji did this is to capture the profit on as much glass as possible to make sure that they get back the R&D cost (and and acceptable profit) on the lens/Mount development. I would (pure guess). Think that canon will open the Mount to 3rd parties a few more years down the line (after they get a head start and have a significant line-up already established). I can see the long-term wisdom of this decision as well as the short-term ill-will created with customers.

no, Zeiss announced fully official X-mount AF lenses ( Touit ) back in September 2012 - just few months after first X-mount dSLM camera from Fuji was announced ( March 2012 )

was the rumor about Meike "official" RF AF mount lens already busted ?!

www.canonrumors.com/meike-launches-the-af-85mm-f-1-4-autofocus-lens-for-the-rf-mount/

Hmmmm.

I remember those Zeiss lenses. Did they reverse engineer them?

This article implies that two of the large brands could not “crack the code” of the autofocus until Fuji opened the standard.

infullframe.com/news/fuji-opens-x-mount-to-third-party-manufacturers-available-now-3294

Of course, the article could be wrong too. The source that we know is also always correct is Wikipedia (which also confirms that the Mount was closed). Lol.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fujifilm_X-mount

And rumor sites are also always true (lol):
www.fujirumors.com/fujifilm-manager-toshihisa-iida-we-open-the-x-mount-to-third-parties-x-h-line-continues-no-gfx-fixed-lens-camera-more/

I’m guessing that the likes of sigma either couldn’t reverse engineer the autofocus or simply looked at the market and decided to spend money elsewhere (until Fuji officially opened the Mount a couple of years ago). I seem to recall that as soon as Fuji did officially open the Mount, sigma (and others) started making some lenses.

Back to the OP’s question: I expect canon will follow a similar path and eventually open the Mount. I also assume that the large 3rd-party lens makers are working very hard to reverse engineer the system as the Canon RF market out of the box was likely larger than the Fuji X market.

Exactly! First, I'm surprised that they can do this at all. I mean, I know Canon doesn't have to cooperate, but can a company really say, "Don't make anything that will work on our products"?

Still, I'm wondering why Canon thinks this is a good thing, considering how good the competition is. Is Canon in such a strong position that they don't need to worry about people choosing other manufacturers in order to have access to third party lenses? And, even if so, is it more profitable for Canon to adopt this strategy?

Canon has decided that they legally have the right to their intellectual property which is protected by patent. That means that they can be the gate keeper of who has access to it and they can either file a cease and desist (as they have done) or sue (if it comes to that) anyone who infringes on that patent.

My personal view is that Canon sees themselves as an imaging company. That includes lenses. So while they want to sell camera bodies, lenses are just as important. Sony saw that Canon has between 40 and 50% of the market share and had to do something to move some camera bodies. So they opened their lens mount up to third parties in an effort to make a dent in Canons market leading position.

From what I’ve read, Canons market leading position has only increased from 2021 to 2022 and they’re quickly closing in on or taking over the mirrorless segment as well with the latest R releases. One source said 47% of the overall ILC market or something.

Even given all that, Canon has also said that they are in discussions with third parties, so it appears they will allow on a case by case basis. Presumably allowed if (a) they don’t infringe on Canons patents and/or (b) they don’t offer any direct competition with Canons existing or planned lenses and/or (c) Canon receives satisfactory compensation and makes money if they sell a Canon lens or the third party sells a Canon lens.

All in all - seems like good business sense to me.

There was a lot, as in almost an infinite amount, of discussion of this on DPR. No-one seems to know exactly what it is that Canon has done, but everyone seems to have a really strong opinion about it. I'm not really bothered, because I love what Canon has released so far in RF mount, at all price levels, and expect them to keep releasing excellent lenses. Having some third-party options would be nice, but I doubt whether I'd buy any of them.

it is Zeiss , that answers the "question"

the universe rotates around you !

So does that mean, then, that if Canon made batteries, they could forbid other companies from making batteries for their cameras?

Sure -- it was the profitable move. But can a company really forbid another company from making products that work with their products? So a car company that owned a wiper company could forbid other manufacturers to make wipers that worked on their car?

Wow! I didn't know that! I had thought that Sony was a close second!

But they didn't need this for EF?

In the same way that if Canon could forbid anyone else to make cameras is also "good business sense".

What a very strange thing to say. Reminds me of some of the silly things said on DPR that made it an unpleasant place to visit sometimes. If I had said that it doesn't matter whether third-party RF lenses become available, because I doubt whether I'd buy any, your comment would have been appropriate. Given that I was stating my personal preference, like the rest of you, and had even said that having third-party options would be nice (I notice you omitted that from your quote), your response was reminiscent of the worst sort of trolling on DPR. It's a real shame to see that such things are happening over here so quickly.

I don’t understand what this means.

You said that my comment that the Fuji X Mount was closed was incorrect. I believe that the Mount was closed until about 2020 when Fuji announced that it was going to open the Mount (and several of the large third-party lens companies quickly began to make lenses for Fuji X thereafter) and I questioned whether Zeiss reverse engineered the X Mount for the lenses that they made shortly after the X-mount was announced back in the 20-teens.

Can you help me understand what your comment above means? I don’t understand.

Just change the http... but everything remains the same.

I wont buy RF lenses from 3rd parties either, so I guess I will get trolled too 😂