Industry News: Sigma announces a 28-105mm F2.8 Art lens

[Richard CR]

This is industry news because Sigma doesn't want to make this for the RF mount, yet. However, I am happy to see that Sigma is offering mount conversion for even their fairly inexpensive Sigma 10-18mm DC DN | Contemporary.

Industry News: Sigma announces a 28-105mm F2.8 Art lens

This is industry news because Sigma doesn’t want to make this for the RF mount, yet. However, I am happy to see that Sigma is offering mount conversion for even their fairly inexpensive Sigma 10-18mm…

www.canonrumors.com

 

[Walrus]

I saw the Chris Frost test review, the lens is good, but not super good, I expected better; distortion and vignette are not ideal, but who cares with in camera corrections, otoh I expected more sharpness in the corners, and there's a certain loss even in the centre at 105mm. And LCA is pretty bad tbh.
Test was done on a high mpx count camera (42mpx), so on 20/24mpx of an R6(II) there should be less problems, but still, I have to say I'm not fully convinced on this lens, I feel Tamron 35-150 is still a better option, especially in terms of flexibility.

Sigma doesn't want to make this for the RF mount, yet

Doesn't want, or can't, yet?

 

[Exploreshootshare]

Doesn't want, or can't, yet?

"Can´t" because it seems like there are still restrictions from Canon for third party ff lenses.

 

[Walrus]

"Can´t" because it seems like there are still restrictions from Canon for third party ff lenses.

I know; it was a rhetorical question ;-)

BTW Chris Frost also did the side to side comparison with the Sigma 28-105, the Canon 24-105 and the Tamron 35-150; I remembered the Canon to be MUCH better, but side to side it's almost on the same level of the Sigma, so actually that Sigma is much more desirable then I thought given the price. But the Tamron is clearly the best of the trio, and the most flexible for the ceremonies.

This Saturday I've the last wedding of the season, after that I'll have some serious thoughts on what to do next, before next season starts in march/april; the Tamron is for both Sony and Nikon, the Sigma (for now?) just for Sony (and L-mount which I don't care), I would have guessed the Sigma could be done for Nikon, too.
I'm thinking of either swap one of my two R6's for an A7III/IV and see how's going as second body (I still have almost only EF lenses, so I can use them on the Sony), or directly getting rid of all Canon stuff and going for a pair of used Z5's, but that would be pretty drastic. But I really want that 35-150 so bad.

 

[Diko]

Interesting to compare next to 24-105 f/2.8. AFAIK there is no other and this Canon Masterpiece is the only in that range with that aperture. Correct?

 

[SvO2]

Interesting to compare next to 24-105 f/2.8. AFAIK there is no other and this Canon Masterpiece is the only in that range with that aperture. Correct?

Correct, though the Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8 does hit a similar niche.

 

[Walrus]

Interesting to compare next to 24-105 f/2.8. AFAIK there is no other and this Canon Masterpiece is the only in that range with that aperture. Correct?

It's already done, along with the Tamron 35-150

F/2.8 Super zoom battle: Sigma 28-105mm vs Tamron 35-150mm vs Canon 24-105mm

By popular demand! In case you're wondering, I mention the Samyang 35-150mm lens at the end of the video. Pictures taken on a full-frame Sony a7R III 42mp ca...

www.youtube.com

 

[Diko]

Correct, though the Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8 does hit a similar niche.

Hmmm I need those 24-35 in the same lens more than the 105-150 (because of excellent optics and resolution).

Thanks for the video @Walrus

 

[Steven]

I saw the Chris Frost test review, the lens is good, but not super good, I expected better; distortion and vignette are not ideal, but who cares with in camera corrections, otoh I expected more sharpness in the corners, and there's a certain loss even in the centre at 105mm. And LCA is pretty bad tbh.
Test was done on a high mpx count camera (42mpx), so on 20/24mpx of an R6(II) there should be less problems, but still, I have to say I'm not fully convinced on this lens, I feel Tamron 35-150 is still a better option, especially in terms of flexibility.


Doesn't want, or can't, yet?

 

[Steven]

"Can´t" because it seems like there are still restrictions from Canon for third party ff lenses.

Yes, I would really love the new Sigma full frame lenses with RF mount. Let's hope this happens soon...

 

[raphael lencrerot]

Yes, I would really love the new Sigma full frame lenses with RF mount. Let's hope this happens soon...

I have no hope it happens soon... this is why I'm about to switch to Sony

 

[mimbu]

This is industry news because Sigma doesn't want to make this for the RF mount, yet.

Sigma wants to sell lenses, but they no longer wish to deal with reverse engineering mount protocols for AF/AE/OSS/etc and all the compatibility issues that come along with that. Tamron is the same. They make all their lenses (except Sigma TCs) for E mount because Sony has almost no restrictions on what license holders can produce for E mount.

They make few lenses for Z mount (though slowly growing, especially Tamron recently), and almost no lenses for RF.

I don't think it's a big mystery why that is, there are approvals required for Z and RF before a lens can be released on the mount, and Canon is not approving anything. To me, that is consumer-unfriendly behavior.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I don't think it's a big mystery why that is, there are approvals required for Z and RF before a lens can be released on the mount, and Canon is not approving anything. To me, that is consumer-unfriendly behavior.

Being friendly to consumers is not typically included among corporate goals.

 

[Diko]

I don't think it's a big mystery why that is, there are approvals required for Z and RF before a lens can be released on the mount, and Canon is not approving anything. To me, that is consumer-unfriendly behavior.

Z mount? I have the 24-105 f/2.8 ... Z and IMHO stands basically for 2 holes to attach a small additional motor with corresponding interface to move the zoom. ;-)

However that being said. IMHO there are laws to break and patents that might get all vendors in troubles caused by CANON.

 

[Walrus]

Z mount? I have the 24-105 f/2.8 ... Z and IMHO stands basically for 2 holes to attach a small additional motor with corresponding interface to move the zoom. ;-)

However that being said. IMHO there are laws to break and patents that might get all vendors in troubles caused by CANON.

Z mount is the Nikon mirrorless mount; the Canon RF Z lenses are a different thing.

 

[Diko]

My bad. Didn't said it correctly.... Model Z on RF mount.