You do matter to Canon!what's not to like about me?!? I'm a lovable guy
I've spent so much money with Canon.... (yes yes I know that in the grand scheme of things, I do not matter to Canon.... but they matter to me)
You and @neuroanatomist are just meanies
I believe the mark 3 version may have improved ‘closed loop’ AF with the camera body, resulting in more precision. Not something Canon ever publicised.If you look at the ef 70-200mm f2.8 LIS mk II's S/H value compared to the very slightly improved mk III (mostly flourine coatings to the front element). The mkIII sells for a lot more than the mkII even though they are essentially the same lens.
But have you ever tried the EF 35/1.4 II ?That's your answer? You sound like a Canon fanboy. i'm not going to buy a 9 year old EF lens that needs an adapter everytime i want to use it. EF is now an obsolete system!
Don't take it personally - it's a comment on Canon's general marketing policy.That's it, another one joins the meanie list
At this point, the witchcrat ritual and the naming are the bare minimum to placate my righteous ireYou do matter to Canon!
If it weren't for you, they would never have designed an RF 1,2/35, never!
They will even name it Robynon.
(Written in the entrails of a roadkilled Meep Meep.)
PS: I don't want to join the meanie list.
Those EF lenses still exist.How would #2 benefit Canon? They are in the business of selling lenses (and cameras and other stuff). If someone buys a lens and then never upgrades that is not good for Canon.
Do you think that most people getting EF lenses are buying them new? Otherwise people sticking to EF lenses or buying them second hand are not bringing Canon much revenues.
They have to introduce new lenses to induce people to upgrade (at least for people moving from EF to RF).
Now it is entirely possible that a fast 35L was de-prioritized compared to 50, 85 and 135 because the EF equivalent 35 1.4L II was more recent than the EF equivalents of the other 3.
But still, 35mm is a classic focal length and one of the most represented in all systems.
In any case, it doesn't matter to Canon that I want it badly. I still want it though
I have some H. P. Lovecraft books if you think it can help you locate the fabled Necronomicon!At this point, the witchcrat ritual and the naming are the bare minimum to placate my righteous ire
OK ok you're safe... for now
Not sure I understand what you mean?Those EF lenses still exist.
The question is whether enough people would buy a new RF version for Canon to make enough profit.
What are the current sales numbers for the EF 35/1.4 II? You’re assuming they’re weak, but none of us know. Canon does.My point was simply: saying that we do not need a new fast RF 35L because there is already a great EF 35mm f/1.4L II may be logical, but it does not do Canon much good, financially speaking
Yes I am indeed assuming that. I may be wrong of course.What are the current sales numbers for the EF 35/1.4 II? You’re assuming they’re weak, but none of us know. Canon does.
I doubt they're making more, but it is possible that there is a significant inventory of the EF version. If so, that would give them two very good reasons not to make an RF version.Yes I am indeed assuming that. I may be wrong of course.
But would you assume differently? Would you assume that Canon would use manufacturing resources for EF lenses while they cannot make enough RF lenses to fulfil demand? And would you assume that many people are still spending money on new EF lenses? Like a $2K new EF 35 1.4L II? I assume that the second hand market is still healthy.
In the end, yes I don't know. I am stating my opinions based on my logic. It could be that Canon made a boatload of EF 35 1.4L II and they're waiting to sell them before introducing a new RF 35. Don't know. Canon won't tell me
2 reasons? what would be the other one?I doubt they're making more, but it is possible that there is a significant inventory of the EF version. If so, that would give them two very good reasons not to make an RF version.
An inventory to sell, and the fact that there's an inventory to sell would suggest they overestimated demand for a 35/1.4L.2 reasons? what would be the other one?
If that was the case, then perhaps there would be discounts on the EF35/1.4ii to clear the stock. I haven't seen it on any discount advertising to date.An inventory to sell, and the fact that there's an inventory to sell would suggest they overestimated demand for a 35/1.4L.
I just bought one 3 weeks ago....What are the current sales numbers for the EF 35/1.4 II? You’re assuming they’re weak, but none of us know. Canon does.
Congratulations ! If Heineken made lenses…….I just bought one 3 weeks ago....