Are Camera Brands Slowing Down Lens Innovation in 2025?

[DavidHopper]

So, Nikon, Canon, and Sony are dropping firmware updates like crazy instead of giving us cool, fresh lenses this year. Do you think lens innovation for mirrorless cameras is slowing down? Are these companies putting too much effort into software stuff and forgetting we want spanking new glass?

I want to know what you guys think—is this just a short-term thing, or is this the direction the camera market is going?

 

[koraks]

we want spanking new glass?

Do we? IDK really. Maybe the camera companies decided based on their marketing research that we want more features, more pixels, faster speeds, smaller cameras - not glass. I really wouldn't know; I'm not privy to data on where the revenues and the juicy margins are.

 

[DavidHopper]

Do we? IDK really. Maybe the camera companies decided based on their marketing research that we want more features, more pixels, faster speeds, smaller cameras - not glass. I really wouldn't know; I'm not privy to data on where the revenues and the juicy margins are.

Okay, I get your point. Specs might sway brands, but for us photographers, new lenses seem way more inspiring than just another software update.

 

[koraks]

Yeah, I understand; the question is whether we're representative in that sense for the market at large. I honestly don't know how things are going with the market for digital cameras and lenses; so much has changed due to the pervasiveness of good camera phones; dSLR's are pretty much dead already it seems, not sure what the status is with mirrorless...
I can also imagine that in terms of lenses, the market reaches a point of relative saturation. dSLR's ('digital' and crop factor lenses) and mirrorless breathed new life into that for a while, but that may have peaked, leaving the question where to go next.

 

[Milpool]

I don't think there is much left to do with lens design unless you want really exotic materials, adaptive optics, that sort of thing. Particularly when it comes to mirrorless, the lenses are generally probably as good as lenses really need to be. I'm not sure why new lenses would be so inspiring to photographers unless they are of the GAS type. On the other hand as John Sexton has said of photographers "we like stuff".

So, Nikon, Canon, and Sony are dropping firmware updates like crazy instead of giving us cool, fresh lenses this year. Do you think lens innovation for mirrorless cameras is slowing down? Are these companies putting too much effort into software stuff and forgetting we want spanking new glass?

I want to know what you guys think—is this just a short-term thing, or is this the direction the camera market is going?

 

[thinkbrown]

I dunno, but I've been pretty thrilled with a lot of the glass that's come out recently, especially on an affordability scale.

• Canon is selling a 45mm f1.2 lens for under $500.
• Tamron makes a 28-200 that starts at f2.8 and actually delivers great image quality for under $700
• Both canon and Sony are offering an f2 standard zoom now.

As someone who both shoots modern digital stuff and vintage film cameras, modern glass often feels like someone broke the laws of physics. It's so good

 

[retina_restoration]

I dunno... my most "inspiring" lenses are 70-160 years old.

 

[Lachlan Young]

I don't think there is much left to do with lens design unless you want really exotic materials, adaptive optics, that sort of thing. Particularly when it comes to mirrorless, the lenses are generally probably as good as lenses really need to be. I'm not sure why new lenses would be so inspiring to photographers unless they are of the GAS type. On the other hand as John Sexton has said of photographers "we like stuff".

The big change that seems to have happened is the expansion (and then saturation) of a market segment that's desperate to haul 24x36 lenses around that make Pentax 67's seem light and small - and don't necessarily want hyper durable mechanical build quality (first-rate optical glass parts seem to have never been cheaper to make or design). On the other hand, Zeiss has been doing this currently fashionable 'modern' style of rendering for 70+ years...

 

[BrianShaw]

I dunno... my most "inspiring" lenses are 70-160 years old.

ditto, and that's just the physical lens as the lens design is sometimes even older than that.

 

[abruzzi]

Okay, I get your point. Specs might sway brands, but for us photographers, new lenses seem way more inspiring than just another software update.

While Photrio has support for discussion of film and digital cameras, this place seems to be about 95% discussion of film photography. (this is not a criticism of your post, since it is in an "mixed film/digital" section.) Because of that, most people here are shooting cameras or systems that haven't seen a new lens is 25 or more years, and in some cases even more. In my case, there are some lenses I'd love to try but pretty much all of them are 40-150 years old.

 

[BMbikerider]

Okay, I get your point. Specs might sway brands, but for us photographers, new lenses seem way more inspiring than just another software update.

Is it inspiration or a lust after something new which you convinced your self that it is a 'must have' because it will improve your photography beyond wishful thinking. Don't waste your money. There are lenses out there, not expensive ones either, that will encompass and exceed most peoples capabilities.

Probably the lens I fall back on to use most regularly is a Nikon 35/70 F2.8 AF constant (and not the later AFD version either) Is the most consistent performer of all my lenses that fit my film and digital bodies. It is an absolutely cracking bit of glassware, and you don't need better for that. How much did I pay , well from memory about £75

 

[MattKing]

New inter-changeable lens cameras were traditionally more of a loss leader, because people who bought a new camera often turned around and bought a new lens, and there was less pressure on the price margins for lenses.
This just confirms that the cameras many of us are most interested in are becoming less and less important in any market.