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

AlanF

Everyone sits in the prison of his own ideas. A E
Aug 16, 2012
5,179
2,111
true btu witrh sigma. their most popular lenses or popular lens in general arent telephotos unless you count the 135mm
You move in different circles. The 150-600mm C is a very popular lens with nature photographers, for example, the S less so, but the 60-600mm could become popular. The Sigma 100-400mm is a cheap alternative to the Canon version. And the major manufacturers have either introduced or will do so combining in-lens with in-body IS to give even more effective IS.
 
Reactions: unfocused

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
Mar 25, 2011
15,307
569
Are you telling me I could’ve been using the nifty fifty over all these big expensive lenses all these years? Ugh Canon marketing!!!!!


if they’re just staying with original lens designs and slapping an adapter on these, I would think they could put control rings on the lenses.

They can’t move the lens any closer to the sensor than DSLR correct? Therefore leaving a 24mm or so extension on the RF lens?
I'd bet that the control ring is covered by a host of patents, Any 3rd party will need to navigate thru them, Canon has not sold licenses to lens technology so far, but its possible that they would swap licenses to patents if it was a benefit.
 
Reactions: Pape and Photo Hack

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
Mar 25, 2011
15,307
569
No, because DXO scores are highly dependent on the sensor. A higher resolution sensor will give higher score for the exact same lens.
DXO keeps the way they score products secret and no one has reverse engineered it. Possible its because its not totally related to lens performance, but to personal opinions. Certainly, their scores only apply to a certain lens / Camera model and can't be compared with a different camera. About all you can say is that a particular lens seems to work very well with a particular camera if tested in a warehouse.
 
Reactions: jd7

Dragon

I'm New Here
May 29, 2019
21
18
I am not sure if I should trust DxOMark. But if their results indicate significant difference, I probably should give a consideration.

After Canon RF 50mm F1.2 comes out, praise all over the places. But check these:

Canon RF 50mm F1.2 scores pretty low at 38, ranks 174 in DxOMark ranking:
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Canon/Canon-RF-50mm-F12L-USM-mounted-on-Canon-EOS-R__1262

Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L vs Zeiss Otus 1.4/55 ZF.2:
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-RF-50mm-F12L-USM-on-Canon-EOS-R-versus-Zeiss-Carl-Zeiss-Distagon-T-STAR-Otus-55mm-F14-ZF2-Nikon-on-Nikon-D800E__1995_1262_1242_814

Canon 28-70mm F2 scores even worse at 33, ranks 417 in DxOMark ranking:
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Canon/Canon-RF-28-70mm-F2L-USM-mounted-on-Canon-EOS-R__1262
Look at the Otus on a 5D IV and other than the Otus being sharper at f/1.4 than the Canon at f/1.2 the two are almost a perfect overlay. Then put the Otus on a 5DSR and watch it outrun itself on the D800E. You are just looking at megapixels and AA filters and not lenses. The RF lens softens a bit at f/1.2, but that is no surprise. It will score very well when Canon releases a high MP R body.
 

degos

EOS 80D
Mar 20, 2015
194
119
Bashing Sigma for not having IS on their Art series is odd when the Canon RF 50, 85 and 28-70 don't have IS either....

I think some people just find it difficult to accept that optical excellence isn't reserved to Canon and Zeiss, so they look for other reasons to criticise.
 
Reactions: jd7

lawny13

EOS M50
Mar 6, 2019
25
35
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.
Again... it depends. There is a lot more going on that what most people realize. Here is an example.

Lets say you decide that you really want a small lens (normal FL), and that since you don't ever shoot faster than f8, you are going to design a lens that has a max aperture of f5.6 (to give yourself some room).

For such a lens there is absolutely no lens mount advantage. Maybe flange distance (registration distance) plays a role, but ya... pretty much no advantage regardless of the mount (at least none that people tend to focus on). It wouldn't be much of a challenge and even in terms of cost it would be difficult to see how you would end up with a sony or canon lens with any significant price difference unless you take buid quality and such into account.

The MAIN advantage about the wider lens mount is seen in fast glass. And then with what canon did with the 35 mm. They claim they chose the flange distance because they wanted a robust mount (presumably to mount those massive RF lenses, especially the inevitable bigger ones), and I pretty much agree with that approach. But the wider mount allows for lens like the RF 35, were the rear element protrudes past the mount interface by quite a bit. Having larger lens elements shifted to the back helps to provide a better lens + body balance in terms of center of mass. Simpler lens designs allow for better sample variations, cheaper manufacturing costs (hopefully passed on to us) etc.

So if canon makes a 50mm f1.8 to compete against the 55 ZA lens, it probably won't perform better than it. It may very well end up costing about the same to be honest. And that would have to do with the fact that canon would probably use a more conventional design approach, while the 55 ZA is a sonnar design. So it isn't apples to apples. Instead lets take it a step further. I would wager that a RF 50f1.4 would perform on par as the FE 50 f1.4 ZA, for cheaper (say $900-$1000), with a center of mass closer to the rear of the lens.

For more conventional lens design approach, for the faster lenses f2 and faster primes we will likely see how the lens mounts impact various design parameters (including price). For zoom... well zooms are always more complicated to gauge. We just need to see what the holy trinity zooms will look like, cost and perform before we can make a conclusion that they are "better" than their sony GM counter parts.
 

lawny13

EOS M50
Mar 6, 2019
25
35
We are so lucky to have experts here who know and can predict Sigma's market share and their technology better than Sigma does.
I know right? Surprising that sigma isn't knocking on our doors begging we work for them as consultants :p
 

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D MK IV
Jan 28, 2015
3,331
949
Irving, Texas

crazyrunner33

EOS RP
Nov 4, 2011
253
77
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
.
IS lenses will not go on the back burner because of IBIS. IBIS can substitute for OIS to a certain extent, but it performs so much better in conjunction with OIS.
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
7,950
1,336
Canada
DXO scores make absolutely no difference as to whether or not the photographer can take a good photo. Screw DXO scores... no matter which manufacturer they favor.
So you say, but DXO tells me that the nifty fifty is a better lens than the 600F4, so that’s the lens we should be using to take pictures of grizzly bears and lions..... what could possibly go wrong?

185541
 
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

RayValdez360

EOS RP
Jun 6, 2012
312
97
IS lenses will not go on the back burner because of IBIS. IBIS can substitute for OIS to a certain extent, but it performs so much better in conjunction with OIS.
if that is true how many futures lens coming out have IS for all the mirrorless brands aside from telephotos. seems like much less incentive for it anymore and they can just focus on sharpness. It doesnt matter if you think it is a replacement for OIS. The companies are the ones that pay for it and will decide if it is a necessary expense.
 

raptor3x

EOS 7D MK II
Jan 26, 2012
546
37
State College, PA
whumber.com
No worries. Maybe you can add the link to the comparison you were asserting. You know, where the comparable Nikon lens is always better than the Canon lens.
I think you're confusing me with someone else as I never said anything like that; actually I don't think anyone has said anything like that. Someone just pointed out that DxO scores Nikon mount versions of a given lens, like the Sigma 35 1.4 as an example, higher than the Canon versions. Some examples

Sigma 35 1.4
F-mount = 43
EF-mount = 41

Sigma 50 1.4
F-mount = 46
EF-mount = 44

Sigma 85 1.4
F-mount = 51
EF-mount = 47

Sigma 20 1.4
F-mount = 41
EF-mount = 40

Sigma 12-24 2.8
F-mount = 28
EF-mount = 24

and so on.
 
Reactions: Don Haines