Is there any reason to believe that this sigma lens won't be compatible with future Canon camera? I have never used non-canon lenses before. Can someone shed some light on this issue? Or is it just made-up nonsense? By the way, it's a wonderful lens priced fairly and made with sincerity.
Sigma 35 1.4 compatibility with future canon cameras
- Thread starter sunnyVan
- Start date
- Status
unfocused
Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
I'm pretty sure that's why Sigma introduced the docking station for firmware upgrades.
Canon and Nikon may change their firmware in the future to try to shut third party lenses out of some features. By offering a docking station, major firmware upgrades can be added to the lenses at home. Sigma can release new firmware and, hopefully, stay one step ahead.
Canon and Nikon may change their firmware in the future to try to shut third party lenses out of some features. By offering a docking station, major firmware upgrades can be added to the lenses at home. Sigma can release new firmware and, hopefully, stay one step ahead.
Upvote
0
I think this is mainly made-up to cut into the sales of 3rd party lensmakers. It would be possible to make a DSLR body, that only accepts EF lenses. But to do so, there should be something in the lens that lets them identify as an EF lens. I do not think that Canon has anything like this in their older EF-lenses.
So if Canon likes to keep its compatibility to their old lenses, then the Sigma lenses will also keep working on EOS bodies.
It will be interesting to see, if we will get 3rd party lenses for the EOS-M or the Nikon 1, or it Canikon buildt this "feature" into their new mirrorles cameras.
So if Canon likes to keep its compatibility to their old lenses, then the Sigma lenses will also keep working on EOS bodies.
It will be interesting to see, if we will get 3rd party lenses for the EOS-M or the Nikon 1, or it Canikon buildt this "feature" into their new mirrorles cameras.
Upvote
0
unfocused said:
That's the rationale I used when I handed them $900 for the new 35mm f/1.4. I had never used a non-Canon lens, and I wasn't looking forward to owning a brick when Canon locked out third party lenses.
I also think the Canon users would scream too vehemently about such a move. Locking out some functionality on batteries is one thing, but lenses would not go down easily!
Upvote
0
3rd party lenses being abandoned is real, but i think it hasn't been done with anything recent. there are many older 3rd party lenses that are either completely useless, or only work in manual focus mode. There are usually a few at b&h or Adorama's used department(they state it). Once i nearly bought a manual focus only sigma 500mm f something(can't recall), but then decided against it.
Upvote
0
aj1575 said:
3rd party lenses 'borrow' lens codes from old Canon lenses. In some cases, this has caused problems - for example, off-center AF points not working properly on 40/50/60D and 7D bodies for many Tamron lenses. Of course, Canon lenses were affected, too...which probably annoyed the 4-5 people using a 20 year old 35-80mm zoom lens on a recent dSLR.
Upvote
0
aj1575 said:
Nikon has already patented a technology that could - potentially - prevent the use of third-party lenses on Nikon cameras:
http://petapixel.com/2013/04/14/nikon-patent-shows-password-protection-for-lensbody-combinations/
Upvote
0
I've had 5 or 6 Sigma Lenses that failed to work after a new Canon camera model appeared. It happened twice, but hasn't been a issue for newer Sigma lenses made in the last 10 years.
Certainly, it can happen again. Most of my lenses could not be updated, but I did pay Sigma $100+ to update my 105mm Macro.
Those who say it cannot happen only need look back to the past, its already happened twice, because after Sigma fixed them, they broke again with a new Canon model. All Canon lenses worked fine, Sigma had done a poor job of reverse engineering.
I'd hope that at least the very few Sigma lenses that have upgradable firmware could be fixed by the user, but that is a unknown. Certainly, most of them might require a hardware fix.
http://photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00UWyX
Certainly, it can happen again. Most of my lenses could not be updated, but I did pay Sigma $100+ to update my 105mm Macro.
Those who say it cannot happen only need look back to the past, its already happened twice, because after Sigma fixed them, they broke again with a new Canon model. All Canon lenses worked fine, Sigma had done a poor job of reverse engineering.
I'd hope that at least the very few Sigma lenses that have upgradable firmware could be fixed by the user, but that is a unknown. Certainly, most of them might require a hardware fix.
http://photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00UWyX
Upvote
0
Personally I look at this a little differently. Don't worry too far in the future, look at what's best for the near future. Even if the worst were to happen with a future model, you can continue to use it with existing equipment for its working life. Unless they release a firmware to break it...
Upvote
0
Agree with the docking station making the new lenses "future proof", I bet it would rather be in Sigma's interest for CaNikon to change up their protocols, as they will sell loads of those docks once that happens
Upvote
0
unfocused
Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
Keep in mind too that there is more than a little risk for any camera manufacturer who would completely shut out third-party lens makers.
They'd have to consider the ill-will they'd be generating among their best customers, since those who buy third-party lenses are also the ones with the discretionary income to buy Canon lenses and Canon cameras. Is it really worth it to antagonize those customers?
Canon doesn't operate a monopoly. If they make it impossible to use third-party lenses, that will only drive customers to Nikon. Right now, the two companies compete relentlessly over insignificant differences in their products. Ceding the third-party compatibility issue to the other side would be handing them a massive competitive advantage.
Shutting out Sigma, Tokina or Tamron would also mean shutting out Zeiss. Granted, it's a very small market, but I don't think either Canon nor Nikon would want to hand over these high-end luxury buyers to the other side.
Yes, I can see Canon and Nikon engineering new features into their lenses and trying to keep those features from being accessible by third party lenses, but that's a far different case than completely shutting out a competitor's lenses.
They'd have to consider the ill-will they'd be generating among their best customers, since those who buy third-party lenses are also the ones with the discretionary income to buy Canon lenses and Canon cameras. Is it really worth it to antagonize those customers?
Canon doesn't operate a monopoly. If they make it impossible to use third-party lenses, that will only drive customers to Nikon. Right now, the two companies compete relentlessly over insignificant differences in their products. Ceding the third-party compatibility issue to the other side would be handing them a massive competitive advantage.
Shutting out Sigma, Tokina or Tamron would also mean shutting out Zeiss. Granted, it's a very small market, but I don't think either Canon nor Nikon would want to hand over these high-end luxury buyers to the other side.
Yes, I can see Canon and Nikon engineering new features into their lenses and trying to keep those features from being accessible by third party lenses, but that's a far different case than completely shutting out a competitor's lenses.
Upvote
0
I think this would be financial & loyalty suicide on Canon or Nikons behalf, The only sigma I own is the 35 1.4 art which is superb much better than the canon 35L, its the only sigma lens I've considered in 10 years as a pro. Many many other semi pro's and amateurs buy lots of sigmas to save a bit and get nearly the same IQ as USM or L lenses at a lot cheaper cost. I can justify the cost of L's against my business and to myself for the quality. But many cannot and are still very happy with decent Sigma, tamron or tokina lenses.
I had a few FD sigmas when I was a student and rookie pro as I couldnt possibly afford a L, and theres many more students, amateurs and semi pros buying cameras than pros.
Do a poll I'd say most 7D or 60D owners have a sigma lens or two whilst most 5D II/III and 1D owners will have mostly Ls. If consumers were tied into buying more expensive USM or L lenses or the crap basic canon zooms then they would switch to other manufacturers that have not and would not lock out 3rd party manufacturers.
Freemarket development is great in camera tech land, and from the new sigmas, canon can learn a lot from them I believe, unless they decided that Sigmas are getting too good and putting them to shame in which they might try to lock them out. But users would have a huge outcry imho. I think the new sigma's are really good for canon R&D to push the game up.
Canon & Nikon are kings but is also a servant of its population..
I had a few FD sigmas when I was a student and rookie pro as I couldnt possibly afford a L, and theres many more students, amateurs and semi pros buying cameras than pros.
Do a poll I'd say most 7D or 60D owners have a sigma lens or two whilst most 5D II/III and 1D owners will have mostly Ls. If consumers were tied into buying more expensive USM or L lenses or the crap basic canon zooms then they would switch to other manufacturers that have not and would not lock out 3rd party manufacturers.
Freemarket development is great in camera tech land, and from the new sigmas, canon can learn a lot from them I believe, unless they decided that Sigmas are getting too good and putting them to shame in which they might try to lock them out. But users would have a huge outcry imho. I think the new sigma's are really good for canon R&D to push the game up.
Canon & Nikon are kings but is also a servant of its population..
Upvote
0
If Canon theoretically disallowed 3rd party lenses would this include the Zeiss ZE lensens? I kind of thought they were somehow "authorized" 3rd party lenses. I dont' think it would stop me from buying the one that I want but I'm just curious.
Upvote
0
I'm reminded of the videotape recording development days. IIRC, many manufacturers had agreed on the 8mm format, then Sony jumped the gun with Betamax. JVC's VHS format was technically inferior to Beta, but JVC had the sense to license other manufacturers to use the VHS format for a small royalty/licensing fee. Sony did not follow that business model with Beta and it died rather quickly. As my income and demands change, I buy L lenses if I can and the best 3rd party lenses when I can't justify the expense - even if I can afford it (hobbyist, not pro). I'm not certain Canon would lose a significant amount of sales if they set up a royalty/licensing arrangement with Sigma/Tamron/Tokina for autofocus/aperture control in lenses. AF on my old Sigma 400/5.6 works fine but not aperture. For the limited amount of use it sees I'm content to be stuck at 5.6, I just don't use it often enough to warrant replacement with the Canon, though in that case it has little to do with price. If price was not a factor, I'd be shooting Zeiss anyway.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
