I was not aware of that lawsuit. I assume Sony could adopt a similar stance unless the Chinese lens manufacturers have the appropriate licences.
I can understand why Canon are protecting their lens mount but they are in danger of pricing most of their products out of the reach of all but pros and wealthy enthusiasts. I am fine with buying used non current mirrorless cameras but I cannot really justify the cost of most RF lenses for my purposes. Perhaps I am just mean and out of touch.
I am not a legal expert; my understanding is that E mount was initially released with a generous degree of openness to allow rapid expansion of lenses available and start competing with the big players at that time. The two notable limitations as we now found out are restrictions on TCs (no big deal) and 15fps limit (a little more annoying but again no big deal personally). I am not sure if it goes any deeper and if Sony has any recourse other than silently changing the spec at some point. L-mount is a similar situation, only perhaps even more open (no fps / tc limit).
So naturally, we see - and therefore EXPECT - new amazing and relatively affordable optics such as Sigma 50mm 1.2 and 1.4 DN ART, Viltrox 35mm f/1.2, or Tamron 35-150 just to name a few. and in this case Canon still has NO answer for the latter 2 examples. There are obviously MORE. 50mm decision is mostly financial at this point - all options can be considered "excellent" optically other than retail cost. So you are absolutely not out of touch but rather well-informed.
This leads us to the reality check if Canon RF line-up is competitive on functionality against E mount options. It is a reasonably mature system at this point and CAN GET THE JOB DONE, even if falling behind Sony in terms of updates in certain focal ranges - wider angle is a particularly notable here. With the exception of 24-105 f/2.8 (usable 30-90 range maybe) all wider lenses are old releases from the early days of the system. Most other manufacturers have released improved gen II range. Canon 50mm and longer options seems to be quite competitive. On the other hand, Sony 16-35mm f/2.8 GMII in particular is a major reason for entering E mount system in my case. I have exhausted all EF mount options and settled with the least compromised 16-35mm f/2.8 III, and I am not yet convinced that RF 15-35mm adds anything positive other than slightly wider FOV (not a major pain point for me). RF 14-35 is not an option due to image stretching and comparatively high cost of entry. 35mm vcm and all wider RF primes so far all employ notable image stretching - again totally unacceptable in my view. Despite so many rumors, there are zero new TSE lenses and old ones are worse than performing keystone correction in Lightroom. So Canon is good for professional telephoto shooters, web resolutions, press or else if periphery is completely of no consequence (video work, shallow DOF portraits and journalism). This is survivable but limiting.
As discussed above, one is most likely taking a financial hit when buying into Canon RF line-up compared E mount options. Whether this is important and significant depend on business revenue. £100k pa (profit) business should easily afford a couple of midrange RF L zooms or primes. Not everyone is hitting that (myself included at this point) and there are hobbyists who are earning zero from photography by choice, and this is totally OK.
The most interesting aspect of this discussion is what it is doing to Canon. It is very hard to really know so I will just spill some thoughts. 1. Both Canon and Sony appear very profitable. Both models seem to work. Nikon has lost a lot of market share, but other reasons may be also at play. 2. There is significant brand loyalty, meaning many users will only purchase OEM accessories. 3. There is a massive uptick in Chinese lens options and quality, but they are also increasing in price. DJI and Godox today are not budget brands any more and Viltrox is shifting that way. This is already acting as a pressure on Sony, and indirectly Canon (brand switching). 4. Canon controls 100% of RF mount lens market, but users may be less motivated to upgrade from EF mount options and / or invest in a new lens. Brand switching or running 2 systems (my intention) becomes very tempting.
So this is a balancing act between monopolised lens market and suppressed sales or brand switching.
