Is Canon 'clearing house' on EF mounts that will be replaced with RF mounts?

I just got a note from Canon that they are lowing the price of the 24-70 f/2.8 EF mount lens. Normally, I would just shrug, but that is in a key range of where the RF pro lenses will be. They already off a 24-70 f/2 R mount. Just wondering if this is a slow, but planned EF inventory reduction since they will now be selling two mount systems. I think the 70-200 f/4 also had a price drop.

Just a thought.

There is no 24-70 RF lens. There is a 28-70 and that is a bit long. This time of year, Canon throws all kinds of sales and price drops, just enjoy the holiday savings and the strong US dollar. The price has steadily been declining for 4 years now as well.

It makes zero sense to eliminate a lens that fits millions of EOS camera bodies that have been sold over the years, when there is no lens that COULD replace it...an R mount lens will have insufficient distance between mount and focal plane to work on an EF mount body.

Wilt wrote in post #18754595
It makes zero sense to eliminate a lens that fits millions of EOS camera bodies that have been sold over the years, when there is no lens that COULD replace it...an R mount lens will have insufficient distance between mount and focal plane to work on an EF mount body.

I didn’t say eliminate, I said reduce inventory. It one assumes a sign isn’t amount of sales will be shifting to a sister product, then one shifts inventory. At least that’s how my company has always done it in industry. Otherwise our accountants would be flipping out

Again, prices have been dropping for 4 years, and it is the Christmas season.

https://www.cpricewatc​h.com …m-f2.8L-II-USM-price.html

Have to plead with "St. Nicholas".

buddy4344 wrote in post #18754763
I didn’t say eliminate, I said reduce inventory. It one assumes a sign isn’t amount of sales will be shifting to a sister product, then one shifts inventory. At least that’s how my company has always done it in industry. Otherwise our accountants would be flipping out

One might say that intention for 'reduction' of EF inventory might merely mean that the next production run of any given lens is simply reduced/and or delayed in timing. Besides, the inventory is mostly in Distributors and retailers' inventory, not the factory's.
While fewer dSLRs sold reduces the population of purchases by new buyers of dSLRs who are building their own kits, there is still a large population of existing dSLRs sold 2-10 years ago whose owners might want to add lenses. So yes, a decline in new dSLR bodies does impact add-on lens volume, but one would not surmise a 50% drop in lens volume. In 2016, there was a 35% drop in body volume, but only a 12% drop in lens volume (all brands).

Wilt wrote in post #18761079
One might say that intention for 'reduction' of EF inventory might merely mean that the next production run of any given lens is simply reduced/and or delayed in timing. Besides, the inventory is mostly in Distributors and retailers' inventory, not the factory's.

.
Next production run "delayed in timing" ..... hmmmm ..... seems that would have the opposite effect. . Like, if there weren't going to be any more for a while, wouldn't they milk the existing inventory, instead of trying to unload it quickly?


.

I wish they would put the Clear the house price on that 500 F4 - heck I would buy one if the clearing house price was 30% off current pricing

It would be nice to have Canon provide an R mount lens which is significantly better in NON-optical ways, so we get to see the practical benefits of the higher speed communications. To me, those advantages (due to communications speed) marks one of the drivers for why any long FL needs to be in the R mount, having redesigned optics and taking advantage of the larger available optical clearances of the R mount.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18761081
.
Next production run "delayed in timing" ..... hmmmm ..... seems that would have the opposite effect. . Like, if there weren't going to be any more for a while, wouldn't they milk the existing inventory, instead of trying to unload it quickly?

.

My point was that if EF, as a class of lenses, was 'doomed' by R mount, Canon would know that EF sales volumes to the dealers would diminish, due to fewer Canon EF cameras in circulation, with owners selling off EF bodies to buy R mount bodies. But there remain many millions of EF bodies that remain in common usage for a very long time (heck, there are folks still shooting with FD mount bodies!) and folks may wish to buy an additional lens for their body for a long time...ergo production runs which are delayed in timing, and/or in smaller production volumes.
The RF lens cannot be used on EF body, so EF lenses need to be sold for EF mount bodies, since new users of EF mount lenses keep them to run on the R mount body.

It now seems to me that Canon is not pushing for R mount customers to use the EF mount lenses but rather trying to get folks to abandon that glass for new, pretty shiny things. The rumor mill has several R R lens coming out in Feb. At least 3 are in a overlap range of fairly new EF models that are touted as world class glass:

Canon RF 15-35mm f/2.8L IS USM
Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS USM
Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

buddy4344 wrote in post #18807214
It now seems to me that Canon is not pushing for R mount customers to use the EF mount lenses but rather trying to get folks to abandon that glass for new, pretty shiny things.

I can't agree with that notion. Canon may not be "pushing" but I think Canon would love EOS R owners to use EF lenses with that body, because all that does is spread testimonials about how incredible the EOS R works with adapted lenses.

That builds a narrative about how much easier the transition is, on par with throwing fuel on a fire.

Canon's EF to RF adapter and upcoming filter adapters are further designed to encourage EF lens use on the RF body. Basically, everything that multiplies the use of EF lenses on the RF body, can boost extra sales of RF lenses.

Canon has demonstrated little to no true 'advantage' of the R mount lens, apart from the fact that there is an extra control ring on the lens which can be assigned user-defined function. Since the adapter can add the control ring to EF lenses, that takes away inherent advantage of R lenses in that regard.

Admittedly, there is the optical performance gains when retrofocus optics can be abandoned and non-retrofocus can be used instead...but that is limited to short FL glass!

So what benefit will be achieved from the 'faster communications' in the R mount that will drive buyers to the R glass because the EF glass in normal to telephoto designs is truly 'inferior' in demonstratable ways to the R glass?!

Curious minds want to know.

Wilt wrote in post #18807834
Canon has demonstrated little to no true 'advantage' of the R mount lens, apart from the fact that there is an extra control ring on the lens which can be assigned user-defined function..

I guess time will tell. Yes, the new 28-70 f/2 zoom is intriguing, but I just handled this brute. Whoa, it's big. Leaked images said to be the R mount 70-200 show it as being much shorter than the EF versions, but those are only leaked images and could just be photoshop tricks.