Canon to buy Sigma? (Per Sigma Rumors site)

[9VIII]

What precedent are people using to determine that an anti-trust suit would find anything wrong with Canon buying Sigma? The market is flush with competition.
If Canon was going to buy... Sigma Tamron Tokina and Samyang, and maybe you would even need to include Zeiss (basically impossible at this point) then you might have a point. But even then, you have other camera systems, even with all the third party lens manufacturers gone there's plenty of competition. If Canon were the only pro-body manufacturer out there you might have a point, but there's a a bazillion companies making cameras, and not joke consumer products like the iPhone, high performance photography equipment.

 

[privatebydesign]

I don't see antitrust coming into this at all. I don't even see how the USA or Europe could regulate one medium sized Japanese corp buying a much smaller Japanese corp in Japan, especially in a market as comparatively open as the camera market.

 

[Luds34]

I don't see antitrust coming into this at all. I don't even see how the USA or Europe could regulate one medium sized Japanese corp buying a much smaller Japanese corp in Japan, especially in a market as comparatively open as the camera market.

I completely agree on antitrust not coming into play here. The market is far too competitive.

However, both Canon and Sigma have divisions in the US. So the US would/could have something to say about that piece of the pie. But again, this is a moot point with the state of the market these days.

While Sigma is not Canon's biggest competitor looking at the full market, I'd argue they give an annoying, unique thorn in Canon's side. And that is they create very competitive lenses that work on Canon's cameras. While Canon competes with Sony and Nikon, they have the advantage that once they "win over a customer" they are locked in (to a certain degree) to the Canon system and buy lenses, etc. from Canon. Sigma's latest Art lenses have provided an alternative and have surely cost Canon sales. Sure Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, etc. have always provided a 3rd party alternative, but those have historically been consumer based lenses. Pros and top photographers have always gone done the road of "L" glass. However, today there seems to be some real alternatives to pro glass for your EF mount camera.

 

[rfdesigner]

If Canon bought Sigma I'd hope it was for the IP, not the people.

If bought for the people they'd have to leave the culture as is otherwise all the best people leave, I even know of one instance where a small tech firm was bought, most of the best people then left and setup a new firm, leaving the buyer with nothing for all their millions except for a few patents rapidly being overtaken by new inventions.

 

[wsmith96]

Usually when one company buys another they do so to acquire something they don't have such as a market, a niche, a technology, etc.

Or their rolodex (for those of you that know what that is). If this is true and it is for the lenses, it may also be a play to control the quality of lenses in the market should canon decide to stop making non-canon mount sigma lenses. It puts the pressure back on the other camera companies to make better lenses.

Or looking at it from a different perspective, Canon makes money off of your sigma purchases no matter what camera you own. Imagine seeing someone with a Nikon D4 and a lens with canon written so big on it that it would serve as a billboard.

 

[ScottyP]

Usually when one company buys another they do so to acquire something they don't have such as a market, a niche, a technology, etc.

Or their rolodex (for those of you that know what that is). If this is true and it is for the lenses, it may also be a play to control the quality of lenses in the market should canon decide to stop making non-canon mount sigma lenses. It puts the pressure back on the other camera companies to make better lenses.

Or looking at it from a different perspective, Canon makes money off of your sigma purchases no matter what camera you own. Imagine seeing someone with a Nikon D4 and a lens with canon written so big on it that it would serve as a billboard.

Ha. A Canon lens on a Nikon body (with a native mount, no Franken-daptor). That would be interesting to see. Or vice versa really. Even if only done with one lens, in a category where the OEM's lens is weaker, would be an interesting move.

 

[jrista]

I see no business sense in such a move.

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

Given Canon's investment in layered sensor technology, I would be willing to bet it's the Foveon patents.

I really do wonder if this is the best move for the industry, though. Sigma lenses have gotten really good, and offer a great alternative to the very highly priced Canon lenses. I don't see Sigma lenses sticking around over the long term if Canon bought Sigma...which would be a very, very sad and detrimental outcome indeed.

 

[kaihp]

I don't get why Canon would want to buy the entire company, if all they really wanted was access to the Foveon sensor technology. It would make much more sense just to make a licensing deal, or even buying out the patents from Sigma, if that's what Canon needs.

To buy out the company, they are probably looking for something bigger - to either get rid of Sigma as a competitor on the lens side, or being able to tap into the Nikon/Sony lens markets.

I'm just guessing here, I have no business knowledge about Canon and Sigma.

 

[Aglet]

.
I see no business sense in such a move.

It would be purely strategic and is as follows:

EAT YOUR MOST SERIOUS COMPETITION

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".

Seriously, that's like saying Toyota should buy Sparco in order to eat its most serious competition.

Ya, seriously.
What other lens mfr is taking the wind out of Canon's sales? (pun intended) Tokina?... Tamron?.. Zeiss?..
it's a matter of pride
Sigma's producing glass that can mount on most major bodies, with optical performance near or even exceeding the best OEM glass, at prices that are significantly lower.

Canon doesn't need anything from Sigma's portfolio, it would be just like the school bully putting the nerd into a locker. Shut 'em up and get them out of sight so there's no embarrassing comments to be heard as they try to talk the wallets out of customers' pockets.
it would just be basic business.

 

[Hector1970]

First I don't think Canon would buy Sigma,
If they did they would never spend that money to shut it down.
Thats like burning money.
They would buy it to supply lens to Canon and non-Canon cameras alike.
They would try to maximise Sigma sales but steer around certain Canon Cashcow lens.
They'd be mad to buy Sigma to stop it selling to Nikon or other users.
It would do more damage to Nikon by increasing Sigma Nikon sales.
Maybe Foveon sensors are the subject of interest for Canon but Sigma haven't done a great job with them so far.
Their cameras have never taken off.

 

[unfocused]

First I don't think Canon would buy Sigma,
If they did they would never spend that money to shut it down.
Thats like burning money.
They would buy it to supply lens to Canon and non-Canon cameras alike.
They would try to maximize Sigma sales but steer around certain Canon Cashcow lens.
They'd be mad to buy Sigma to stop it selling to Nikon or other users.
It would do more damage to Nikon by increasing Sigma Nikon sales.
Maybe Foveon sensors are the subject of interest for Canon but Sigma haven't done a great job with them so far.
Their cameras have never taken off.

Completely agree. This is a totally made-up rumor that is nothing more than click-bait.

No matter how you look at it, there is no good business reason for Canon to buy Sigma.

 

[NancyP]

Probably click-bait. However, there may be more patents around the Foveon sensor. I would have to say that one of the attractive features of Sigma is the now-high end manufacturing capacity in Japan. I have to say that there may be process improvements including and beyond the "QC every lens on a Foveon sensor-based automatic testing machine" that has helped Sigma achieve excellent optical consistency. All recent complaints about Sigma lenses are about AF issues, so far as I can tell. (About Sigma CAMERAS, the main complaint is the f*ing RAW conversion software!!!! - the main reason I get less use from my DP Merrill than expected).