Canon to buy Sigma? (Per Sigma Rumors site)
- Thread starter ScottyP
- Start date
unfocused
Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
I don't know what Sigma brings to the table. I am sure Canon's lens technology is superior and if Canon wanted to market less expensive lenses they could do that. I can't see them diluting the brand by offering Sigma lenses under the Canon name.
Upvote
0
If Canon bought Sigma, I am sure that they would still make lenses for other brands...that1guyy said:
Upvote
0
distant.star said:
That is because you don't know what Sigma have on the table or what Canon are looking for.
One patent could be valuable enough for Canon to throw down that kind of money. Sigma must have a shed load of patents on the Foveon sensor design as well as a mutlitude of lens layouts.
Imagine a Sigma lens line without AF issues, they could call it the Art+ or something ;D
Upvote
0
Or perhaps rename it as Canon Art Luxury ??? and put two red rings on itprivatebydesign said:
and double the price. :
Upvote
0
Anyone can start a rumor, but to be credible sets a much higher bar.
Even if true, anti trust regulators in Europe and USA would be pretty tough and might set requirements that Canon would not accept.
Even if true, anti trust regulators in Europe and USA would be pretty tough and might set requirements that Canon would not accept.
Upvote
0
Sigma's magic is a small collection of people doing design, and a gutsy CEO with a vision. I love Canon, but neither would be well homed in Canon.
What Sigma is doing is indeed a threat to Canon in an indirect fashion. In the absence of Tamron and, especially, Sigma, Canon would have an unassailably dominant professional/prosumer lens lineup. As it is, Sigma Art lenses are, at times, the best in their class, and they can be sold for just about what they originally cost. You don't even need Sigma's mount changing service. You can just sell your Art lens and buy it in another mount. This makes using Nikon and Sony much more attractive than they'd be otherwise.
If Canon were looking to put a stake in Nikon's heart, retiring the Sigma brand would be helpful. It would be terrible for photographers, including Canon shooters.
What Sigma is doing is indeed a threat to Canon in an indirect fashion. In the absence of Tamron and, especially, Sigma, Canon would have an unassailably dominant professional/prosumer lens lineup. As it is, Sigma Art lenses are, at times, the best in their class, and they can be sold for just about what they originally cost. You don't even need Sigma's mount changing service. You can just sell your Art lens and buy it in another mount. This makes using Nikon and Sony much more attractive than they'd be otherwise.
If Canon were looking to put a stake in Nikon's heart, retiring the Sigma brand would be helpful. It would be terrible for photographers, including Canon shooters.
Upvote
0
Aglet said:
Seriously? Sigma are tiny compared to Canon and they offer very few similar items, Sigma certainly don't present Canon with any serious competition, let alone their "most serious competition".
Canon's most serious competitor has always been Nikon, second at this time, though who knows in a few years (they probably won't still be making cameras), would be the Sony camera division that I am sure Sony would quite happily spin off.
If Canon bought Sigma they would be buying a state of the art lens manufacturing facility and the skilled workforce that is there actually in Japan, they would also be buying the patents and intellectual property, and I suspect there is a good amount of value to that.
But I doubt if there is anything to this, the Canon share price hasn't reacted to these rumours and they would be the first to know and approve or disapprove of the idea.
Upvote
0
If this rumor is real and no nonsense than i see only two reasons for that move:
1. patents or production techniques (more likely):
2. exogenic growth (less likely - esp. for the rumored price):
I think that honor still belongs to SonNikon.
And to say that the portfolio of Sigma would add something up that Canon was not able to do themselves is likely unbelievable (except for patent restrictions, see 1.)
Time will tell, what's the truth.
1. patents or production techniques (more likely):
Either the Foveon tech or something we don't have on the screen yet.tolusina said:
2. exogenic growth (less likely - esp. for the rumored price):
If Canon sees Sigma as the "most serious" competition I would be really surprised.Aglet said:
I think that honor still belongs to SonNikon.
And to say that the portfolio of Sigma would add something up that Canon was not able to do themselves is likely unbelievable (except for patent restrictions, see 1.)
Time will tell, what's the truth.
Upvote
0
+1dilbert said:
+1, too
I don't know if the the Foveon patents are worth the rumored price. A licensing deal should be much cheaper if well-negotiated.
Let's hope Sigma will stay independent.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Deleted member 399245
- Third Party Lenses
