Is SIGMA getting ready to announce their first RF mount lenses? [CR1]

canonical

EOS M50
Jul 3, 2019
37
21
Should optical design of these Sigma RF-mount lenses be based on same/minimally adapted formula they are using for Sony E-mount version, they definitely are wasting a lot of potential.
 
Dec 6, 2018
55
73
After a Tamron 85mm didn't adapt to my Canon M5, I decided to start buying native Canon lenses as much as possible. When I put my Canon 85mm or the Canon M5, it works perfect, just like it does on my 5DS or my EOS R ...

As for Sigma, not only are they 3rd party, but I thought it was sort of budget design the way their latest lenses skip IS in most everything. But the fact that my Canon lenses are working with all my Canon bodies is most important right now.
 

Photo Hack

Hi there
Apr 8, 2019
67
70
I’m a little confused by the comments on Sigma not producing lenses with IS. At the time of release, nearly all of their zooms and Macros with exception of ultra wide, have IS. Even their 24-70 2.8 has IS compared to Canon’s non IS offering.

As far as all the primes go in the ART series, what equivalent lenses did Canon have with IS at the time those lenses came out?

It seems to me the market Sigma was aiming to get were those of us who are looking for exceptionally sharp and well built lenses that rival Canons L lenses but at a fraction of the price. In that Regard, Sigma really outdid themselves.

I guarantee they took a big chunk out of Canon’s L lens sales with the ART line.

We’ll see how long that will last as we slowly move towards mirrorless. It seems Sigma is going to have to make some hard decisions about how to stay competitive long term.
 
Reactions: jd7 and max_sr

miggyt

I'm New Here
Sep 3, 2018
9
2
IS is a must at this point. Sigma's popular lenses without one is a very sad move. Obviously, Sigma will try to milk us twice. So I am not buying a Sigma lens without IS.
do not expect IS in these shorter focal lengths especially as most mirrorless brands already have IBIS. and historically, its canon that's been milking customers several times over with several iterations of the same lenses (just how many variations of 70-200 does canon have???).
 

ozturert

EOS T7i
Jan 16, 2019
76
61
After a Tamron 85mm didn't adapt to my Canon M5, I decided to start buying native Canon lenses as much as possible. When I put my Canon 85mm or the Canon M5, it works perfect, just like it does on my 5DS or my EOS R ...

As for Sigma, not only are they 3rd party, but I thought it was sort of budget design the way their latest lenses skip IS in most everything. But the fact that my Canon lenses are working with all my Canon bodies is most important right now.
Exactly. Tamron 45mm and 100-400mm VC worked on my EOS R but AF is very slow and sometimes they refuse to AF (in this case I have to play with focus ring to bring the focus close to my subject, then AF works). I haven't tried any Sigma lens yet though.
 

canonical

EOS M50
Jul 3, 2019
37
21
... and is the market demand for RF enough to sustain their development costs?
i see no reason to worry at all about Canon RF mount. don't see anything that would keep it from commanding 50%+ market share, just like EF did.

as soon as new tilt-shift lenses for mirrorless FF are launched, the wheat (RF, Z) will quickly separate from the chaff (E). :)

only new mount i'd not invest in is L. technically ok, but nowhere near enough market potential. Sigma does pour money into L, but i don't think they'll ever recoup it, much less make any profits. same as with their cameras. rather erratic decisions by their owner-CEO.
 
Last edited:

lawny13

EOS M50
Mar 6, 2019
25
35
35mm F1.2
If as Canon claims that RF Mount has advantage, Sigma 35mm F1.2 Canon RF version vs Sony E version:
RF version should have better IQ, or Same IQ with cheaper price, because easy to develop/produce.
Big misconception. The larger mount gives more freedom when concerning the various design parameters. It doesn't necessarily mean that the customers will see it or that the RF version will be better than the FE version.

For example. All things the same in terms of performance, the RF should be (potentially) cheaper. However, it makes a little to no sense for sigma to go with multiple optical designs unless they have to. So you may very well get a lens that is designed for the RF flange distance while keeping FE in mind. That way they can end up with lenses for two mounts following the same optical formulas. Such a lens will not take full advantage of the shorter flange distance of the FE, nor would it take full advantage of the canon mount diameter.

Maybe they design a lens with that sort of similar RF 35 design, where the back element protrudes into the mount. While at the same time be flush with the FE mount interface. That element would have to fit sony's mount diameter and keep FE performance in mind. But as mentioned before, this would mean not taking advantage of the RF mount diameter.

But we will see. If it is cheaper to make/design for canon, then sigma may very well go with two different designs. Perhaps design wise it is just tweaking the design from one mount to another.
 
Reactions: ozturert

uri.raz

EOS 80D
Jan 5, 2016
116
57
It seems a bit too soon for me, but maybe it doesn't take all that long to do. I haven't yet reverse engineered anything other than an omelette. Or maybe there will be some kind of development announcement and any RF mount lens releases will be in the distant future.
They might have figured out how the EF-RF adapter signals the camera an EF lens is mounted, so it would fall back to EF protocol. From there, it's just using their EF implementation + adding the appropriate length to the barrel.
 
Reactions: lawny13

AlanF

Everyone sits in the prison of his own ideas. A E
Aug 16, 2012
5,177
2,109
We are so lucky to have experts here who know and can predict Sigma's market share and their technology better than Sigma does.
 
Reactions: Quirkz

6degrees

RF 85mm F1.2
Sep 6, 2018
69
47
Big misconception. The larger mount gives more freedom when concerning the various design parameters. It doesn't necessarily mean that the customers will see it or that the RF version will be better than the FE version.

For example. All things the same in terms of performance, the RF should be (potentially) cheaper. However, it makes a little to no sense for sigma to go with multiple optical designs unless they have to. So you may very well get a lens that is designed for the RF flange distance while keeping FE in mind. That way they can end up with lenses for two mounts following the same optical formulas. Such a lens will not take full advantage of the shorter flange distance of the FE, nor would it take full advantage of the canon mount diameter.

Maybe they design a lens with that sort of similar RF 35 design, where the back element protrudes into the mount. While at the same time be flush with the FE mount interface. That element would have to fit sony's mount diameter and keep FE performance in mind. But as mentioned before, this would mean not taking advantage of the RF mount diameter.

But we will see. If it is cheaper to make/design for canon, then sigma may very well go with two different designs. Perhaps design wise it is just tweaking the design from one mount to another.
That means Canon it’s own lenses will be superior than same-formula-multi-mount lens providers like Sigma, Zeiss, etc. if RF Mount really has advantage over, saying E mount.

We will see.
 
Reactions: canonical

yoms

EOS M50
Jul 4, 2012
33
4
Would a SIGMA 12-24mm f/2.8 DG HSM specifically designed for mirrorless systems have a front filter thread? Or would that also be a bulbous lens?
 

RayValdez360

EOS RP
Jun 6, 2012
312
97
Everyone company and i mean EVERYBODY has IBIS except canon , so IS in lenses can go on the backburner except for canon users to this date. SOny, Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic, and even Nikon have IBIS. Canon is just beating around the bush as usual waiting for us to buy all the cameras up before giving us more convenient tech. It's actually insane how they treat their customers when they have all that money
.
 

AlanF

Everyone sits in the prison of his own ideas. A E
Aug 16, 2012
5,177
2,109
Everyone company and i mean EVERYBODY has IBIS except canon , so IS in lenses can go on the backburner except for canon users to this date. SOny, Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic, and even Nikon have IBIS. Canon is just beating around the bush as usual waiting for us to buy all the cameras up before giving us more convenient tech. It's actually insane how they treat their customers when they have all that money
.
In-lens IS is essential for telephoto lenses, and so Olympus, Panasonic etc have added in-lens IS to their telephotos (Olympus 300 f/4, Panasonic-Leica 100-400mm etc).
 

RayValdez360

EOS RP
Jun 6, 2012
312
97
In-lens IS is essential for telephoto lenses, and so Olympus, Panasonic etc have added in-lens IS to their telephotos (Olympus 300 f/4, Panasonic-Leica 100-400mm etc).
true btu witrh sigma. their most popular lenses or popular lens in general arent telephotos unless you count the 135mm