SIGMA to address their RF mount plans in early 2020 [CR2]

[shawn]

That is actually bullshit. You can set that ring, that it is changing selected value just during half-way press back button AF. And that is the time, when you should change the exposure. So in the end, it cannot change accidentely. But I got it. Reviewer unbox camera, set just important things in menu and go shoot. So if you set CR properly, than it is really greta tool. I set it for aperture, because I hate that back dial

Its sad that reviewers don't do basic research before jumping to conclusions.

 

[jvillain]

I liked it when I used it for the first few months I had it. Now when I look back on my images I see that it's not that great. My style of shooting has kind of evolved and my eye has gotten more critical. I find that Canon glass requires a lot less post processing to get the look I want, even the relatively cheap RF 24-240 is better than the Sigma 85 Art.

The main problem with the Sigma is that it has a harsh feel to how it renders and the contrast is poor in a lot of scenarios. A lack of contrast is going to hurt image quality because it requires increasing contrast which causes color shifts.... So basically it just isn't for me anymore. (Its on ebay right now actually)

Now that Canon has made the RF 70-200 it is going to be my goto portrait lens.

It is harsh but that is becuase it is so damn sharp. You see every thing. The reason why it is so sharp is because of the good contrast. I pretty well never sharpen in post some thing I have shot on Art glass. I will occasionally soften up portraits depending on the lighting and what the customer is looking for.

Some one mentioned Sigma quality control and that is definitly a factor. The first copy of the 50-100 I had wouldn't focus unless it was more than 20' from the subject. Sigma atleast at that time, it may have changed, would not repair under any conditions even if you were willing to pay if you bought your lens from any one other than an "authorised dealer" which meant you were paying atleast 50% more up front. I hope that has changed but I haven't looked. Other than that original 50-100 all my other Sigma lenses have been fine.

If you live in the US Canon may have the best service going. But I live in Canada and Canon HATES Canada.

 

[unfocused]

I’ve seen reviews of Canon lenses with the control ring adapter, and generally, they don’t like it. Too easy to grab the ring and change something.

Actually I prefer the location of the control ring on adapters to the location on the one RF lens I own (24-105). On the adapter, it's easier for me to locate and know what I am changing. On the RF lens, where it is located up-front, I find myself more likely to accidentally grab it when zooming.

 

[jdale273]

I’ve used my f1.8 zooms on the R with crop, works seamlessly for video. Af at 60fps didn’t work but maybe the firmware fixed that. For photo it does lower your megapixels though

The reason 60fps doesn't work is because you're using a crop (DC) lens. If you were using an actual EF-S lens the 60fps options would be grayed out. Your DC lens is actually EF mount (not EF-S) so the camera doesn't know the image circle won't cover the whole sensor, but it needs the whole sensor when shooting at that frame rate.

 

[SteveC]

That is actually bullshit. You can set that ring, that it is changing selected value just during half-way press back button AF. And that is the time, when you should change the exposure. So in the end, it cannot change accidentely. But I got it. Reviewer unbox camera, set just important things in menu and go shoot. So if you set CR properly, than it is really greta tool. I set it for aperture, because I hate that back dial

I'm new enough to photography in general to not have ingrained habits (I have to think about what control to touch to do something). As such, given that aperture is actually adjusted inside the lens with those vanes that silly people think are the shutter, it seems like the logical place for the control to be is on the lens.

If/when I go RF I'll probably use that ring to control the aperture, until I decide I like something else better. Adding the back button AF to the motion is also logical (and a good idea for the reasons you stated) since that's where you'll be getting your "preview" of what the picture will look like.

Of course, that's me theorizing; once I own the camera who knows what I'll end up actually settling on.

 

[mpeeps]

I'm hoping for Sigma to release their excellent and affordable 2,8/14-24 WA zoom, unless Canon produces one of those "crazy" UWA primes...

The EF 11-24 with adapter on R is excellent; just as good as on 5dsr. The RF 15-35 is incredible corner to corner wide open.

 

[melgross]

That is actually bullshit. You can set that ring, that it is changing selected value just during half-way press back button AF. And that is the time, when you should change the exposure. So in the end, it cannot change accidentely. But I got it. Reviewer unbox camera, set just important things in menu and go shoot. So if you set CR properly, than it is really greta tool. I set it for aperture, because I hate that back dial

Apparently it’s not, though you may think it is. Everybody works differently.

 

[Cryhavoc]

Why not just use the current Canon mount with an adapter?

Has anybody been using current Sigma lenses with the R? I have a macro, but I just realized I haven't tried it yet!

I do
I have the Sigma 35mm and 20mm Art lenses and they work perfectly with the adapter. The 35mm did require a lens firmware update to square away an issue, but that addressed an issue that occurred in all Canon cameras and the fix was released before the R came to market. I use the 20mm Art for Astro on the R and the results are pretty darn good. Yeah some coma at the edges, but I expected that.

 

[AJ]

Canon has some crazy patents for ultrawides in the R mount. I'm curious to see what Sigma will come up with.

 

[jedy]

Some one mentioned Sigma quality control and that is definitly a factor. The first copy of the 50-100 I had wouldn't focus unless it was more than 20' from the subject. Sigma atleast at that time, it may have changed, would not repair under any conditions even if you were willing to pay if you bought your lens from any one other than an "authorised dealer" which meant you were paying atleast 50% more up front.

If someone could enlighten, won’t third party lenses for Canon have to be reverse engineered? I did hear Canon aren’t sharing their focusing technology, unlike Sony. I’m only really familiar with third party lenses on Canon DSLR’s, what with their calibration issues and future body compatibility problems. Apart from the calibration issue, largely removed by contrast detect autofocus, I do wonder how third party lenses will fare on Canon R bodies.

 

[Otara]

If someone could enlighten, won’t third party lenses for Canon have to be reverse engineered? I did hear Canon aren’t sharing their focusing technology, unlike Sony. I’m only really familiar with third party lenses on Canon DSLR’s, what with their calibration issues and future body compatibility problems. Apart from the calibration issue, largely removed by contrast detect autofocus, I do wonder how third party lenses will fare on Canon R bodies.

The only concern will be whether they stick with the older EF protocol or whether they try to make full use of the new RF communications options that allow higher communication speeds. I wouldnt be surprised if they just stick to EF as a workaround , as the compromise with this is currently pretty minimal other than for high frame rate/fast AF shooting.

 

[Architect1776]

I'm new enough to photography in general to not have ingrained habits (I have to think about what control to touch to do something). As such, given that aperture is actually adjusted inside the lens with those vanes that silly people think are the shutter, it seems like the logical place for the control to be is on the lens.

If/when I go RF I'll probably use that ring to control the aperture, until I decide I like something else better. Adding the back button AF to the motion is also logical (and a good idea for the reasons you stated) since that's where you'll be getting your "preview" of what the picture will look like.

Of course, that's me theorizing; once I own the camera who knows what I'll end up actually settling on.

Remember there are shutters in the lens that look like aperture blades, they are called leaf shutters.
As far a control of the aperture being on the body or the lens would be personal preference. I do like the control ring being programmable for that function, even better is that Canon is unique in that your EF and EFs lenses all now have this feature option when adapted to the RF mount. This is amazing and shows innovation and preserving compatibility with all the old lenses as well as enhancing your collection of old lenses.
I have no problem with using the body to adjust aperture even though I learned on old manual lenses with the aperture ring on them.

 

[SteveC]

...even better is that Canon is unique in that your EF and EFs lenses all now have this feature option when adapted to the RF mount. This is amazing and shows innovation and preserving compatibility with all the old lenses as well as enhancing your collection of old lenses.

That is true provided you buy the adapter with the control ring.

The kits include the adapter without the control ring; I'd happily pay $100 more for a kit that included the adapter with the control ring (that's the price difference between the two adapters when bought by themselves), if/when I step into the R world.

 

[Architect1776]

That is true provided you buy the adapter with the control ring.

The kits include the adapter without the control ring; I'd happily pay $100 more for a kit that included the adapter with the control ring (that's the price difference between the two adapters when bought by themselves), if/when I step into the R world.

Yes, and that is the beauty of the Canon system. No one else offers such an option. Thus keeping the EF lenses as current as possible after over 30 years, pretty good when you consider how technology is advancing. That is why the all digital mount back then allowed for advances with just software vs the others who kept with flippy and inaccurate levers and slow gears were left behind and that is now painfully obvious that their old stable of AF lenses are pretty worthless in spite of the new whiz bang camera they are mounted on where that old AF canon lens works just as good as it ever did and even better.
Actually the adapter with the filter holder is really nice in that lenses with huge front elements or an way of mounting a filter to the front now have that option, another brilliant and innovative idea from a company that "does not innovate".

 

[koenkooi]

Yes, and that is the beauty of the Canon system. No one else offers such an option. Thus keeping the EF lenses as current as possible after over 30 years, pretty good when you consider how technology is advancing. That is why the all digital mount back then allowed for advances with just software vs the others who kept with flippy and inaccurate levers and slow gears were left behind and that is now painfully obvious that their old stable of AF lenses are pretty worthless in spite of the new whiz bang camera they are mounted on where that old AF canon lens works just as good as it ever did and even better.
Actually the adapter with the filter holder is really nice in that lenses with huge front elements or an way of mounting a filter to the front now have that option, another brilliant and innovative idea from a company that "does not innovate".

Yes! The filter adapter allows me to use a polarizer on my MP-E65mm without worrying about flash reflections.

 

[Architect1776]

The only concern will be whether they stick with the older EF protocol or whether they try to make full use of the new RF communications options that allow higher communication speeds. I wouldnt be surprised if they just stick to EF as a workaround , as the compromise with this is currently pretty minimal other than for high frame rate/fast AF shooting.

The EF mount has fewer pins as well as the lenses with fewer contacts. My guess this will limit adapting RF protocols.
But it should work wonderfully, fast and at a top level pro requirement for fast action and rugged performance.
Remember this is a 1 series camera.

 

[john kriegsmann]

I have an RP and the only native RF lens I have is the macro 35mm f1.8. Great lens and it fits the form factor of the RP perfectly. Hopefully Sigma will not simply convert their fast but heavy lenses like their 35mm f 1.4 Art lens to a RF mount. A lens of that size would be too heavy for my RP. Zeiss is making small light weight Loxia series for the Sony E mount cameras. Fuji is also renowned for making small, lightweight lenses for their mirrorless cameras. These company's have the right idea, the whole idea of lighter, compact mirrorless cameras is to lighten our kits. It is absurd to push huge, expensive fast, heavy lenses like the Canon RF 85mm f l1.2 at customers.

 

[addola]

We have seen some crazy patents from Canon recently, but this one is more plausible given that Canon had EF 200mm f/1.8L since many years ago (1988), so why wouldn't we have a 135mm lens that is faster than f/1.8 like the competition (Sony & Sigma)?

 

[Deleted member 381342]

The main issue with Sigma has been focus accuracy, I am pretty sure that goes away when we get to mirrorless cameras and no longer needing micro adjustments. 3rd party lenses could become a much better value proposition than before.

Here's hoping the Art 50 and 85 come over fast, these are really good lenses and much cheeper than than Canon(mostly because they are slower).

 

[Del Paso]

Yes! The filter adapter allows me to use a polarizer on my MP-E65mm without worrying about flash reflections.

And on the 17mm TSE without the need for a monstrous frontal adapter!