What are Canon playing at

Saw this just earlier , it would be very strange if they were producing M43 lenses. As it says on here, they don't make lenses for systems hey don't sell themselves -

https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/news/canon-to-join-micro-four-thirds-standard

"The patent was spotted by Canon News, and describes three 'standard' zoom lenses with variable apertures: a 12-48mm f/1.7-4.0, a 12-47mm f/1.7-2.8, and a 12-24mm f/1.7-4.0"

No idea why they have patents for 3 very similar lenses, but the f1.7 is interesting, as we know this is a popular aperture for M43. But with Olympus already having a 12-40 2.8 and Panasonic a 12-35 2.8, they would have to match or under-cut prices on those, especially if it was to be variable aperture
 
Last edited:
If they take out the patent on a particular lens design/type then it stops Panasonic / Olympus from making them or charge them a fee to ,simples really
 
the black fox said:
If they take out the patent on a particular lens design/type then it stops Panasonic / Olympus from making them or charge them a fee to ,simples really
Click to expand...
WHS, companies often patent things or buy up patents to stifle development.
 
the black fox said:
If they take out the patent on a particular lens design/type then it stops Panasonic / Olympus from making them or charge them a fee to ,simples really
Click to expand...

Almost exactly what I just posted on another forum!
 
the black fox said:
If they take out the patent on a particular lens design/type then it stops Panasonic / Olympus from making them or charge them a fee to ,simples really
Click to expand...

I guess, but why? are they really making a move? It's very specific territory
 
the black fox said:
If they take out the patent on a particular lens design/type then it stops Panasonic / Olympus from making them or charge them a fee to ,simples really
Click to expand...
sirch said:
WHS, companies often patent things or buy up patents to stifle development.
Click to expand...
That would be extremely sh***y of Canon to buy patents just to stop Olympus and Panasonic expanding a system that Canon aren't in the market for.
 
May be they finally realised their strengths is in lens design (not camera bodies) and decided to become a 3rd party lens manufactures? :D
 
snerkler said:
That would be extremely sh***y of Canon to buy patents just to stop Olympus and Panasonic expanding a system that Canon aren't in the market for.
Click to expand...
All's fair in love and war, makes sound business sense to me to stop a competitor siphoning off potential customers.
 
snerkler said:
That would be extremely sh***y of Canon to buy patents just to stop Olympus and Panasonic expanding a system that Canon aren't in the market for.
Click to expand...
running scared comes to mind ,both Panasonic and Olympus make there attempts at mirrorless look amateur . and yes I have used both
 
I don't see how Canon can patent a focal or aperture range. They could patent the actual design of a specific lens but I'd guess that the chances of another company not being able to produce a lens different enough to avoid a patent infringement law suit must be very unlikely.
 
woof woof said:
I don't see how Canon can patent a focal or aperture range. They could patent the actual design of a specific lens but I'd guess that the chances of another company not being able to produce a lens different enough to avoid a patent infringement law suit must be very unlikely.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure how it works in that regard tbh, as I know that Olympus can't make an exact lens that Panny have and vice versa which is why you have Panny making a 12-35mm f2.8 and Olly doing a 12-40mm f2.8 etc. Whether that's just an agreement between those two, or whether that's something across the m4/3 format I don't know?
 
When you patent something it has to be a thing which can be defined and seen to be sufficiently different from the rest in some way. If you Google it you'll see. You can't for example patent the wheel as it already exists but you could maybe patent a new wheel with some not seen before property or a different way of making one if these things and ways of making them are different from the way it's been made or otherwise done to date.

With a lens I'm guessing that you can't patent 12-24mm f4 as it's just not special enough as just about everyone makes them but you could maybe paten a 12-24mm f4 with 12 elements in 6 groups as shown in this drawing... and attach the drawing. I don't know if you'd have to detail the curves and glass types and the exact special dimensions and distances etc as I've never looked into it in that detail.

An example, I used to work for a company called Systime computers that got away with copying DEC stuff for years. Sometimes the Systime stuff looked nothing like the DEC stuff but performed exactly the same function but I remember one circuit board which was a mirror image of the DEC board and that seemed to be enough to get away with it... so I suppose it depends how strict things are in the market you're interested in and how good your legal team is.

I do doubt that Canon can patent such a vague thing as 12-24mm f1.7-4 though, I think they'll need to specify much more and if that's the case it should be relatively easy for anyone else to make a lens with exactly the same headline specification, 12-24mm f1.7-4, if it's different enough. I know that there are lenses out there that are exactly the same as other companies patents, I think there's a Tamron patent which exactly matches a Sony lens for example but I think all this proves is that Tamron designed it for Sony. I think there are to give another example loads of 50mm f1.8's out there that don't seem to be infringing anyones patent as they're all different once you look at the lenses, groups, curves and all the rest inside...
 
Just a quick ps on the subject...

You don't have to patent things and not patenting some things could be an idea as if you patent it you have to give details and your competitors can then take your patent, change things a bit and make/do almost the same thing. But if you don't patent it it might take your competitors years to work out how you've done it and be ready to put it into production and by then you've made a boat load of cash and moved on to MK2.

With a lens though I'd imagine that once your competitors can get their hands on one any optical company could strip it down, measure it and have the glass types, the curves and the full design in the computer within what? A day? I suppose the challenges would be duplicating the exact make up of any coatings and of course the dreaded electronics.
 
I think all of these companies should be more liberal, the market is so boring as is, it's this system or that ... I'd love to see more cross-compatibility. No doubt it's all financial restraints, I mean, if say Panasonic begun to make lenses for Sony or even more out there - Sigma and/or Tamron actually creating lenses for Fuji! :D
 
It'd be great if there was a standard mount and the focus and comms were all open standards but there's more of a mark up on lenses so each company is going to want to sell as many lenses as possible and one way of doing that is to have a unique mount with its own protocols that limit what others can do as much as possible. Sadly.

This is one thing that attracts me more to old film lenses as they're lenses for life :D and all you need is a different £10 adapter and you can use them on your next different make camera.
 
That's what I love about old lenses too, they are so versatile and don't [have to] put much of a hole in your pocket. I keep meaning to get back to the hunt for some. Haven't used any since I sold my M43 gear and all the adapters I had along with
 
woof woof said:
It'd be great if there was a standard mount and the focus and comms were all open standards but there's more of a mark up on lenses so each company is going to want to sell as many lenses as possible and one way of doing that is to have a unique mount with its own protocols that limit what others can do as much as possible. Sadly.

This is one thing that attracts me more to old film lenses as they're lenses for life :D and all you need is a different £10 adapter and you can use them on your next different make camera.
Click to expand...
The old Zeiss Ikon M42 mount was the industry standard for decades. When Pentax brought out the K mount, they allowed all and sundry to use it. While using a proprietary mount might stop others from making lenses for your cameras, it also stops people buying your lenses for other makes of camera. Swings and roundabouts. The best way to compete is to be better, not to be different.
 
It happens in all areas of business.

Tesco are currently holding untold areas of land that would be perfect to build a supermarket on but they have no intention of doing so. By owning the land they can make sure no one else can build one there.
 
Mike.P said:
It happens in all areas of business.

Tesco are currently holding untold areas of land that would be perfect to build a supermarket on but they have no intention of doing so. By owning the land they can make sure no one else can build one there.
Click to expand...


And if they are getting near the of life of the original planning license they will/might build a supermarket even if it competes their other one nearby.......better to spread what they have rather than allow a competitor get in!!!
 
john.margetts said:
The old Zeiss Ikon M42 mount was the industry standard for decades. When Pentax brought out the K mount, they allowed all and sundry to use it. While using a proprietary mount might stop others from making lenses for your cameras, it also stops people buying your lenses for other makes of camera. Swings and roundabouts. The best way to compete is to be better, not to be different.
Click to expand...

I agree but most companies don't seem to.

We're going on holiday next week and if it was just me I might just take a couple of old manual lenses but it's not a photographic holiday and I'll be with other people so I'll take a modern AF lens. Left to my own devices and for a slower picture taking experience I'm quite happy with an old Rokkor which is great for me for everything except for taking pictures of people faster which is where the modern AF lenses win out.
 
Mike.P said:
Tesco are currently holding untold areas of land that would be perfect to build a supermarket on but they have no intention of doing so
Click to expand...

Box Brownie said:
And if they are getting near the of life of the original planning license they will/might build a supermarket even if it competes their other one nearby.......better to spread what they have rather than allow a competitor get in!!!
Click to expand...
They are starting to open "Jacks" stores just out of town, I wonder if this was the plan all along, with the land hoarding?
Sorry that's O/T as you were (y)
 
woof woof said:
An example, I used to work for a company called Systime computers that got away with copying DEC stuff for years.
Click to expand...
Oddly enough that's explained something that's been a mystery to me for a long time.

About 25 years ago I was maintaining a legacy foreign exchange system for one of the banks. It ran on a Vax cluster and the dev system lived in a corner of our work space. My team leader suggested at one point that I should hunt around for the backup dev system which had been put in the equipment store at some time. Two hours of fascinating computer archeology later I hadn't found the thing.

We looked in the equipment database and there was its tag number so back I went. It takes a long time to check tag numbers in a big store room but by tea time I'd found the number on a box with the name "Systime". No-one recognised the name or the box it was on and having thought for a while we agreed we had no idea what this box might be and so so abandoned the idea.

Now I know I'd found the elusive backup. :ty:
 
Having read the article the lenses don't match MFT standards, and have a much shorter back focus than MFT, so could they simply be for a range of larger sensor fixed lens compacts ?
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
Oddly enough that's explained something that's been a mystery to me for a long time.
Click to expand...

Systime computers where based in Leeds. They manufactured DEC clones and also their own range of kit which was IMO often good kit. I worked in their repair department but left to be a field engineer as they got more money and a car. It was just after I left that everything fell apart and DEC came in to cherry pick the staff. Obviously it all fell apart because I left :DWorking at Systime taught me a lot.

I think it was the boss of DEC, who's name I can't remember, who said that people would never have computers at home as there was no need and I suppose that explains why they suffered massive losses and were bought by Compaq.
 
Last edited:
Tysonator said:
Are canon desperate to get market share in a sector that is very specific !
Problem is canon sensors are lagging behind sony and fujifilm. So how will they corner this market if the performance is not there ! ?
Click to expand...

They'll sell because of their name. If Canon and their products were pants and continued to be pants for years then their reputation and sales would suffer but for most people they're competitive enough to be not obviously and undeniably uncompetitive to the point that the masses realise and buy something else instead.
 
You right woof woof, canon do have a good name and are a realibme brand.
For me it is the marketing tactics they emoy on recent mirrorless line up by struggling features in bodies to protect high end models.
If this same tactic is employed in m4/3 sector which is a specialised area will that fly with the main stream ! ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top