Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 20 Oct 2013 (Sunday) 22:59
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Why still no 14-24 lens?

 
Invertalon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,495 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Cleveland, OH
     
Oct 23, 2013 09:04 |  #31

Could be patent issues. It is possible that Nikon is using an ideal optical formula that Canon cannot match until the patent expires. That is my guess.


-Steve
Facebook (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
David ­ Arbogast
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,168 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 7677
Joined Aug 2010
Location: West Point, Georgia
     
Oct 23, 2013 09:33 |  #32

Radders wrote in post #16392483 (external link)
Sigma 12-24 is a pretty sharp lens, why wait for a rumoured Canon lens?

I don't think a "pretty sharp" lens is what the OP is looking for. :)


David | Flickr (external link)
Sony α7R II | CV 12mm, FE 12-24mm, Loxia 21mm, Loxia 35mm, CV 40mm, FE 50mm ZA, Loxia 85mm, Batis 85mm, Batis 135mm

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,606 posts
Likes: 415
Joined Apr 2003
Location: British Columbia
     
Oct 23, 2013 09:43 |  #33
bannedPermanent ban

Invertalon wrote in post #16392510 (external link)
Could be patent issues. It is possible that Nikon is using an ideal optical formula that Canon cannot match until the patent expires. That is my guess.

Patents are good for 20 years so we will be waiting a little longer if that is the case.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
andrikos
Goldmember
Avatar
1,905 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
     
Oct 23, 2013 09:44 |  #34

Abu Mahendra wrote in post #16392352 (external link)
I learnt something new today. Here, all along, I thought that Canon was not-for-profit philanthropic organization. Thanks Andrikos. Careful getting off that tall steed of yours.

It seems you haven't been on this forum long enough to see how "idealistic" and "wishful" people become here...


Think new Canon lenses are overpriced? Lots (and lots) of data will set you free!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Radders
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,017 posts
Likes: 19
Joined Oct 2009
Location: UK
     
Oct 23, 2013 09:45 |  #35

David Arbogast wrote in post #16392573 (external link)
I don't think a "pretty sharp" lens is what the OP is looking for. :)

Well a pretty sharp lens is better than one that isn't even around. I love the Sigma 12-24, very sharp when used around f/10..


| 1DII | 7D | 60D | 6D | 100 2.8 | 50mm 1.4 | 11-16 2.8 | 24-105 4 | 70-300 IS USM |
Totallyrad.co.uk (external link) | Airplane-Pictures.net (external link) |Facebook Page (external link) | Russianplanes.net (external link)Gear list

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
andrikos
Goldmember
Avatar
1,905 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
     
Oct 23, 2013 09:53 |  #36

Invertalon wrote in post #16392510 (external link)
Could be patent issues. It is possible that Nikon is using an ideal optical formula that Canon cannot match until the patent expires. That is my guess.

I wouldn't buy it.
There are so many ways around a patent, you can lawyer yourself in court until the actual patent expires. (look at Apple vs. Samsung vs. Apple)

I don't think patents stopped anyone from doing what they want to do.
And if it, they'd be out of business soon enough...


Think new Canon lenses are overpriced? Lots (and lots) of data will set you free!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ginga
Senior Member
Avatar
370 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Jokkmokk - Sweden
     
Oct 23, 2013 10:54 |  #37

andrikos wrote in post #16392638 (external link)
I wouldn't buy it.
There are so many ways around a patent, you can lawyer yourself in court until the actual patent expires. (look at Apple vs. Samsung vs. Apple)

I don't think patents stopped anyone from doing what they want to do.
And if it, they'd be out of business soon enough...

Well, in that case. There dies the theory to why Canon can't get rid of the shadow banding and increase the dynamic range from their sensors.

If what you say is true, Canon could just make their own version of Exmor and call it the Canmore.


Sony A7R * 70-200 2.8L II * 24-70L II * Samyang 14
Recently sold: 5DIII * Sigma 35 *

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
andrikos
Goldmember
Avatar
1,905 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
     
Oct 23, 2013 11:02 |  #38

Ginga wrote in post #16392822 (external link)
Well, in that case. There dies the theory to why Canon can't get rid of the shadow banding and increase the dynamic range from their sensors.

If what you say is true, Canon could just make their own version of Exmor and call it the Canmore.

It's not a patent issue.
It's a technology issue,

Canon has been using the archaic 0.5 micron process node that doesn't provide enough space to do A/D conversion on the sensor chip (i.e. lower noise).
Sony is using a much smaller 0.18 micron process.


Think new Canon lenses are overpriced? Lots (and lots) of data will set you free!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Invertalon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,495 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Cleveland, OH
     
Oct 23, 2013 11:11 |  #39

Yet Canon tends to produce some of the best lens out of any manufacturer, still... Even with so-called "technology" issues.

And Nikon can't produce decent chips so they buy them from Sony... So who REALLY is lacking in technology? Canon did not have amazing sensors handed to them like Nikon.


-Steve
Facebook (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
David ­ Arbogast
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,168 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 7677
Joined Aug 2010
Location: West Point, Georgia
     
Oct 23, 2013 11:23 as a reply to  @ Invertalon's post |  #40

Who REALLY is lacking in technology? Canon. ;)

IMO they don't deserve any special bonus points or credit just because they elect to develop their own in-house sensors; sensors that are not the equal of the Sony sensors.

This lens topic thread is all off the tracks now that we're talking camera sensors. :lol:


David | Flickr (external link)
Sony α7R II | CV 12mm, FE 12-24mm, Loxia 21mm, Loxia 35mm, CV 40mm, FE 50mm ZA, Loxia 85mm, Batis 85mm, Batis 135mm

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,606 posts
Likes: 415
Joined Apr 2003
Location: British Columbia
     
Oct 23, 2013 11:48 |  #41
bannedPermanent ban

Invertalon wrote in post #16392877 (external link)
Yet Canon tends to produce some of the best lens out of any manufacturer, still... Even with so-called "technology" issues.

And Nikon can't produce decent chips so they buy them from Sony... So who REALLY is lacking in technology? Canon did not have amazing sensors handed to them like Nikon.

Sometimes it is a business decision, not a technology decision. Nikon might have felt they could spend their efforts better at other aspects of the camera and just cooperate with Sony on the sensors. Sort of like not manufacturing your own LCD and using a 3rd party or not being into battery development and relying on a 3rd party supplier.

Nothing wrong with these decisions...and from where I sit, it seems like using a Sony sensor was a pretty good business decision by Nikon.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FeXL
Senior Member
493 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Dec 2007
     
Oct 23, 2013 12:19 |  #42

Radders wrote in post #16392611 (external link)
Well a pretty sharp lens is better than one that isn't even around. I love the Sigma 12-24, very sharp when used around f/10..

I've been using the 12-24 for about 4 years now, mostly interior architecture. Almost exclusively at the wide end. I find center frame sharpness is acceptable (far from great) at f8 and up, the corners are unacceptably soft at all apertures.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mag10
Senior Member
357 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Apr 2011
Location: CA Bay Area and Taiwan
     
Oct 23, 2013 12:19 |  #43

andrikos wrote in post #16392638 (external link)
I wouldn't buy it.
There are so many ways around a patent, you can lawyer yourself in court until the actual patent expires. (look at Apple vs. Samsung vs. Apple)

I don't think patents stopped anyone from doing what they want to do.
And if it, they'd be out of business soon enough...

Not saying patents are the reason we haven't seen a 14-24mm lens, but I have to correct your apparent misconceptions about patents. First, designing around a patent is not always easy, especially if one has a solid invention and the patent is drafted properly. Second, you can lawyer up in Court, but it will cost you. You do realize that Apple and Samsung have each spent tens, if not hundreds, of millions of dollars in legal fees over their recent battles right? Plus, the only reason the lawsuits haven't affected them much is because of how much money they both have and how quickly their industry moves on to new products and technologies. As we all know, the photography industry does not move as quickly, nor is there as much revenue involved to justify large legal expenses.

As for patents not actually stopping someone from doing something - you may be technically correct, but that is because more than 90% of all patent lawsuits settle. So even though someone accused of infringing a patent may not actually be forced to stop selling a product, they likely ended up paying a lot of money to avoid or settle a lawsuit.

Bottom line is this: patents are a factor in a company's decision to develop and market products. I personally know this from being counsel for many multinational corporations. A company may decide that it wants to take on the patent risks if the potential rewards are big enough, but you would be wrong to assume that companies do not consider them at all or takes them lightly. In fact, if a company fails to consider patent risks in product development, they likely will be out of business soon....


Canon EOS 5D Mark III | Sony DSC-RX100M3 | Canon EF 16-35 f/4 L IS USM EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM | Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM ART | Canon Speedlite 600EX-RT Dedicated flash ST-E3 RT controller

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Todd ­ Lambert
I don't like titles
Avatar
12,625 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 122
Joined May 2009
Location: On The Roads Across America
     
Oct 23, 2013 12:33 |  #44

Are we talking sensors or lenses here? If we're talking about lenses like I thought we were, patents don't really enter into this I think. Canon is more than capable of creating a similar spec, and probably better quality 14-24 if they wanted to.

I think, as I said earlier, this is merely a business decision and Canon doesn't feel the need to produce this lens at this time. That's really it. Now why they feel this way is certainly a good discussion but I think discussing why canon isn't capable of producing this lens is a bit off target.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
light_pilgrim
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
922 posts
Gallery: 23 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 145
Joined Jan 2012
     
Oct 23, 2013 14:54 |  #45

Invertalon wrote in post #16392877 (external link)
Yet Canon tends to produce some of the best lens out of any manufacturer, still... Even with so-called "technology" issues.

And Nikon can't produce decent chips so they buy them from Sony... So who REALLY is lacking in technology? Canon did not have amazing sensors handed to them like Nikon.

I think this is a very philosophical and not helpful discussion. The fact is, there is no 14-24 from Canon and there is actually nothing available that can match this lens on Nikons side. We do not talk about chips and other lenses that are great...I am just talking this specific lens


www.lightpilgrim.com (external link) ||1x.com (external link) ||500px.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

5,744 views & 0 likes for this thread
Why still no 14-24 lens?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is 18schroj
923 guests, 339 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.