Finally, clarification from Canon about paring the list of EF lenses

[DanK]

Canon has finally issued a statement about the discontinuation of many EF lenses. You can find it here:

https://petapixel.com/2021/04/22/can...-optimization/

Some of these make sense to me. Canon has at least 6 EF 70-200 lenses, and it makes sense to get rid of dinosaurs, like the f2/8 without IS. What does puzzle me is dropping the 70-200 f/4 II, which is a new lens, only 3 years old, and is an obvious choice for some people who want a very high quality 70-200, as it both weighs and costs half as much as its f/2.8 sibling.

But in any case, this hardly consistitutes abandoning EF lenses for DSLRs, at least for the moment.

[LenR]

I note that 2 of what were considered Canons "L" prime trilogy, The 85mm f1.2 and the 135 f2 are on the list.
The 35mm f1.4 appears to be still available for the time being. Both the 35mm and 135mm are part of my kit and baring any unforeseen accidents will probably outlast me.

[Manfred M]

None of this should surprise anyone. Canon did exactly the same thing with the introduction of the ES mount and the phasing out of the FD mount cameras and lenses (and the FL and R mounts before that). That was one of the negative marks against Canon when I was looking at my first DSLR. The new RF mount is just the next mount in a long line of changes.

From a technical standpoint, the design team is less encumbered by restrictions of the old mount. Look at Nikon with the F-mount from 1958. They simply could not produced ultra-fast lenses because the mount itself restricted the exit pupil and an f/1.4 was generally the fastest lens they could build.

That being said, Canon has marketing data as to how well certain lenses are selling and are projected to sell against the inventory that they hold. They understand their production capacity and which lenses are going to give them the highest return on investment. Sometimes a product gets dropped because a supplier no longer makes a key component and redesigning the product for the replacement part is not going to be economical.

At least there is some form of transition plan; ES adapters are going to squeeze a bit more life out of existing glass, people are going to dump their old bodies and lenses, so Canon gets to sell more bodies and glass. The only people who won't be happy are the ones who are the ones that are going to have to buy new lenses when they have reasonably adequate ones already...

[William W]

Arguably a list of what EF Lenses Canon chooses to continue producing is more significant to gain an holistic view of their strategy and involvement apropos DSLR.

I reckon (as only one example) if the Tokyo Olympics do go ahead, then Canon will still have a cache of DSLRs and EF lenses in attendance - similarly for Paris: perhaps by Los Angles in 2028 Mirrorless will happen?

I think DSLR as a system has a long way to travel - at least 10 years, more and more for specialized shoots, though.

WW

[Tronhard]

The thing is, a camera of whatever type and era will have a certain level of performance. It will continue to have that level as long as it is maintained and not damaged. When one looks at some of the amazing photos that date back decades it is hard for me to say that DSLRs (or SLRs, or earlier) are junk and not worth buying. I think there is a whole constituency of people out there who will buy DSLRs because they are cheap and work fine, or because they are enthusiasts for that technology. I can't argue against either as long as they are happy with the results. What they will get is likely some very good bargains as people migrate more to the digital platform.

I have been thinking about what to do with my cameras when I pass on and I was considering finding a museum or some such, only to discover that the local secondary schools would kill to have access to them, and if it helps a generation of students discover the joys and techniques of photography, I can hope for no better outcome.