Sigma to add a 200mm F2.0 to its Lineup

[mimbu]

"The information below comes from an online retailer listing. It looks like some of the listing uses placeholders."

Sure, but as far as I saw you did not include that disclaimer when you originally posted. Just a quick translation from Polish and then an immediate post without any sort of checking. I get the desire to be "first" but still.....

 

[Canon Rumors]

The page posted by the Polish retailer about the Sigma 200mm f/2 DG | Sports includes three tabs:

1. Opis produktu (Product description)
2. Cechy produktu (Product features)
3. Specyfikacja (Specifications)

All of them include inconsistencies and blatant errors, including the first tab, the translation of which makes the residual substance of your edited post (HSM autofocus motor and TC-1401/TC-2001 teleconverters -you edited the name of the former but forgot the latter).

I don't disagree. I f'd up.

 

[David - Sydney]

But we might get a Laowa 200mm f/2.0 with EF-mount.

I wish that 3rd parties would release in EF mount but as far as I know, there hasn't been a EF lens released since RF mount was released :-(
It would be ideal if they were released especially for manual lenses although EF protocols would still be very useful.
Most of the 3rd parties don't wish to rock the boat with Canon although they were happy to for EF lenses in the past.
Sigma's 14/1.4 is mostly used for wide angle astro and just needs the mount to be adapted.

 

[Jethro]

Admin removed the specs that he also posted with the article. Some of the errors (like HSM motor, just search for HSM) are also within the article text but some were only in the now-removed list of "specs". Wrong weight. Wrong lens color (lol). Wrong min focus distance. Wrong motor. Wrong teleconverter versions.

The photos of the lens are legit which we know from an already leaked image. But much (all?) of the article text and all the "specs" were probably AI generate by the site admin got all this from.

OK - so we were commenting on different versions of the article - I get that.

But is it then necessary to get into speculation about 'AI generated' text? I feel like that is about to become the next 'Canon is doooomed' equivalent on here ...

 

[roby17269]

I've had the EF 200 f/2L IS and it was a wonderful lens - loved the results. But it is also a quite specialized lens and it was heavy to carry around. I was using it primarily for fashion, but when I bought a MF camera for that I mostly stopped using it (I think I could have used it on MF but not sure) and sold it. On the good side it was really easy to sell as there are always precious few if any on offer.

Regardless, I would be happy to see Canon make a RF version of it but I do think that there are more pressing priorities (and no, not just the highest priority of them all, the 35 1.2 )

I am also in the camp that would like Canon to open the RF mount to 3rd parties beyond crop. I am not going to get in the strategy / economics sides of the discussion, but I do think that having more choices is better, at least for us.

 

[degos]

... but at Canon we're forced to either buy their overpriced 2000-3000 dollar ones or adapt old glass.

Or just boycott the RF system until Canon changes its mind. Unfortunately few people are prepared to do that.

 

[snapshot]

Or just boycott the RF system until Canon changes its mind. Unfortunately few people are prepared to do that.

Not boycotting, still using my EF lenses including a couple of Sigmas. The real problem is these new lenses wont work on EF mount, so maybe now I am boycotting Sigma.