Yongnuo to make lenses.

Why are they making lenses when they haven't even made my flash yet! Still waiting for that new one to actually make it to the shops >.<
 
I still can't find out how they are even legal? They basically rip off Canon and call it reverse engineering? Yet they get away with it because they are Chinese? I mean they don't even hide of change design :confused:
 
Copying/reverse engineering is how the third-party manufacturers roll. Normally they just have the good graces to put the glass ina slightly different looking casing etc, here they're not bothering. For what is sucha cheap Canon lens, I doubt it will seriously impact Canon's sales, unless it is markedly better quality in terms of the lens elements and output (which if it is half the price, is unlikely). In those circumstances, it might even benefit Canon from "cheaper" lenses being available to those people who might buy a new Canoin body to put it on and then hopefully, get a bit of G.A.S thereafter and buy more Canon-brand, expensive lenses etc...
 
Canon and nikon actually quite like Sigma/Tamron/Tokina/Yongnuo etc as it makes the system complete. They even have working relationships sometimes, e.g. the Tamron 10-24mm is a design from Nikon (Nikon's 10-24mm is the same lens).

Japanese companies don't work like western companies. they would much rather see a very strong contingent of Japanese companies blocking american companies form entering the market than have Japanese companies strongly competing and loosing sales to outsiders. Thus it is no surprise that many of the companies are so similar matched with similar technologies - Nikon and Canon are so similar you could swap one system for the other and not notice a big difference in the broad scope of things (Af works similalry good on each, lenses are all very similar etc). The IS/VR/OSS/VC all behave very similarly and likely have shared technologies and designs. Sony is perfectly happy to work with Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, Panasonic (and now it seems Canon as well). You see this in other areas, e.g. Toyota and Honda make very similar cars with very similar technologies.

Of course they all keep a lot of secret sauce to differentiate a little or show them selves as that little bit better. The fact that Canon and nikon did not share the AF comms protocol with Sigma/Tamron is their way of ensuring differentiation.
 
englishpremier said:
Well anyone can copy anything. It's up to the patent owner to challenge it in court.
Click to expand...

Yeah which is what I don't understand, why they don't go after them.

AtticusFinch said:
Copying/reverse engineering is how the third-party manufacturers roll. Normally they just have the good graces to put the glass ina slightly different looking casing etc, here they're not bothering. For what is sucha cheap Canon lens, I doubt it will seriously impact Canon's sales, unless it is markedly better quality in terms of the lens elements and output (which if it is half the price, is unlikely). In those circumstances, it might even benefit Canon from "cheaper" lenses being available to those people who might buy a new Canoin body to put it on and then hopefully, get a bit of G.A.S thereafter and buy more Canon-brand, expensive lenses etc...
Click to expand...

Lenses I agree but the flash and triggers they are not just reverse engineering them they are copying them almost exactly. I find it surprising that canon have not nailed them.

D.P. said:
Japanese companies don't work like western companies. they would much rather see a very strong contingent of Japanese companies blocking american companies form entering the market than have Japanese companies strongly competing and loosing sales to outsiders.

Of course they all keep a lot of secret sauce to differentiate a little or show them selves as that little bit better. The fact that Canon and nikon did not share the AF comms protocol with Sigma/Tamron is their way of ensuring differentiation.
Click to expand...

They are chinese aren't they? I can't see the benefit to canon to have a chinese company bang out direct almost identical copies or in cases with the wireless trigger better products in the exact same design.

Do photographers only care and bleat when their own image rights are effected :D;)
 
dannyjo22 said:
Yeah which is what I don't understand, why they don't go after them.



Lenses I agree but the flash and triggers they are not just reverse engineering them they are copying them almost exactly. I find it surprising that canon have not nailed them.



They are chinese aren't they? I can't see the benefit to canon to have a chinese company bang out direct almost identical copies or in cases with the wireless trigger better products in the exact same design.

Do photographers only care and bleat when their own image rights are effected :D;)
Click to expand...

Yeah, Yongnuo is Chinese but my response was to give insight in to the ways Japanese companies operate. They don't mind cheap 3rd party stuff, otherwie could have easily gone about blocking sigma/Tamron etc from making compatible lenses.

Saying that exact copies are rare from Sigma/Tamron/Tokina. Recently some Chinese company license the Kodak brand name and made an exact copy of a Nikon 1 camera and lens- Nikon sued them and they changed their design but only slightly. It still looks nearly identical to the Nikon J1.
And therein lies part of the problem defending designs is very tricky.

That Yongnuo lens is the first lens I have seen that looks to be a direct copy of a 1st party lens so perhaps Canon will sue. The best time to do this is once Yongnuo has already produced hundred of thousands and started shipping - because if Cnaon win and the lens is issued a cease and desist then it has the maximum cost on Yongnuo. If Canon sues before mass manufacturing then Yongnuo likely can change some very minor things about the cosmetic design in order to by pass the design infringement.
 
dannyjo22 said:
I still can't find out how they are even legal? They basically rip off Canon and call it reverse engineering? Yet they get away with it because they are Chinese? I mean they don't even hide of change design :confused:
Click to expand...

Oh come on, Canon's 50mm f/1.4 lens design is ancient, hasn't the patent expired?
 
Energize said:
Oh come on, Canon's lens design is ancient, hasn't the patent expired?
Click to expand...

It could be but not sure when the patent was filed.

Came out in June 1993. Patents usually lasts 25 years so unless it was registered on or before 1989 then it still have 4 years to go.
 
You have to be careful to separate the patent from the design (as in appearance) of the lens.

Canon's patent reflects the construction, arrangement of lenses, auto focus system etc.
How the lens looks physical is covered by product design copyright, which doesn't run out (as long as the company exists to defend it).


The patent running out may mean that they can directly copy the internals piece for piece but the physical appearance is likely covered by different IP.

E.g, you designs really cool watch that has super technology to travel in time, you also and make a unique appearance for the watch. You can get a patent on the time travel technology but not on the appearance of the watch. But the appearance is protected anyway by copyright.
 
The appearance in this case is very generic, I don't imagine you could make a lens that looks much different to that using that same internal design. I wouldn't be surprised if the release of this lens coincides with the expiration of the patent, which would surely have been filed a couple of years before they marketed it.
 
Energize said:
The appearance in this case is very generic, I don't imagine you could make a lens that looks much different to that using that same internal design. I wouldn't be surprised if the release of this lens coincides with the expiration of the patent, which would surely have been filed a couple of years before they marketed it.
Click to expand...

You are likely right regarding the patent expiring.
Also designs are very hard to protect because as you rightly point out designs often reflect natural physical or ergonomic patterns.
 
One thing people have overlooked. Is that it all depends on the laws in the countries in question. If the lens only goes on sale in China, then Canon would have to deal with Chinese law,which might be very different to what we're used to.
 
Chinese law would most likely say they don't look similar and allow them to be sold. Intellectual property rights there don't seem to be worth the paper they are written on. Copying the poorest 50 f/1.4 variation isn't something that is going to set the lens world alight.
 
Energize said:
Their flashes lack features like HSS that 1st party models have so I wouldn't call it a rip off of those manufacturers.
Click to expand...

They have HSS. Regardless that wouldn't matter, the look is exactly the same. So you are saying I could build an exact copy of the iphone, copy the menus, layout but if it was missing one feature, for example flash on the camera then I wouldn't be ripping them off and find myself in court?

Look at the latest flash and trigger side by side to the Canon 600EX and RT, they could at least have tried to make it look different :D

I understand they would have a hard job in China, I'm just surprised Canon haven't gone after sellers in other countries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom