/p/ - Photography » Thread #4060288

[164 / 22 / 42]

116KiB, 1024x576, canon-eos-r-vs-sony-a7iii-product-34-1-1024x576.jpg

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 00:01:53 No.4060288 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>4060295 >>4060438 >>4060442 >>4060506 >>4061491 >>4063025 >>4063782 >>4064095

Why are there so few lenses from third party manufacturers for canon RF mount?
The only AF lenses I know of are Samyang 14 2.8 and 85 1.4
In contrast, Sony has lots of manufacturers making af lenses for e-mount: Sigma, Tamron, Samyang, Yongnuo.
What's the deal here?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 00:17:59 No.4060290 Report

Quoted By: >>4060327

Sony's E-mount has been around longer and has many more cameras utilizing it. Sony also has a lot of those cameras in the consumers hands right now. Canon by comparison has far fewer currently and so the money isn't there for third party manufactures yet.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 00:40:22 No.4060295 Report

Quoted By: >>4060344 >>4060345 >>4060346

>>4060288
>mount covers the sensor
sonysisters...

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 02:12:38 No.4060327 Report

Quoted By: >>4061516

>>4060290
This plus Sony has the open E-mount which means some companies know how to use the full mount potential other than advanced stabilization and i think gyro stats.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 02:27:29 No.4060331 Report

Quoted By: >>4060335 >>4060438 >>4061410 >>4063061

It seems that Canon RF lens protocol isn't open to 3rd party yet, same with Nikon Z. They don't want third party to cannibalize the lens sales? Also, Sony was ahead in the mirrorless game and party owns Tamron shares and has opened their mount to third party brands years ago.
But maybe only to a certain extent to keep the best AF implementation to the Sony lenses, just a guess.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 03:13:12 No.4060335 Report

Quoted By: >>4060524

>>4060331
Third parties will likely have to reverse engineer RF. Having said that: RF is EF v1.1. The pins in common are used for the exact same things. There are new pins to carry high speed serial data for things like getting lens corrections from the lens itself. So I doubt RF is difficult to fully reverse engineer. And in fact, you can ship an AE/AF/IS lens today for RF just using the EF part of the protocol. Which is probably how the small players are doing it. But if you're Sigma/Tamron/Tokina you want to fully support the new mount.

Another factor is that if you have an EF lens catalog, all those lenses work perfectly on RF via adapter AND still sell to EF camera owners. You're not going to be that interested in selling RF versions until there are enough RF owners who will buy the RF version over the EF version to justify the cost.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1650616537287.png, 880KiB, 689x1630

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 03:47:40 No.4060344 Report

Quoted By: >>4060363 >>4060396 >>4060458 >>4060513

>>4060295
>smallest mount
>most compact and highest quality lenses
how did snoy do it?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1652748688283.png, 1022KiB, 687x1648

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 03:48:41 No.4060345 Report

Quoted By: >>4060363 >>4060396 >>4060513

>>4060295
This can't be happening Nikonbros

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1646051556608.jpg, 82KiB, 700x585

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 03:49:42 No.4060346 Report

Quoted By: >>4060351 >>4060359 >>4060513 >>4063058

>>4060295
bros?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 04:00:12 No.4060351 Report

Quoted By:

>>4060346
And it's a shame because the 20mm f/1.8 for the F mount was an excellent lens. Who knows what happened.
Now shows us their actual use rather than the spreadsheets,

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 04:13:35 No.4060359 Report

Quoted By: >>4060549 >>4060550

>>4060346
smaller, aperture ring, better performance
slightly cheaper ($100 or so)

oh well, don't think anyone is choosing systems based on individual primes, props to sony otherwise

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 04:49:23 No.4060363 Report

Quoted By: >>4060371

>>4060344
>>4060345
>thread about 3rd party canon rf
>snoy fag posts cherry picked test charts to prove how amazing snoy is vs. nikon
I hate brandfags so damn much.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 05:32:09 No.4060371 Report

Quoted By:

>>4060363
>cherry picked
cope

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 07:13:27 No.4060396 Report

Quoted By: >>4060411 >>4060442

>>4060344
>>4060345
The small sony mount acts as a closed down aperture, so of course it looks sharper with less vignetting.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 58828baddc790_thatsbait.gif.0b58 (...).gif, 2MiB, 480x360

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 08:04:47 No.4060411 Report

Quoted By:

>>4060396

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 09:45:15 No.4060438 Report

Quoted By:

>>4060288
the only third party AF lenses for RF basically have an integrated EF adapter in them so the camera thinks the lens is EF.
Like >>4060331 said it seems canon hasnt released any of the info needed to make a real native RF lens

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screenshot_20220618-100822.png, 309KiB, 1080x2280

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 10:00:23 No.4060442 Report

Quoted By: >>4060449 >>4060469 >>4060772 >>4060867 >>4068150

>>4060288
Couple of reasons

Sony has an open mount format, so anyone can make 100% compatible lenses that can take full advantage of what the camera can do. Canon needs reverse engineering by 3rd parties.

The next one is that canon has a history of slightly changing how their lenses work, in an attempt to disable 3rd party lenses. Sigma ef lenses from the 90's still don't work with ef bodies today because of it (hilariously a Sony with a canon adapter works with more EF lenses than any EF mount camera). Having millions of people suddenly be no longer able to use the products they spent thousands on isn't a very good marketing strategy. It's a brand risk that even samyang have decided isn't worth it and have palmed off the few af lenses they did make onto their scuffed rokinon brand.

>>4060396
You're so desperate
Pic related, does this mean canons mount is even smaller? $1400 lens and it can't even reach the corners.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 10:15:14 No.4060449 Report

Quoted By: >>4060460

>>4060442
>anyone can make 100% compatible lenses that can take full advantage of what the camera can do
Wrong, they can't make breathing corrections, gyro stats for Catalyst or for optimized IBIS.
Try again friendo

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 10:34:43 No.4060458 Report

Quoted By: >>4060460 >>4060553

>>4060344
why is there so much ugly purple and blue and orange streaks in the sony?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 10:40:38 No.4060460 Report

Quoted By: >>4060469 >>4060479 >>4060755

>>4060449
All of those things are because they are hard coded for each compatible lens into the firmware for Sony bodies. If they release a new lens that has those features, what you actually do is update the bodies firmware to give it the instructions it needs. It's a body feature, not a lens feature.

The 3rd party lenses are still 100% compatible.

>>4060458
Moire, you always get artifacts in a digital signal if you can resolve past the nyquist limit. It's on the Nikon too, but less noticeable as the Nikon lens has low contrast and sharpness.

It's not an issue that ever really shows up in real world shooting, especially not on higher resolution bodies like the fantastic Sony a7r IV.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 11:33:12 No.4060469 Report

Quoted By: >>4060478

>>4060442
>The next one is that canon has a history of slightly changing how their lenses work, in an attempt to disable 3rd party lenses.
This is FUD. Canon has never done this. Sigma themselves will tell you they didn't get the protocol 100% right back then.

>Sigma ef lenses from the 90's still don't work with ef bodies today because of it
Depends on the lens. Also: at one time Sigma would re-chip any lenses that didn't work.

>It's a brand risk that even samyang have decided isn't worth it and have palmed off the few af lenses they did make onto their scuffed rokinon brand.
More FUD. No one knows why the parent company sells under two brand names, but the lenses are identical except for the label.

>>4060460
>Moire never shows up in real world shooting
>t. Never Shoots In The Real World

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 11:59:21 No.4060478 Report

Quoted By: >>4060481

>>4060469
>Sigma said they didn't get it 100% right

So you're saying there's an inherent risk when you aren't working with an open mount format...

>Depends on the lens

How butthurt do you have to be to have to imply I made an absolutist statement, did I say ALL sigma lenses from the 90's don't work? No, but a significant number don't.

>Sigma rechipped broken lenses

No they didn't. Why are you so desperate to paint this as a non issue?

>Parent company sells under 2 brands

Wrong again, samyang are their own, publicly traded company (ie. they don't have a parent), they sell their factory seconds to elite products rebranded as rokinon.

>Moire does show up in the real world

Ok, can you show 5 examples from your catalogue that are unquestionably real life photos.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 12:04:49 No.4060479 Report

Quoted By: >>4060485 >>4061648

>>4060460
so why doesn't the other camera get them?
i dont understand the technical reason, all i know is the the other camera doesn't have it and the sony camera color abberations are ugly as fuck

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 12:14:03 No.4060481 Report

Quoted By: >>4060485 >>4060533

>>4060478
>So you're saying there's an inherent risk when you aren't working with an open mount format...
There's an inherent risk even when you are. As but one example, note that the Sigma 135 ART has some minor AF issues on Sony E-mount that do not exist on other mounts despite E-mount being open.

>How butthurt do you have to be to have to imply I made an absolutist statement,
How shitty is your 2nd language understanding of English that you forgot the word "some"?

>>Sigma rechipped broken lenses
>No they didn't.
Oh yes they most certainly did.
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/1525986
https://petapixel.com/2013/04/25/rechip-old-sigma-lens-so-that-it-plays-nicely-with-your-new-canon-dslr/

>Why are you so desperate to paint this as a non issue?
Why are you an ignorant dipshit who can't use Google?

>Wrong again, samyang are their own, publicly traded company (ie. they don't have a parent), they sell their factory seconds to elite products rebranded as rokinon.
>FACTORY SECONDS
Why are you so desperate to lie and create FUD? Samyang manufactures lenses, ships them out to be labeled as Rokinon, and they are then sold in North America. There are no "factory seconds" you little FUDtard.

>Ok, can you show 5 examples from your catalogue that are unquestionably real life photos.
And link myself to this place? No. Try reading for once:
https://photographylife.com/what-is-moire

>but i never get moire!!!!
Either you're shooting a Sony camera with an AA filter, or you have cheap lenses. With no AA filter and expensive, sharp glass, you can get moire. It's rare, but it happens.

Finally: reddit spacing - you have to go back.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 12:43:14 No.4060485 Report

Quoted By: >>4060500 >>4060508 >>4060529

>>4060479
The other camera does have them you blind cunt.

And some cameras choose to use an anti aliasing filter on the sensor, which blurs everything slightly but massively reduces moire. It's a question of whether you prioritise sharper images or having better test pattern shots. It tends to be the more expensive cameras that don't have an AA filter.

>>4060481
>This one lens has an issue, therefore the risk is still there

Wrong. Again. It WAS a poorly programmed lens at launch, which has since been fixed through fw updates. This is an issue for an individual lens af, and again has nothing to do with compatability.

>You don't know what "some" means

No anon, you don't understand basic English, and you're embarrassed that I called you out on it so now you've doubled down by implying that any non absolutist statement has to clarify that it's not absolutist, no, that's just cope because I made you realise you're stupid.

>Look, one guy from 2006 that was within driving distance of sigmas repair centre managed it, and look another guy programmed his own at24 micro controller to do it.

You didn't even read these did you.

>Lens companies have no factory seconds

What do you think they do with the lenses with poor centering or grinding?

>No I can't give any examples from my catalogue

Oh what a surprise, and no one's going to be able to doxx you from a 500 pixel wide 100% crop.

>I get upset over double spaced paragraphs

You're a right weird cunt.

>Sony cameras have aa filters

None of the current a7 lineup has an AA filter. The a7iii and a7ii did, but all the rest never did.

Every Fuji except the gfx has an AA filter

Every Olympus and Panasonic except the s1r has an AA filter

Nikon z5, z6, d800 has an AA filter

Every single Canon has an AA filter

Why are you so desperate anon?

>>4060479

>I don't understand

Good on you for finally admitting it you ignorance fuelled bellend that still can't work out periods.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 12:53:20 No.4060488 Report

Quoted By:

None of you faggots take photos

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 13:15:07 No.4060500 Report

Quoted By: >>4060539

>>4060485
>reddit spacing
You should be banned permanently.

>>This one lens has an issue, therefore the risk is still there
Well, yeah, that's pretty much what that shows. I would prefer Canon open the RF mount, but an open mount != perfect compatibility every time.

>Wrong. Again. It WAS a poorly programmed lens at launch,
Funny the programming worked on other mounts.

>No anon, you don't understand basic English,
Sorry, but "Sigma EF lenses from the 90s" without any additional qualifiers implies all Sigma EF lenses from the 90s.

>>Look, one guy from 2006 that was within driving distance of sigmas repair centre managed it, and look another guy programmed his own at24 micro controller to do it.
Sigma would re-chip ANY lens you mailed to their warranty center, for free, up until sometime in the late 2000's. They openly said this on their web site back then. It was a well known service program.

>>Lens companies have no factory seconds
Not what I said. Again, learn English.

>Oh what a surprise, and no one's going to be able to doxx you from a 500 pixel wide 100% crop.
Don't care. Internet is full of moire discussions. Everyone knows it happens from time to time. Except you because you're too poor to afford sharp glass.

>None of the current a7 lineup has an AA filter.
A7 III is still for sale new and is therefore part of the current lineup.

>Every Fuji except the gfx has an AA filter
>Every Olympus and Panasonic except the s1r has an AA filter
>Nikon z5, z6, d800 has an AA filter
>Every single Canon has an AA filter
Gee, why would manufacturers include AA filters? Is it because of...MOIRE?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1654851818947.jpg, 454KiB, 1920x1920

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 13:27:10 No.4060506 Report

Quoted By: >>4060781

>>4060288
>Why are there so few lenses from third party manufacturers for canon RF mount?
The chicken before the egg problem.
Customer buy E-mount body because lots of lenses available.
Manufacturers make more E-mount because more customers are coming.
Customer buy E-mount body because lots of lenses available.
Manufacturers make more E-mount because more customers are coming.
etc.

It's a positive feedback loop. So Sony has become the EF-mount of our era.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 13:34:57 No.4060508 Report

Quoted By: >>4060539

>>4060485
>Every Olympus and Panasonic except the s1r has an AA filter

That is not correct. Pretty much every 20 mpx MFT and some 16 mpx come without an AA filter.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO zeiss-loxia-21mm-e-mount-lens.jpg, 72KiB, 1185x670

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 13:40:05 No.4060513 Report

Quoted By:

>>4060344
>>4060345
>>4060346
I'm happy for you AF bro, but you will never unseat the king. EVER.

And he is coincidentally also only available to E-mount.
Strange. But I guess Zeiss just does what Zeiss does.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 13:55:10 No.4060524 Report

Quoted By: >>4060530

>>4060335
>rf is ef v1.1
EF v1.1 actually exists, it is EF with a higher clock rate. First-party lenses support both 1.0 and 1.1 and this is why STM lenses still work with early film EOS bodies (albeit smooth diaphragm and silent focus is not available as they are protocol extensions)
RF is more like EF v2.0 as it implies physical and electrical changes

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Moire-Comparison.jpg, 106KiB, 1266x1296

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 14:08:03 No.4060529 Report

Quoted By: >>4060539 >>4060808

>>4060485
>Every Fuji except the gfx has an AA filter
no xtrans fooj has an aa filter, which is almost all of them
xtrans inherently isn't susceptible to moire
get rekt faggot, look at how badly the sony is to moire noise

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 14:08:59 No.4060530 Report

Quoted By:

>>4060524
>EF v1.1 actually exists, it is EF with a higher clock rate. First-party lenses support both 1.0 and 1.1 and this is why STM lenses still work with early film EOS bodies (albeit smooth diaphragm and silent focus is not available as they are protocol extensions)
>RF is more like EF v2.0 as it implies physical and electrical changes
Fair enough. Though...the corresponding pins are, to the best of my knowledge, the same. But new pins warrant a 2.0 description.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 14:20:51 No.4060533 Report

Quoted By:

>>4060481
>ships them out to be labeled as Rokinon, and they are then sold in North America
That's an old meme that keeps getting parroted. They sell both brands on all continents. Here in Europe as well.

They just like to flood the retailer's website I guess. twice the lenses will give them twice the attention.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 14:36:13 No.4060536 Report

Quoted By:

Different reasons for different manufacturers.

Category 1 - "we do whatever the fuck we want"
Zeiss Loxia and Batis are E-mount only, because fuck the rest.
Voigtlander Lanthar were E-mount only "because fuck the rest", but now they are on Z-mount as well because the guy in charge of Voigtlander likes both E-mount and Z-mount, "fuck the rest though".

Category 2 - "profits profits profits"
Sigma requires your ecosystem to have good sales, otherwise they dump you, see K-mount.
Tamron is perhaps even more stringent than Sigma because they are operating on smaller profit per lens. so volume needs to be there otherwise "fuck your mount".
Samyang is willing to experiment on your mount, but they will fuck right off if the profit isn't there. See the only 2 Samyang lenses in the OP.
This category might sound harsh, but it's about survival for these companies, they can't afford to lose much money on stuff that doesn't sell.

Category 3 - "lenses from China"
These guys are willing to give every mount a chance, you could say their dedication is about equal to 1st party lens makers.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 88b095a1080544f48e4ad71b0243a854.jpg, 124KiB, 733x489

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 14:43:07 No.4060539 Report

Quoted By: >>4060698 >>4060699 >>4060810

>>4060500
>i don't understand the difference between a company making a rectifiable mistake to a companys whole product line being blocked out by the product it's designed for

you thicko.

>but the lens worked fine on other mounts

Huh, that's odd, i googled "sigma 135 art sony autofocus issue" and the only relevant link was someone complaining about the autofocus with that lens on his nikon. couldn't even find anyone having issues with sony, except for someone that was using the canon version on an adapter and was upset that he lost some functionality with continual autofocus with his a7ii, which is exactly as expected.

>EvErYoNe KnEw SiGmA CoUlD ReChIp ThEm FoR FrEe

Yet the only example you could come up with is someone that had to drive himself to their official repair centre? lmao.

>learn to read, I never said there weren't any factory seconds

>"There are no "factory seconds""

Which one is it buddy.

>No, I cannot show any photos i took with moire

Oh what a surprise.

>A7iii is still for sale

And that's great for people that do want an AA filter.

>Why do some manufacturers include AA filters

Nikon do it so they can upsell people to their models without an AA filter, like the d860 and Z9

Canon are forced into it due to DP AF causing bigger issues with moire

Panasonic don't use one on the S1R, their flagship camera, again as an upsale tool.

Why would manufacturers remove the AA filter from their best cameras unless moire wasn't really an issue?

>>4060508
That's changed in the last few years, they probably get away with it on 20mp and above as diffraction will do the job of an aa filter for it.

>>4060529
Look, Sony gets more moire on this test image designed to trigger moire on a bayer CFA, and fuji doesn't, xtrans isn't susceptible to moire

wrong, pic related is from an x100t, what are those rainbow stripes if not moire?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1648378363500.jpg, 448KiB, 1920x1080

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 15:20:43 No.4060549 Report

Quoted By:

>>4060359
Sony is getting really, really good at wide angle in general right now.

They have come a long way since old days.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1649653146615.jpg, 758KiB, 1920x1080

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 15:21:58 No.4060550 Report

Quoted By:

>>4060359
Sony is getting really, really good at wide angle in general right now.

They have come a long way since old days.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 15:27:20 No.4060553 Report

Quoted By:

>>4060458
Because it's the sharpest lens.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 22:22:42 No.4060698 Report

Quoted By: >>4060736

>>4060539
>>i don't understand marketing decisions
you thicko.

>I'M GOOOGLING
In YT reviews the 135 ART hunts in low light on E-mount but exhibits no such behavior on other mounts. Sony's 135 doesn't exhibit the behavior, so it's definitely a lens+body, i.e. mount protocol issue. It's not a killer issue, it may have even been firmware fixed by now. But it's a good example that "open mount" != perfect all the time.

>>EvErYoNe KnEw SiGmA CoUlD ReChIp ThEm FoR FrEe
Funny you couldn't Google this. If you look for posts from the 2000's there are pages upon pages of people discussing it. You will find people bitching because Sigma would not always do it. If the lens was out of warranty it was first come, first serve on parts availability.

More importantly for you FUDster: Tamron and Tokina never had this issue. It was well known that the problem was in Sigma's ROM code because their initial reverse engineering wasn't correct. Canon didn't break anyone's lenses, FUDdy.

>Which one is it buddy.
Samyang is not shipping "factory seconds" for sale under the Rokinon name you stupid little FUDster. No one has ever found a quality difference between the Samyang/Rokinon/Bower names.

>moire widely acknowledged to exist with many samples online
>IF YOU DON'T POST YOUR NAME, ADDRESS, DRIVER'S LICENSE, AND PORTFOLIO THEN IT DOESN'T EXIST
OK fuddy

>Canon are forced into it due to DP AF causing bigger issues with moire
LMFAO what a shill FUDster fuck you are. [CITATION NEEDED] FUDster.

>Why would manufacturers remove the AA filter from their best cameras unless moire wasn't really an issue?
It becomes less frequent as resolution increases, which is why HIGH RESOLUTION bodies drop it. Canon instead redesigned their AA for the R5 and used the same design on the R3/R6. Sharper but still less moire prone than no AA at all. The actual reason was feedback from Canon Pro members who are wedding/fashion photographers.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 22:26:46 No.4060699 Report

Quoted By: >>4060736

>>4060539
>Look, Sony gets more moire on this test image designed to trigger moire on a bayer CFA,
>a drawing was designed to trigger moire
>the artist who made the drawing...possibly from before digital cameras existed...made it to trigger moire
>in fact he made it to trigger moire ONLY on Bayer digital sensors
Shill, spin, shill, spin. Cope. Seethe, shill, spin. FUD!!! Spin, shill, cope, seethe. SEETHE!!!

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 22:57:58 No.4060715 Report

Quoted By:

and why not efm when canon is not doing anything with it

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 24 Jul 2022 23:41:58 No.4060736 Report

Quoted By: >>4060798 >>4060801

>>4060698
>Out of context comment about marketing

???

>In yt reviews

Lmfao, still can't link to anything either

>The much more expensive Sony hunts less in low light

Wow

>There's pages of people discussing how they couldn't get it done!

Lmao, nice.

>Tamron and tokina reverse engineered ef mount differently, so couldn't be locked out by canon so easily

Wow

>Canon didn't break anyone's lenses

Except the thousands of sigma lenses that arbitrarily no longer worked, and canon ensured that all future cameras also didn't work with them.

>Samyang is not sending rokinon factory seconds

Ok ;)

>Posting one example image, that wouldn't be posted online anyway due to moire would doxx me

How do you figure that one out? Or is it that every single shot you have taken with moire happened to be a keeper that you've posted on socials?

Very curious.

>Fudster

Why do you keep using this fud term incorrectly? It makes literally zero sense in the context you have tried to use it. Very weird.

>Moire isn't an issue at high resolution

Define high resolution

>>4060699
>I don't understand the difference between an image chosen due to features it has to an image made specifically to emulate those features, and I believe making that distinction is critical!

Why anon?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 25 Jul 2022 00:46:05 No.4060755 Report

Quoted By:

>>4060460
>It's a body feature, not a lens feature.
Guess i'll have to believe you
>Moire is not an issue that ever really shows up in real world shooting
Guess i'll have to stop believing you now

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 25 Jul 2022 01:54:14 No.4060772 Report

Quoted By:

>>4060442
You seem to know what you're talking about, maybe.
>(hilariously a Sony with a canon adapter works with more EF lenses than any EF mount camera)
I noticed you said this. I'm planning to buy an EOS 35mm film camera so that I can use modern EF lenses with image stabilization.

Do you know if an old Minolta with the A-mount (that sony later used) will work with EF lenses with an adapter and still power the image stabilization in EF lenses?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 25 Jul 2022 02:50:51 No.4060781 Report

Quoted By: >>4060794

>>4060506
They'll fuck themselves somehow. They always do time after time. It's the Sony way.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 25 Jul 2022 04:03:22 No.4060794 Report

Quoted By: >>4060802

>>4060781
Thing is you're not dealing with just Sony, you're also dealing with Tamron, Sigma and Samyang who will unfuck whatever Sony potentially fucks up.

You need about 20-30 years until the current millennial retire.
Then you need a new paradigm similar to DSLR->Mirrorless that justifies a new mount (for example curved sensors)
That's the point where you have a new chance to make a new outcome.
E-mount as it is right now has 35% of all lens sales.
MTF comes second at 14%
EF-mount is third at 13%
F-mount fourth at 9%
RF, X , Z are all at 6%

Current status quo has stablilised, and not even the biggest shitposting campaign on 4chan will change the outcome.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 25 Jul 2022 04:10:06 No.4060798 Report

Quoted By: >>4060856

>>4060736
>marketing confuses and enrages this poster
I'll wait a bit and see if you can figure it out.

>Lmfao, still can't link to anything either
https://youtu.be/J7N4WQ_eFq0
You'll hand wave it of course but since you don't even own a camera it doesn't matter if you live in ignorance.

>>The much more expensive Sony hunts less in low light
The Sigma doesn't hunt on other platforms. Guess Sony doesn't want to straighten out their mount protocol with 3rd parties to insure FULL compatibility. Who knows, one day they might just shut off all 3rd party lenses.

>>There's pages of people discussing how they got it done!
fify

>>Tamron and tokina reverse engineered ef mount differently, so couldn't be locked out by canon so easily
>spin, spin, spin, SHILL, spin, FUD
If Canon had wanted to lock anyone out it would have been trivial. They didn't.

>Except the thousands of sigma lenses that arbitrarily no longer worked,
>THOUSANDS!!!
It was select models which worked fine on all film cameras (that's how old we're talking about) and fine on digital after a re-chip.

>>Samyang is not sending rokinon factory seconds
Lmfao, still can't link to any evidence of this.

>>Posting one example image, that wouldn't be posted online anyway due to moire would doxx me
I'll post a photo with moire just as soon as you post proof that DPAF causes worse moire, FUDster.

>Why do you keep using this fud term incorrectly?
You were lying to spread FUD. So you are now FUDster.

>>Moire isn't an issue at high resolution
>Define high resolution
You just can't help yourself but lie and misquote, can you? It's less frequent at 42-61mp than at 20-30mp. It can still be an issue.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 25 Jul 2022 04:11:54 No.4060801 Report

Quoted By:

>>4060736
>>a sketch artist made this drawing to trigger moire on Sony cameras
>BEFORE SONY EVEN MADE CAMERAS
>IT'S A CONSPIRACY!!!!

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 25 Jul 2022 04:14:14 No.4060802 Report

Quoted By: >>4060804

>>4060794
Gonna call [CITATION NEEDED] on those percentages champ since Canon is still the global market leader in ILC camera and lens sales, and those numbers come from financial statements and industry research groups, all of which are liable if they lie. Is this some assessment of 3rd party lenses only? Source?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 25 Jul 2022 04:17:10 No.4060804 Report

Quoted By: >>4060849

>>4060802
https://i.4cdn.org/p/1658587151237649.jpg

>Canon is still the global market leader in ILC camera and lens sales
Your info is a decade old.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 25 Jul 2022 04:38:27 No.4060808 Report

Quoted By:

>>4060529
Jesus. That's some brutal moire on the Sony. Fuck.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 25 Jul 2022 04:41:55 No.4060810 Report

Quoted By:

>>4060539
Jesus. That's some brutal moire on the Fooj. Damn.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 25 Jul 2022 09:51:18 No.4060849 Report

Quoted By: >>4060866

>>4060804
>a jpeg
Got a link?

>Your info is a decade old.
Oh really?
https://1kcreatives.com/camera-sales-statistics-market-share/

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1004962/global-leading-manufacturers-digital-cameras-market-share-sales-volume/

https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/news/camera-market-share-canon-owns-48-sony-22-nikon-drops-to-14

https://www.dpreview.com/news/8247704752/bcn-r-data-shows-that-canon-and-sony-controlled-the-japanese-camera-market-in-2021

Is your jpg even real?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 25 Jul 2022 10:17:53 No.4060856 Report

Quoted By: >>4061483

>>4060798
>I'll wait

You mean you don't have a clue what the fuck you were talking about. Lmao.

>Video of sigma
Works absolutely fine for this guy, very snappy af in low light. Manny said he couldn't even get it to work during golden hour, seems like he has a faulty unit, especially as it just stops autofocusing without confirming focus.
https://youtu.be/AJBwJlfRud0

>The sigma doesn't hunt on other mounts

Doesn't on Sony either, here's another video of it performing the same as the Sony in low light https://youtu.be/XTpctoBiI5c

>There's pages of people discussing they got it done.

*Citation required*

>It would be trivial for canon to lock anyone out

And trivial for them to ensure 3rd party lenses that once worked, continue to work, but they didnt. In fact all canon changed was the protocol for setting aperture from 0x12 to 0x13, and left 0x12 unused, it would be a 5 second fix for canon, and the change serves no purpose except to lock out 3rd party lenses using the 0x12 command.

>You can't link to evidence of this

You haven't linked to evidence of any of your claims, lmao.

>I still can't post a photo with moire

I know

>Still doesn't understand what fud means. Or you do, but we all know you're incapable of admitting when you're wrong.

Sticking with something so clearly wrong is the little canary in the mine for me, until you can accept you are wrong about a word, you're never going to admit you're wrong about an idea. Please, keep going, it funny.

>Paraphrasing is misquoting and lying >:(

No it's not buttercup, you being so desperate for a win is again very funny though.

>High Res is 42mp+

How come there's high end crop cameras that don't come anywhere near that, that don't have an AA filter? Why does the 24mp Leica M10 not have an AA filter? Or the a7iv?

Why does everyone on here that knows what they're talking about disagree with you?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 25 Jul 2022 10:46:19 No.4060866 Report

Quoted By: >>4060870

>>4060849
Sounds like you are sperging out. None of your links have anything to do with lens sales.

>Got a link?
https://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/cipa-data-shows-positives-signs-for-the-camera-business-e-mount-still-the-most-popular-system-in-japan/
>And BCN+R claims that the most popular mount in Japan is Sony’s E-mount with 32% of the market share. Followed by MFT with 17,1% and Canon EF with 12,3%.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO sony-issues.png, 276KiB, 1452x1046

Anonymous Mon 25 Jul 2022 10:52:47 No.4060867 Report

Quoted By:

>>4060442
>Sony has an open mount format, so anyone can make 100% compatible lenses that can take full advantage of what the camera can do.
There are probably more problems on Sony's open mount than on the reverse engineered EF and F mounts. Pic related. Google produces pages of complaints.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 25 Jul 2022 10:58:15 No.4060870 Report

Quoted By: >>4060871

>>4060866
So GLOBAL data showing Canon is ahead is supposed to be ignored for JAPAN ONLY data on lens purchases apart from a camera kit? Really? Sounds like you are sperging out because you can't stand to admit the truth.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1637893193451.png, 77KiB, 897x1312

Anonymous Mon 25 Jul 2022 11:00:50 No.4060871 Report

Quoted By: >>4060876 >>4061518

>>4060870
>>So GLOBAL data showing Canon is ahead
Just with the APS-C rebel sales.

Tamron is still the one who sells the most lenses. And their top sellers are E-moiunt lenses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 25 Jul 2022 11:11:27 No.4060876 Report

Quoted By: >>4060877

>>4060871
>>>So GLOBAL data showing Canon is ahead
>Just with the APS-C rebel sales.
That's unsupported spin.

>Tamron is still the one who sells the most lenses. And their top sellers are E-moiunt lenses.
Sales not part of a kit, in JAPAN. I mean hey, kudos to Sony on a bustling 3rd party lens market in Japan. It's probably pretty decent globally too. But part of the reason for that market is that Canon and Nikon users have 3 decades of lenses to choose from. The guy buying an R5 or Z7 almost certainly has a lens kit already built. He might replace a lens here or there over time with a newer mirrorless option. But he doesn't have to.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 25 Jul 2022 11:13:43 No.4060877 Report

Quoted By: >>4061549

>>4060876
>That's unsupported spin.
What else would they be selling the most of? Full frame bodies?

>It's probably pretty decent globally too.
It's the #1 selling according to Tamron. I think I told you this in the past, and even linked to the claim, but you repressed that info like a bad dream.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1643000062819.png, 466KiB, 700x674

Anonymous Tue 26 Jul 2022 13:10:33 No.4061389 Report

Quoted By: >>4061404 >>4061463 >>4061520

Another E-mount in the making.

Sony is basically invincible at this point. Canon needs the curved sensor to win back the lens sales.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 26 Jul 2022 14:22:23 No.4061404 Report

Quoted By: >>4061406 >>4061407

>>4061389
What if it's finally the RF version of 50?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1632298745085.gif, 2MiB, 650x391

Anonymous Tue 26 Jul 2022 14:27:13 No.4061406 Report

Quoted By:

>>4061404
Not a chance. Rokinon/Samyang lenses for RF has been discontinued on BHphoto.

This era is the E-mount era.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 26 Jul 2022 14:30:34 No.4061407 Report

Quoted By: >>4061413

>>4061404
Samyang pulled out of the canon RF mount completely and dumped all their old stock on rokinon to sell so they didn't have to deal with warranties.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 26 Jul 2022 14:39:53 No.4061410 Report

Quoted By:

>>4060331
>Also, Sony party owns Tamron shares
Minority share. I guarantee you this factor is 100% irrelevant.
Back when E-mount began, Sony also owned shares in Tamron.
But Tamron gave E-mount the cold shoulder. They kept making lenses for EF and F mount. And culminated in the exception 35mm F1,4 anniversary lens.
Tamron never gave a flying fuck about E-mount despite Sony owning some Tamron share.

It was only when the perfect storm of A7iii + Tamron 28-75 happened that they began to see things differently.

The real reason is PROFITS, PROFITS, and PROFITS.
RF and Z is being ignored so they can streamline the production just for E-mount and get more Profits.
That is how Tamron and Sigma thinks.
(in Sigma's case they have co-ownership of L-mount so there is an obligation to make lenses there even if they lose money on that)

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 26 Jul 2022 14:48:08 No.4061413 Report

Quoted By:

>>4061407
With Samyang exiting the RF market there is now 0 probability of Sigma and Tamron entering RF and Z.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 26 Jul 2022 18:06:16 No.4061463 Report

Quoted By: >>4061467

>>4061389
looks like 2nd gen of the 85mm f/1.4. probably won't have significant changes

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 26 Jul 2022 18:19:09 No.4061467 Report

Quoted By: >>4061472

>>4061463
So far the 50mm had a significant upgrade in optics.
The 35mm had a significantly downgrade from the aluminium focus ring/barrel build.
I expect the 85mm to have a significant downgrade from dual linear motor to stepper motor.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 26 Jul 2022 18:35:30 No.4061472 Report

Quoted By: >>4061473

>>4061467
Had the 135mm, returned it due to stepper motor and AF inconsistency. Build also felt cheap, but I still prefer rubber focus ring to a cheaply made aluminum one (had and returned the 35mm 1.8 as well). I'm not even bothering with 3rd party anymore unless Smegma or Tamron make some really good teleprimes or some shit

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 26 Jul 2022 18:37:30 No.4061473 Report

Quoted By: >>4061476

>>4061472
Tamron is retarded about zooms right now. They don't even have a prime macro. Neither does Samyang to be honest, and that's really weird.
Only Sigma is working on the prime lenses of the two.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1655678259023.jpg, 97KiB, 1000x800

Anonymous Tue 26 Jul 2022 18:54:20 No.4061476 Report

Quoted By: >>4061477

>>4061473
Nothing comes close to matching the 90mm f/2.8 G on macro though, and anything new from 3rd party would be more expensive than the 90mm used. If anything, I'd prefer if Sony make a 100-135mm macro that improves on the 90mm, or maybe something crazy like the canon 135mm T/S Macro. The 90mm is nice but too close to the 85mm for me to justify buying. I'd rather just buy a Laowa 2x macro instead. I wouldn't be surprised if the 3rd parties had some talks with Sony to decide which lenses would sell and they should make. Tamron almost certainly does since their lineup just seems weird but also fills in the gaps for the most part. I suspect Sigma does as well which might be why they didn't bother with a 70-200 f/2.8. The 1st gen Sony is so cheap now it's probably pointless for Sigma to compete there.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 26 Jul 2022 19:09:55 No.4061477 Report

Quoted By: >>4061479

>>4061476
Right now Canon is the nimble boat who sets the rules, and Sony is the slow big boat who is following Canon.

We are more likely to see Sony attempt to make a 1.4x Magnification macro to copy Canon, than a 135mm macro.

>Nothing comes close to matching the 90mm f/2.8 G
Optics are fallin behind the Sigma 105 macro.
Autofocus is falling behind latest generation autofocus.
The only things it has that stands out is the optical stabilisation and the semi-directly coupled focus ring.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 26 Jul 2022 19:20:17 No.4061479 Report

Quoted By: >>4061480

>>4061477
>Autofocus is falling behind latest generation autofocus.
But still way better than 3rd party including the Sigma 105 macro. Sure, less important for macro, but kind of telling that one of the earliest Sony FF E mount lenses still has better AF than a recent Sigma. Main reason I don't bother with 3rd party.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 26 Jul 2022 19:22:44 No.4061480 Report

Quoted By: >>4061517

>>4061479
I just don't understand why Sony isn't applying that 90G focusing ring onto all of their lenses.

It's literally the perfect focus ring.
It would have silenced the 1 flaw the 16-35 pz G lens has. And reviewers would have been nothing but praises.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 26 Jul 2022 19:32:50 No.4061483 Report

Quoted By:

>>4060856
finally a competent sony shill lmao we needed some fresh air to counter the fujislugs

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 26 Jul 2022 19:52:43 No.4061491 Report

Quoted By:

>>4060288
the viltrox 85 ist a pretty good one.
i am very pleased with it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 26 Jul 2022 20:50:07 No.4061516 Report

Quoted By: >>4061517

>>4060327
The tamron 17 70 has better stabilization than the sony ones.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 26 Jul 2022 20:55:38 No.4061517 Report

Quoted By: >>4061519

>>4061516
probably because Sony doesn't give a shit about APS-C aside from vloggers
>>4061480
More prone to failure. There's always 90mms on Ebay for parts only due to failed AF/MF, likely caused by the focus clutch. I'd prefer AF/MF switch to avoid accidentally tripping the clutch, but with a linear focus ring with hard stops at both ends. Focus clutch is cool but for the majority of my lenses I don't MF enough to justify one over a switch.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 26 Jul 2022 20:57:11 No.4061518 Report

Quoted By:

>>4060871
>Canon EF50mm F1.8 STM
>4th place
Canon is still selling loads of them, how are they so good at this business stuff

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 26 Jul 2022 20:58:47 No.4061519 Report

Quoted By:

>>4061517
The question is then, why isn't Sony doing what you suggested?
They can't possibly be so clueless and retarded that they think people want their standard focus ring. Or maybe they can...

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 26 Jul 2022 21:00:18 No.4061520 Report

Quoted By:

>>4061389
Please let it not be a 35 1.8, I just bought one

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 26 Jul 2022 23:35:16 No.4061549 Report

Quoted By: >>4061593

>>4060877
>It's the #1 selling according to Tamron. I think I told you this in the past,
I think you keep mistaking BCN data for Japan as being data "for the world." I think you need to actually learn something about the global ILC market and who reports what before getting pissy about MUH LINKS! Also: don't beg the question, it makes you look stupid.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 27 Jul 2022 05:10:44 No.4061593 Report

Quoted By:

>>4061549
>I think you keep mistaking BCN data for Japan as being data "for the world."
Nope, it was a statement from Tamron, and they said world wide #1 sales.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 27 Jul 2022 09:42:23 No.4061648 Report

Quoted By:

>>4060479
are you retarded? the other picture has orangey creamy moire and it's not even symmetrical bottom vs top or left vs right

neither is ideal but the sony representation is clearly a more beautiful interpretation of what's there

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 29 Jul 2022 22:06:19 No.4062774 Report

Quoted By: >>4062776

I have a Sony because it had way more lens options, but after buying a few different ones I realized there's no point. The only reason you need dozens of different lenses is if you're a reviewer. I have a few in the car with my at all times, but as a daily I'll usually just keep a 24-70 on it, and keep something longer in my bag like a 70-200 as well as a good prime.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 29 Jul 2022 22:11:23 No.4062776 Report

Quoted By:

>>4062774
Well, if you one day need a cheap 600mm zoom, you have that option due to that mount.
If you one day need a cheap 10-18 manual zoom, you have that option as well.
It's about the options down the road as you develop on your own journey.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 30 Jul 2022 14:49:57 No.4063025 Report

Quoted By: >>4063059

>>4060288
>Why are there so few lenses from third party manufacturers for canon RF mount?
Because Canon has a different philosophy.

They don't release a lot of lenses, but they make sure they are the best ones out there and every single one works perfectly with all their cameras. The RF 50mm 1.2, Rf 85mm 1.2, and RF 28-70mm F2 are insane.

Sony has issues with 3rd party lenses not playing well with some cameras or shooting modes.

Not to mention Canon gear is more robust and generally longer-lasting than Sony stuff.

Plus, you can adapt 30 years of EF lenses perfectly on RF cameras.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 30 Jul 2022 15:59:18 No.4063058 Report

Quoted By:

>>4060346
this is pretty close to my current set up. I have a Z5 and A7R3. Im going to buy an adapter to adapt my sony lenses to Z mount.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 30 Jul 2022 16:00:38 No.4063059 Report

Quoted By:

>>4063025
>Canon lenses are long lasting
>Uses 3 different mounts on current cameras, after giving up on the last mount in just 1992

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 30 Jul 2022 16:01:59 No.4063061 Report

Quoted By: >>4063089 >>4063760

>>4060331
the Nikkor 28-75 2.8 is a native Z mount Tamron lens with Nikons name on it

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 30 Jul 2022 16:42:08 No.4063089 Report

Quoted By: >>4063760

>>4063061
This is a good move really, Sony tried it before also with at least 18-200 aps-c zoom, just got Tamron to do most of it, and then slap Sony badge and firmware on it, but unlike the 28-75 it wasn't that good of a lens.
The rebranding will allow Nikon to maintain control over their lens lineup and keep the IP control somewhat, as opposed to completely opening the mount spec, although there are already E to Z adapters.
I'd really love to see those I-series smol primes to get Z-mount versions.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1653166959953.jpg, 58KiB, 780x379

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 14:01:47 No.4063760 Report

Quoted By: >>4063763 >>4063791

>>4063061
>the Nikkor 28-75 2.8
I just had a look at it...
>Stepping motor
>15 elements
it's the original G1 with the RXD motor. That's actually... how do I put this.
It's a bad move from Nikon, because that's an old design which is lagging behind current competition on E-mount.
It's a brilliant move from Tamron to license it to Nikon. They already sold as much of that lens as they could and it's been the world's best selling lens since 2018 and onwards. And now they get that extra bit of customers on Z-mount and the licensing cash from Nikon.
But man... Nikon got outmaneuvered hard this time.

>>4063089
There is a weakness in that strategy, as I complained above.
It is not competitive with the 17 element G2 version on E-mount.

As soon as you ask Tamron for the license, they will sell it to you.
But they will also work on a G2 that will BTFO the lens they just licensed to you.
Right now the Nikkor's MSRP is 1200 dollars.
Whereas the Tamron G2 is 900.
It's a 300 dollar 1st party tax. And customers will notice that when they compare systems.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 14:07:14 No.4063761 Report

Quoted By:

>It's a 300 dollar 1st party tax. And customers will notice that when they compare systems.
400 dollar tax even. The Tamron 28-75 RXD launched at 800 dollars.

At least now we have direct evidence that Sony/Canon/Nikon charge +50% more money than Tamron/Sigma.
It's no wonder Tamron and Sigma are such popular brands.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 14:08:50 No.4063763 Report

Quoted By: >>4063792

>>4063760
The g1 version is only £480 before sales tax in the uk (under $600)

Double the price to use it on a Sony sensor in a Nikon body, with a mount that's rapidly failing.

Nikon are done for.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 14:41:22 No.4063775 Report

Quoted By: >>4063780

Wait a minute, let's check the dates.
>Nikon announces new budget Z 28-75mm F2.8
Published Dec 14, 2021
>Tamron developing redesigned 28-75mm F2.8
Published Aug 5, 2021

That means Nikon knew about the G2 upgrades.
They just preferred to license the old G1 instead.
Likely because they got a cheap offer from Tamron.
So it wasn't because they got bamboozled and outmaneuvered by Tamron, they just preferred the old lens for economic reasons.

Plus it will just have the standard "Nikkor Z" designation, they were never going to advertise it as RXD nor VXD, so most of their customers wouldn't have known it's the old version.
Cheeky move from Nikon.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 14:53:58 No.4063780 Report

Quoted By: >>4063781

>>4063775
Remember Sony are major shareholders in tamron, they may have a timed exclusivity' deal with tamron on some designs.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 14:57:25 No.4063781 Report

Quoted By: >>4063783

>>4063780
Nope, this doesn't work like video games.
The G2 design doesn't belong to Sony, or else it would have been released under the Sony brand.

Nikon had the choice to license the G2, but they opted for the g1.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 15:00:29 No.4063782 Report

Quoted By:

>>4060288
>Why are there so few lenses from third party manufacturers for canon RF mount?
Demand hasn't shifted sufficiently yet.
>EF lenses work perfectly on RF
>the vast majority of RF buyers have existing, high IQ EF lens kits
>many right now would buy an EF version instead of RF so the lens works on everything they own: 35mm film, DSLR, and mirrorless
>many RF video shooters are using the adapter that accepts filters so that one filter set covers all their lenses. they too would maybe just get the EF version
It has taken years for Sony to claw their way to a lens catalog that is remotely comparable to Canon EF or Nikon F. There's just more demand there. Sooner or later there will be a tipping point of RF users who want new RF glass and then you will see Sigma/Tamron/Tokina start producing RF.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 15:11:11 No.4063783 Report

Quoted By: >>4063784

>>4063781
>video games brand
>doesnt work like video games
lol

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 15:13:02 No.4063784 Report

Quoted By: >>4064126

>>4063783
You need a public statement from Tamron to prove the G2 lens isn't available for licensing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 15:35:23 No.4063791 Report

Quoted By: >>4063796 >>4063814

>>4063760
I have the 28-75 2.8 nikkor/tamron

its actually a pretty good lens. Its a LOT lighter than the 24-70 2.8 and sharpness is close to the 24-70 f4. It isnt a problem unless you're pixel peeping HARD. No CA or fringing that i can see without trying to make it happen and any distortion is a one-click correction in LR

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 15:36:25 No.4063792 Report

Quoted By:

>>4063763
top retard posting

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 15:40:55 No.4063796 Report

Quoted By: >>4063807

>>4063791
I think you would have a different opinion if the Tamron G2 lens was available on Z-mount for 900 dollars.

What you are posting right now is just a form of rationalisation because there isn't another option on the Z-mount.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 16:09:48 No.4063807 Report

Quoted By: >>4063810

>>4063796
I think I wouldn't. The only people who think the the G1 version is a bad lens is people trying to sell the newest thing and retarded newfags that just got into photography and never had to use the shit zooms of yesteryear.

The 28-75 IS the budget option, and as the budget option its pretty good.its not as good as the 24-70 2.8S, Its probably not as good as the G2 version, but its half the price of the 24-70 2.8S, and its avaioable to shoot on now.

Also, Nikon is my secondary brand, I run Sonys with mostly Gmasters for my real work, but thanks for playing

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 16:16:23 No.4063810 Report

Quoted By: >>4063874

>>4063807
>I think I wouldn't.
You would.

Not only would the G2 be available sooner than the Nikkor, it would also be cheaper, and come with a 6 year warranty.
Right now you are arguing irrationally in preference of inferiority.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1656882325850.jpg, 490KiB, 1920x1080

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 16:35:49 No.4063814 Report

Quoted By: >>4063878

>>4063791
>It isnt a problem unless you're pixel peeping HARD.
The main difference is the change in autofocus motor. It's not a pixel peeping thing.
And an ever so slightly larger F-stop.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 18:38:34 No.4063874 Report

Quoted By: >>4063876 >>4063879 >>4064126

>>4063810
and you are arguing fantasy vs reality

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 18:43:26 No.4063876 Report

Quoted By: >>4063877

>>4063874
1. It's not a fantasy to expect a higher tier company like Nikon to license the better quality optics between 2 choices.
2. It's not a fantasy to expect Tamron to port over some lenses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 18:44:18 No.4063877 Report

Quoted By: >>4063879 >>4063881

>>4063876
The reality is you overpaid for a rehoused Tamron lens being marketed as a Nikon one when a better version of the original Tamron lens is already shipping and is still cheaper than the Nikon lens.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 18:44:21 No.4063878 Report

Quoted By: >>4063880

>>4063814
>larger f stop

fuckin scrub doesnt know about the secret

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 18:45:19 No.4063879 Report

Quoted By:

>>4063877
meant to quote >>4063874

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 18:46:06 No.4063880 Report

Quoted By:

>>4063878
When the bokeh highlight circles are physically large it's due to larger F-stop.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 18:47:28 No.4063881 Report

Quoted By: >>4063883 >>4064126

>>4063877
the reality is you're a weak troll and you never get laid

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 18:48:32 No.4063883 Report

Quoted By: >>4063884

>>4063881
Post purchase rationalization is one hell of a drug

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 18:51:13 No.4063884 Report

Quoted By: >>4063885

>>4063883
not as bad as internet addiction

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 01 Aug 2022 18:52:15 No.4063885 Report

Quoted By:

>>4063884
I guess it's too bad you have both

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 01:03:19 No.4064024 Report

Quoted By:

because sony good canon bad

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 01:19:51 No.4064032 Report

Quoted By: >>4064061 >>4064126

how shit are EF lenses on a sony body with adapter

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 04:01:10 No.4064061 Report

Quoted By:

>>4064032
The latest adapters actually AF pretty well. EF on RF still performs better. But you can work just fine with EF on E and the best adapters. Even sports if you're using a fast USM lens that's well supported by the adapter firmware.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 07:15:06 No.4064095 Report

Quoted By: >>4064126

>>4060288
Because corporate cunts purposefully made multiple mounts so people would be locked into their system.

Instead of the art evolving and progressing, you have gear threads and fanboys who drag this shit to the ground.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 08:42:40 No.4064126 Report

Quoted By: >>4064160

>>4063874
>It's fantasy to think people want an objectively superior lens for a lower price
Oh you silly Billy, did someone not eat their brekkie this morning?
>>4063784
>Private company doing private business must tell me all their secrets or it's not fair
You fucking retard
>>4063881
>Projection
Lol
>>4064032
On a7 gen - shit
On a7ii gen - usable
On a7 iii and after - almost native performance
>>4064095
You sound poor

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 11:15:11 No.4064160 Report

Quoted By: >>4064162

>>4064126
Sorry retard, but licensing lenses is Tamron's primary business model.
You need proof to back up your claim that a Tamron lens isn't available for licensing.

>b-b-b--but muh Sony shareholder
If those MINORITY shares from Sony means so much, then why didn't Tamron help the E-mount back when it struggled?
Answer this question, retard.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 11:27:18 No.4064162 Report

Quoted By: >>4064165

>>4064160
>My whole argument rests on Nikon choosing the objectively worse design for a flagship lens.

Lmao.

>When e mount struggled

When was that, they've been the best selling mirrorless platform since launch, and tamron were the first 3rd party to launch both apsc and FF e mount zoom lenses.

Did you do absolutely zero research before embarrassing yourself again? retard.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1640548113644.png, 98KiB, 1024x367

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 11:36:51 No.4064165 Report

Quoted By: >>4064168

>>4064162
Tamron's main business model was lens licensing. You claimed Tamron has gone against that, so you need to prove it.

>When was that
A7 and A7ii days. The problem is you don't have enough braincells to think that far back.

Where were Tamron during those day? And why where they busy circlejerking all of EF and F mount even though sony was shareholder in Tamron?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 11:45:31 No.4064168 Report

Quoted By: >>4064176

>>4064165
>Tamrons main business is licensing

Burden of proof is on you for that. I'd say considering the 28-75 for Sony mount was the best selling lens across all systems at least 2 years in a row, that actually tamrons main business is making and selling lenses ;)

>You need to prove they limit what can be sold when

That's just me giving Nikon the benefit of the doubt, do you think they'd choose the objectively worse performer for their flagship products? What reason would Nikon have to go with the worse option, apart from it being the only option?

>A7 and a7ii days

They released their first crop lens for e mount in 2012, same year the a7 came out.

Are you saying you're mad that they didn't have any lenses ready to sell for a brand new mount using a flange distance that was completely unfamiliar, requiring complete redesigns from the ground up?

How long do you think lens design from conception to mass production takes anon? Tamron still beat everyone else in bringing 3rd party zoom lenses to the mount.

Not even Sony had a 24-70 2.8 until 2016, less than a year and a half before tamron released theirs.

You really don't do a single iota of research before angrily typing and humiliating yourself again eh?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 12:11:54 No.4064176 Report

Quoted By: >>4064182 >>4064290

>>4064168
>Burden of proof is on you for that
Not really, you made the first claim, that the G2 lens isn't available for licensing. the burden of proof is on you.
But I will prove it anyway, because I can.
https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/patent-adds-one-evidence-zeiss-batis-18mm-designed-tamron/
Batis 18mm patent, owned by Tamron.
https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/did-tamron-design-the-zeiss-batis-85mm-lens/
Batis 85mm patent, owned by Tamron.
See? All those years during A7 and A7ii Tamron was busy selling license to companies like Sony and Zeiss.
They never once gave a fuck about you and was busy pushing out lenses for EF-mount instead.

Now it's your turn loser. Prove to me that Tamron is no longer licensing lenses like the G2.

>That's just me giving Nikon the benefit of the doubt
You didn't have to, retard.
>do you think they'd choose the objectively worse performer for their flagship products?
Yes.
>What reason would Nikon have to go with the worse option, apart from it being the only option?
Because the inferior lens is cheaper to license. How dumb must you be that you couldn't rationalise this?

>They released their first crop lens for e mount in 2012
And nothing after that until 2018.
E-mount was struggling from 2011 to 2017, where were Tamron back then?

...could it be that minority shareholders like Sony don't mean shit?

>How long do you think lens design from conception to mass production takes anon?
About 2 years if nothing goes wrong. But definitely less that the 6 years you were implying.
But I bet you don't have the braincells it takes to differentiate between 2 years vs 6 years.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 12:28:47 No.4064182 Report

Quoted By: >>4064186 >>4064188

>>4064176
>You made the claim that the g2 lens isn't available for licensing
No I didn't, read my comment again.
>Tamron do license some lenses therefore licensing is their main business
Nice non sequitur, you wanna give that another go champ?
>Tamron were making lenses for EF, like the 85mm batis
That's a Sony mount lens champ.
>Prove they no longer license
Again, not what I said, I'm glad that our disagreement basically comes down to you being an illiterate moron.
>You didn't have to give nikon the benefit of doubt
Do giant mnc's often make decisions not in their own best interests?
>Yes they did choose the worse performer for their flagship products because I said so
What happened to that burden of proof you're so keen on?
>Because it's cheaper to license
How much does each cost? That burden of proof thing really starting to backfire on you eh?
>E mount were struggling
Not really
>Where were tamron
Probably still in commitments for other lenses, as you said they had to license to Zeiss to get Sony lenses on the market fast.
>Sony are a minority shareholder
They're the 2nd largest shareholder of tamron
>It only takes 2 years from concept to production for a completely new lens
Lmao, you're not even gonna attempt to cite that are you. Do you have any experience with industrial product design and manufacturing? No? Didn't think so.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 12:42:49 No.4064186 Report

Quoted By: >>4064212

>>4064182
>No I didn't
Yes you did retard. "muh timed exclusive".
You claimed Sony had some sort of timed exclusivity,even though the lens isn't even a Sony branded lens, that's how retarded you are.

>Tamron do license some lenses therefore licensing is their main business
Exactly, retard. You had 1 Tamron APS-C lens on E-mount vs several Zeiss and Sony lenses licensed from Tamron.
Do the math retard.

>Tamron were making lenses for EF, like the 85mm batis
No one said Batis was EF. But Tamron released exactly 1 lens for E-mount during 2011-2017. Meanwhile they released several more on EF mount
You had to try to distract the conversation from this fact because you were about to get your ass raped by facts.

>Again, not what I said,
Yes it was retard. Burden of proof is now on you that G2 is "muh timed exclusive".

>Do giant mnc's often make decisions not in their own best interests?
Saving money is in their interest. Morons like you didn't even know it was the G1 until I pointed it out.

>Yes they did choose the worse performer for their flagship products because
That's what reality shows us, retard.

>How much does each cost?
2 elements less.
Less precise elements
= cheaper to produce
You would know that if you had any braincells left.

>Not really
You can convince me if you can prove E-mount was larger than EF and F-mount back in 2013.
Go ahead and try, retard.

>Probably still in commitments for other lenses, as you said they had to license to Zeiss to get Sony lenses on the market fast.
Ahhhh so you're saying Tamron's first priority is customers like Zeiss and Sony.
Ahhhhhhhhh so what you're really saying is Tamron's main business model is to license lenses to companies like Zeiss and Sony.
Woooooooooooooooooooooooow

>They're the 2nd largest shareholder of tamron
So they are not even the largest, and you think they control Tamron.
Do you think you can control a company by owning 10% of it?
Do you think 10% is larger than the remaining 90%, moron?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 12:43:50 No.4064188 Report

Quoted By: >>4064212

>>4064182
>Lmao, you're not even gonna attempt to cite that are you.
And you didn't even attempt to disagree. Kill yourself loser.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1645863493291.png, 537KiB, 545x545

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 13:17:12 No.4064198 Report

Quoted By: >>4064212

And now the loser will go all silent and butthurt. He isn't even going to admit he was wrong.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 13:56:14 No.4064212 Report

Quoted By: >>4064215 >>4064216

>>4064186
>You claimed they had a timed exclusive
Actually said "they may have..."
Do you not understand what "may" means?
>They licensed more lenses for e mount than building them when e mount launched
Tamron are known to be capped by production capacity, did you expect them to just shut down production lines overnight for existing popular lenses? Did you expect their manufacturing facilities to magically double in size instantly? Do you even have theory of mind?
>They released lenses for EF, the most popular mount at the time
Yes, because going back to an earlier point, how long do you think concept to production takes? Hint, it's not 2 years
>Ass raped by facts
You've not given a single citation that's in any way relevant
>You did say that
Still illiterate I see, I'd have thought with 4 prompts to read it again you'd manage, clearly not
>You didn't know X until I mentioned it
I don't shoot z mount, do you just spend your life reading about camera systems you don't own? Pretty weird!
>That's what reality shows
Where, you've still not got any proof that tamron will license all designs to all brands.
>It has more in it so it costs more to produce
Weird how tamron kept the launch price the same between g1 and g2
>Prove e mount was the largest mirrorless mount against EF and F
Dude, learn to read.
>I don't understand the difference between separate private companies and shareholders
I know sweetie
>You think they control tamron
Tamron has no major shareholder, only minor. And yes, if you own more than 99% of shareholders, you have more say than 99% of shareholders, especially if you produce the best selling complementary product on the market.
>>4064188
No burden of proof, no need to refute it.
>>4064198
No one is silent, you've made absolutely zero attempt to actually prove any point you made that I'm not sure what u expect except for me to repeat myself?

I'll make a deal, whatever of your issues you provide a citation for, I'll reply.

But until then, hold this L.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 14:10:54 No.4064215 Report

Quoted By: >>4064223

>>4064212
>Actually said "they may have..."
Based on the flawed logic that Nikon couldn't possssibly opt for the inferior optics to save some money on their budget zoom lens offering.

It turns out Nikon didn't even bother to design the lens themselves.
It turns out they went to a cheap lens maker like Tamron.
It turns out they opted for the cheapest design they could get.
And you're so surprised by this that you immediately spun up a conspiracy theory about "muh timed exclusivity".
It's time for some introspection, retard.

>Tamron are known to be capped by production capacity, did you expect them to just shut down production lines overnight for existing popular lenses?
So we can conclude Sony has no say whatsoever.
Sony planned an E-mount for years, long before 2011, and they couldn't even get Tamron on board with some lens releases.
There you go, you just proved Sony, the minority shareholder has no decisive power within Tamron.
But feel free to prove otherwise, I will be convinced if you could point out the majority of Tamron's board of directors are appointed by Sony.

>Yes, because going back to an earlier point, how long do you think concept to production takes? Hint, it's not 2 years
LMAO
Get fucked loser
https://www.lenstip.com/143.1-article-Interview_with_Kazuto_Yamaki_-_CEO_of_Sigma_Corporation.html
"Normally, it takes two years to develop one lens, a very long time"

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 14:21:08 No.4064216 Report

Quoted By: >>4064223

>>4064212
>You've not given a single citation
>Still illiterate I see
Suck up the copium loser.

>I don't shoot z mount,
It wasn't just you, the other guy dind't know it was G1 liscense either.
Basically Nikon got away with it.
Until I pointed it out.

that's my point, Nikon opted for the cheaper option, because you losers wouldn't be able to tell the difference either way.

>you've still not got any proof that tamron will license all designs to all brands
I already made you admit licinsing lens designs to companies like Sony, Zeiss, Nikon is Tamron's highest priority.
Losers like you are Tamron's bottom priority.

>Weird how tamron kept the launch price the same between g1 and g2
G1 launched at 800.
G2 launched at 900.
Get your facts right retard.

It turns out the inferior lens indeed was the cheaper design. And woooow this completely blew your mind and caught you off guard.

>Dude, learn to read.
I said they were struggling. You tried to pretend otherwise.
And then I raped your ass by pointing out E-mount was many times smaller, thus struggling.

>I don't understand the difference between separate private companies
You're dodging the point because I just raped your ass and made you admit Tamron's main customers are Nikon, Sony, and Zeiss.

>And yes, if you own more than 99% of shareholders, you have more say than 99% of shareholders
Not if they gang up on you, retard.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 14:45:06 No.4064223 Report

Quoted By: >>4064231 >>4064232 >>4064289

>>4064215
>it's a conspiracy theory to believe that rival companies don't readily allow each other access to the research they have funded.

??? are you ok?

>it's copium that you don't believe every word I say and need a citation

lol

>I already showed you that tamron licensed lenses to their 2nd largest shareholder, and licensed an outdated design to nikon

This just proves my point

>Sony didn't ask tamron to shut down production on EF and F mount lenses that were already making sony money so they could reallocate resources to a completely unproven product from a brand that had ~3% market share!

Do you even think about what you say?

>just because sony are the largest shareholder in tamron behind tamron themselves, and they have been for 15+ years, doesn't mean that Sony have any say in what they do >:(

LMAO, do you have any proof Sony didn't have any say in the directors, because a large shareholder like in this case would definitely be consulted. Have you ever worked a job above minimum wage?

>a link that it says it took 2 years to develop 1 lens

So, not from concept to production then... that's literally just making sure the optics and electronics work.

>>4064216
>wanting proof of what I say is copium, u have to just outright believe anything i say!

Lol

>You losers didn't know who made a lens on a system you don't shoot!

are you sure WE'RE the losers here?

>Nikon is tamrons highest priority

Ah, because of the 0.037% share of holdings tamron have in nikon? and because nikon get outdated designs?

>the g2 launched at 900, 100 more!

And if you calculate inflation from 2018 to now, that $800 should be $944, thanks for pointing out it actually dropped in price!

>I said they were struggling

And I said they were the best performing mirrorless platform, you just can't read.

>I don't know the difference in zeiss and sony/zeiss

LMFAO, dumbass.

>Nikon are main customer

Do you give your best customers outdated products for elevated prices?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 15:02:31 No.4064231 Report

Quoted By: >>4064241

>>4064223
>to the research they have funded.
First, prove that Sony funded the research for the G2 lens.
Then explain why the G2 lens isn't sold under the Sony brand.

>tamron licensed lenses to their 2nd largest shareholder, and licensed an outdated design to nikon
1. Nikon appears to be happy with the cheapass design.
2. Tamron was lisensing the cheapest shit lens to Sony E-mount in 2011 while their best quality lenses went to EF mount.
So you didn't prove shit.

>Sony didn't ask tamron to shut down production on EF and F mount lenses
So you're saying Sony doesn't give a fuck about E-mount.
Is that supposed to prove something?

>LMAO, do you have any proof Sony didn't have any say in the directors,
The burden of proof is on you. Prove that Sony has appointed mroe than 10% of the board of directors at Tamron.

>that's literally just making sure the optics and electronics work.
Prove it.
With a real source from a lens maker.

>are you sure WE'RE the losers here?
Obviously, you're such a loser that you needed help to even know it was the G1.

>Ah, because of the 0.037% share of holdings tamron have in nikon?
No, retard, because that is Tamron's business model.
You E-mount retards were forced to buy overpriced Batis lenses because Tamron's main cusomers are Zeis/Sony/Nikon, not losers like yourself.

>And if you calculate inflation
You're in a state of hyper inflation, so it will take some time to catch up with companies like Tamron who operate from a different country.
Inflation has hit loser countries in the west for the most part because you are warmongers who constantly provoke war and got your ass owned by Russia and China.

>And I said they were the best performing mirrorless platform
So what? They were still struggling with loser numbers back then.

>I don't know the difference in zeiss and sony/zeiss
They are both customers at Tamron.
I bet you didn't have enough braincells to think that in.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 15:03:32 No.4064232 Report

Quoted By: >>4064241

>>4064223
>Do you give your best customers outdated products for elevated prices?
They give their best customers all options.

But Nikon chose the cheap ass option, because this was meant to be their cheapass lens.
Apply the few braincells you have, retard.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 15:22:31 No.4064241 Report

Quoted By: >>4064262 >>4064266 >>4064267 >>4064268

>>4064231
>Why isn't the g2 Sony branded
Same reason fiats don't wear a Ferrari badge, it devalues the premium product much more than it uplifts the cheap option.

>Nikon is happy with their scraps
Not like they can afford to design their own anymore is it, and Pentax still have their deal with cosina, what option did nik have?

>Tamron launched their low cost superzoom on the crop Sony platform

Which are consistently best sellers for crop systems.

>So you're saying tamron don't care about Sony

No, I'm saying Sony cares about profit, they get their 12% regardless if the lens fits Sony or canon.

>Prove that Sony have appointed 10% of directors

They own 12%, that's a bigger say than 10%.
Do you understand how business and shares work? It doesn't seem like it.

>Prove it

You already did

>BUT YOU DIDNT KNOW EVERY MINUTE DETAIL ABOUT LENSES ON A SYSTEM I NOR YOU USE

this makes you the loser pal, why are you deep diving on shit you'll never own?

>Sony users are forced to buy overprice lenses

Says the guy defending an outdated lens selling for nearly double the same lens does on Sony... Lol!

>I'm going to go on a non sequitur about inflation, Russia are better

With Russian inflation that original 800 units of currency would now be just shy of 1200. Do you ever research your ridiculous outbursts?

>So what if Sony are the best performing mirrorless platform

Well, that was your question, dumbass

>I still don't understand the difference between Zeiss and sony\zeiss

Bless.

>>4064232
>It's their cheap lens
>It's $1000
>Same lens on Sony is $600

I get it, you're just mad you spent all your rubles on an overpriced, undersupported system that exploits the last few customers it has, and you're mad.

We told you to buy Sony. You didn't listen. Now you're mad. Lol.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 15:45:23 No.4064262 Report

Quoted By: >>4064280

>>4064241
>Same reason fiats don't wear a Ferrari badge,
Wait, why are you backing down from the claim that Sony funded the G2 lens?
Are you conceding already, loser?
You're supposed to prove that first before talking out of your ass.

>Not like they can afford to design their own anymore is it?
Nikon just released some new super telephoto zooms didn't they?
So you're wrong.
The 28-75 is their budget lens, and is perfectly logically consistent with opting for the cheapest license.
You're just too butthurt to admit you jumped to a conspiracy theory.

>Which are consistently best sellers for crop systems.
So you're saying Sony, the largest shareholder, is fine with turd lenses.
Then why did you make up conspiracy theories about Sony funding the G2 license?

>No, I'm saying Sony cares about profit, they get their 12% regardless if the lens fits Sony or canon.
Then why did you sped a whole day arguing Sony has "muh exclusivity" rights to the G2 lens even though they get a piece of the profit even on Z-mount?

>They own 12%
Then prove that Sony have appointed 12% of the board of directors
I'm not letting you off the hook, retard.

>You already did
Nope, read the link again.
The full context is The interviwer asked him why they released DSLR lenses first.
He said they didn't have enough time.
The interviewer argued they has 1,5 years.
The CEO says they would need 2 years. In this context it is 2 years to release a mirrorless lens for L-mount.
Get fucked loser.

>why are you deep diving on shit you'll never own?
You're the loser who couldn't understand why Nikon would select the cheapest license.
And even when explained that you losers wouldn't have noticed it, you didn't concede the point, you just got more butthurt.

Nikon did the right thing, you losers never even knew they licensed the G1

>Says the guy defending an outdated lens selling for nearly double
Wrong again loser
Not defending them, I'm explaining what they did
You didn't have enough braincells left to notice

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 15:51:50 No.4064266 Report

Quoted By: >>4064280

>>4064241
>With Russian inflation
You're supposed to use the Japanese numbers, because Tamron is a Japanese corporation.
They could have chosen to bear the loss of the inflation from your loser country to preserve their current customers. And you wouldn't be able to know otherwise.

>Well, that was your question
No retard, I asked
E-mount was struggling from 2011 to 2017, where were Tamron back then?
That's when you knew you lost the argument and distracted with whether or not E-mmount was struggling vs EF-mount.

>I still don't understand the difference between Zeiss and sony\zeiss
They are both customers at Tamron.
I bet you didn't have enough braincells to think that in.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 15:53:51 No.4064267 Report

Quoted By: >>4064280

>>4064241
>It's $1000
That is still their budget F2,8 option regardless of how poor you are.
Nikon consider that their low budget option.

you're too butthurt to admit you're wrong, but it is what it is.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 15:54:35 No.4064268 Report

Quoted By: >>4064280 >>4064292

>>4064241
>g2
>premium product

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 16:33:35 No.4064280 Report

Quoted By: >>4064285 >>4064286

>>4064262
>sony didn't fund it
Sony own 12% of the business, do you think they got that for free?

You really don't understand how businesses work eh?

>nikon just released x lens

Prove it was 100% designed and made by themselves

>Investors protecting their investments is a conspiracy theory

No, you're just thick

>So sony is fine with bad lenses

They're a perfectly good lens if you want an affordable option with a very versatile zoom range.

>Sony funding businesses that they have a 12% share in is a conspiracy

Listen to yourself

>prove that sony appointed 12% of their directors

This was a line that you have come up with, the burden of proof is still on you to prove they aren't appointed by sony.

And you do understand that publically traded companies must answer to their shareholders, right?

>They needed 2 years to design lenses

You realise that interview was in 2018, apparently over a year and a half since they started design work, and those lenses made for the L mount flange distance, according to wikipedia, STILL haven't been released, or even announced.

So by your own evidence, it takes at least 6 and a half years.

>YOURE A LOSER >:(

Oh petal.

>I'm not defending them, I'm justifying their decision making even though I have absolutely zero insight.

Lol, loser.

>>4064266

>no i didn't mean russia, i meant japan

Keep backpedaling, you'll come up with something that's not nonsense eventually.

>Where were tamron from 2011 to 2017

Making the most popular e-mount lens? Still making other lenses that netted Sony big profits? Can you read?

>Zeiss is a customer of tamron

Show me 1 lens that is tamron licensed and made by zeiss in zeiss' factories.

>>4064267
>$1000 isn't too expensive, even when an identical product costs $600

logic not your strong point hun?

>>4064268
>More literacy issues

The "premium product" in the context of that reply is clearly the Sony GM range.

Why do you get in arguments when you can't even process basic sentences?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 16:52:59 No.4064285 Report

Quoted By: >>4064287

>>4064280
>Sony own 12% of the business
They purchased that a long time ago.
The G2 is a recent lens, and you claim it was funded by Sony, so you need to prove it, loser.
Prove that Sony funded the G2 lens.
Then explain why they didn't sell it under the Sony brand where they could get 100% of the earnings of the sales.

>Prove it was 100% designed and made by themselves
I don't have to, loser, it's you have have to prove they were too poor to develop it. Because that's the claim you made.

>Investors protecting their investments
Prove that the G2 is an investment solely from Sony.
The default assumption is that G2 is an investment from tamron as a whole.
But you're going the extra mile and claim the G2 is specifically a Sony investment.
Prove it, loser.

>They're a perfectly good lens
The Tamron crap lens from 2011 is not a "perfectly good lens", loser.
But I'm not letting you off the hook.
You said Sony is fine with turd lenses from Tamron, then why would they go out of their way to specifically fund the G2 lens, huh loser? Why would they?

>This was a line that you have come up with, the burden of proof
Nooooope.
You are the one who claimed Sony had far more influence than they had in percentage of shares.
That is your burden of proof, loser.

>So by your own evidence, it takes at least 6 and a half years.
No retard. By my evidence it takes a company like Sigma 2 years, exactly as they said in the context of launching a native lens for L-mount.
Get fucked loser.

>justifying their decision making even though I have absolutely zero insight.
I don't need insight in Nikon to know they released budget 28-75 for their system.
Only retards like you have trouble comprehending that.

>Keep backpedaling,
Different countries use different currencies that are subject to different rates of inflation, loser.
You loser country is on its way into implosion.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 16:56:19 No.4064286 Report

Quoted By: >>4064288

>>4064280
>Making the most popular e-mount lens?
Not for the Tamron brand. They made them for other brands, because those corporate customers are more important than losers like you.

>>4064280
>>Zeiss is a customer of tamron
>Show me 1 lens that is tamron licensed and made by zeiss
When Zeiss buys 1 license from Tamron, it means Zeiss is a customer at Tamron.
You're such an imbecile that wouldn't couldn't even process your way through that. That's how retarded you are.

>$1000 isn't too expensive
That's what Nikon implies. That is the cheapest of their F2,8 zoom, regardless of how you feel.
They wanted to earn the most money, so they purchased a shit lens and sold it for 1200. But retards like you would never understand that. You always have to make up conspiracy theories.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 16:57:18 No.4064287 Report

Quoted By: >>4064289

>>4064285
Let's keep this simple.

I'm only going to read your first paragraph.

>You said Sony funded the G2 version
Where?
>why don't they sell it under the Sony brand
This has already been covered, did you forget already?
>If they sold it under the sony brand they'd keep 100% of the revenue
So you think tamron are just going to design and construct lenses for free?
Regardless of you not knowing how business works, basic logic also seems to escape you.

See what a loony you are now?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 17:00:17 No.4064288 Report

Quoted By: >>4064290

>>4064286
>not for the tamron brand
??? I'm talking about the e-mount tamron 18-200, how is that not tamron branded?
>When zeiss buys 1 license
What lens would that be then? You do know that sony/zeiss is just a marketing thing, and it's Sony that greenlight and make those lenses, right?
>Tamron keeping their best production for their business partners is a conspiracy theory, but Nikon buying the cheapest lenses they can and overcharging for them isn't!

Can you explain that one out for me?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 17:01:34 No.4064289 Report

Quoted By:

>>4064287
>>>You said Sony funded the G2 version
>Where?
See Your line 1 greentext here>>4064223

Are you so retarded that you didn't even remember what you wrote? Did I rape your ass to harD? LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMAO

>This has already been covered, did you forget already?
Nope, They would have earned 100% sales of that lens if they had 100% funded it and sold it under Sony brand.
So why didn't hey do it?
>So you think tamron are just going to design and construct lenses for free?
think harder retard. If Sony has 100% funded the lens, they would be giving money to Tamron.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 17:03:58 No.4064290 Report

Quoted By:

>>4064288
>??? I'm talking about the e-mount tamron 18-200, how is that not tamron branded?
You're saying they made quality lenses for E-mount.
The only quality lenses for E-mount they made were under the Batis brand.
The Tamron APS-C zoom from 2011 is largely agreed by all reviewer to be a piece of shit.

>What lens would that be then?
See>>4064176
Did you get raped so hard you forgot all the Zeiss Batis lenses comes from tamron patents?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1593334597822.png, 48KiB, 196x202

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 17:06:00 No.4064291 Report

Quoted By: >>4064293

How can you guys fight about a fucking lens mount?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 17:06:53 No.4064292 Report

Quoted By: >>4064295

>>4064268
Speaking of g2, who makes it?
Does Tamron even make lenses in Japan?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 17:07:38 No.4064293 Report

Quoted By:

>>4064291
It's not even over a lens mount. I'm mount agnostic.

I'm arguing a retard who believes Sony has "timed exclusivity" to one of the Tamron lenses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 17:09:51 No.4064295 Report

Quoted By: >>4064298

>>4064292
They are a global company with factories all over the world.
Why does it matter where the factory is located so long as the factory holds the same standards?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 17:22:54 No.4064298 Report

Quoted By: >>4064300

>>4064295
Well, everything was going so great, why did Tamron stop making Sony zooms at the original site?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 17:24:28 No.4064300 Report

Quoted By:

>>4064298
>why did Tamron stop making Sony zooms at the original site?
Maybe they wanted more employees.
Maybe there weren't enough employees in the original site for expansion.
Maybe the other countries have superior employees who work even faster.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 17:28:31 No.4064301 Report

Quoted By: >>4064303

See the nuance here is that "Tamron designed" Batis lenses were warrantied and presumably made by Cosina, which would be the real value behind MIJ label.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 17:33:34 No.4064303 Report

Quoted By:

>>4064301
I wouldn't have given a fuck where Cosina have located their factories. So long as they are made to the same standard.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 18:24:59 No.4064323 Report

Quoted By: >>4064327

Lmao these two nerds really woke up on a Tuesday morning and went straight to an argument over lens factories.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 18:45:47 No.4064327 Report

Quoted By: >>4064333

>>4064323
It's important to be located in Japan!
Only Japanese samurai can do proper lens quality check!!!

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 18:49:47 No.4064333 Report

Quoted By: >>4064334

>>4064327
Lmao look at nerd #2 trying to create distance through self deprecation.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 02 Aug 2022 18:50:38 No.4064334 Report

Quoted By: >>4064462

>>4064333
Japanese samurai glass folded 1000 times!

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 03 Aug 2022 02:01:19 No.4064462 Report

Quoted By:

>>4064334
>folded 1000000 times
<still can't deliver a dust-free lens

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 03 Aug 2022 10:33:59 No.4064553 Report

Quoted By:

holy shit, this guy trying desperately to say "Sony bad" really had a tough time the last couple of days, meltdowns all over the board! some guys really need to get out of their moms basement once in a while

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 13 Aug 2022 21:00:18 No.4068150 Report

Quoted By:

>>4060442
>reverse engineering
lmfao, they just have to pay for proprietary design - hardware and software. No one reverse engineers a mount and connectors/AF systems etc jfc.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches