Canon Says it’s up to Sigma to Make Full-Frame RF Lenses

[GirlsAreBeautiful]

RF lenses are outrageously expensive for what they offer, and it's all thanks to the monopoly that Canon enforces on the mount. These kind of things should not even be legal in my opinion.
Sigma lenses are great. I have two Art ones and no complaints. I very much doubt that they are allowed to do full frame ones since nobody else did either.
Also, to be totally fair, Sigma is not producing the lens that I want for other mounts either. So at this moment I am good in general. There are tons of EF lenses that work great. Buying new lenses make no sense.

 

[Bob Howland]

Are you talking about the big green thing in post #50?
A real lens, used to be the most expensive (apart from Canon's 1200 f/5.6 that is a rarity) but Canon's RF800/1200 make it look cheap.

The big green is the Sigma 200-500 f/2.8. It was introduced after Sigma introduced their 120-300 f/2.8 and 300-800 f/5.6 lenses, weighed 35 pounds and, the last time I saw it listed, had a price of $27,000. I was posting on DP Review when it was introduced and the ridicule it got at introduction was severe. I was extremely disappointed because I wanted a 200-500 f/4. The Sigma CEO said that it was a dream of his father's and it had to be made or the father would haunt him..

It seems that this generation's oddity is the BF. Maybe they should have considered a very compact APS-C L-mount body to compete with Sony's 6X00 series and provide a market for APS-C L-mount lenses..

If Neuro is correct about the Canon-Sigma RF-mount licensing agreement, and he probably is, there is probably also a penalty clause if Sigma releases the details of that agreement, specifically the amounts of the licensing fees. Canon is hardly blameless in this situation. Buyer-seller relationships are inherently adversarial.

 

[AlanF]

The big green is the Sigma 200-500 f/2.8. It was introduced after Sigma introduced their 120-300 f/2.8 and 300-800 f/5.6 lenses, weighed 35 pounds and, the last time I saw it listed, had a price of $27,000. I was posting on DP Review when it was introduced and the ridicule it got at introduction was severe. I was extremely disappointed because I wanted a 200-500 f/4. The Sigma CEO said that it was a dream of his father's and it had to be made or the father would haunt him..

It seems that this generation's oddity is the BF. Maybe they should have considered a very compact APS-C L-mount body to compete with Sony's 6X00 series and provide a market for APS-C L-mount lenses..

If Neuro is correct about the Canon-Sigma RF-mount licensing agreement, and he probably is, there is probably also a penalty clause if Sigma releases the details of that agreement, specifically the amounts of the licensing fees. Canon is hardly blameless in this situation. Buyer-seller relationships are inherently adversarial.

It's currently available as a special order at £15,000, and has dedicated TCs. I know someone who has one for astrophotography.