Yes! If they did a 100% new optical design for the RF mount, with it's wide open 20mm flange distance, then you use the identical optical design with a mere 4mm extension of their barrel so it'd fit the Nikon Z mount with it's wide open 16mm flange distance. And the Leica L mount is exactly 20mm, so that the identical optical design can now be used for the L mount Alliance of Leica/Panasonic/Sigma. That's 1 new series of optical designs to fit 3 of the 4 main FF mirrorless mounts (excluding Sony FE which they're already heavily supporting). Come to think of it, wouldn't they just use their existing L-mount optical designs and add them (& new ones) to fill the RF lens selections? That would be the obvious thing.
I'm sure Sigma would be aware of this, and that's probably exactly their plan.
Come to think of it, I always wondered why Canon would choose a 20mm flange distance for their new RF mount when they could have used a shorter one (like Nikon did) to get even more options in lens design with lenses closer to their sensor. Now I think I may have the answer - Maybe they did it to match the L-mount so 20mm flange designs would work for the 3 major flange mounts! Wow.
I came to the comments to see who writes "I won't buy any Sigma until they release the 14-400 1.4 Art. Otherwise any lens they release is no good."
I know it will be here.
I didn't realize that the L mount had a somewhat smaller diameter (51.6mm) than the Canon (54mm) and Nikon (55mm). I guess that Sigma would probably design the optics for all 3 to fit the L mount exactly and just adapt the rest to the mount & electronics as needed. That would still be close to an ideal design for the wider Canon (with same flange distance) and wider Nikon (with 4mm spacer added to the lens at the mount). If they think it's worth it for more design options, they could also design specifically for the Canon mount for those aimed at Canon & Nikon only. Either way Canon could get a near optimal design from them. Time will tell.I hope Sigma doesn’t fall for the temptation to recycle lenses made for the narrow 46,1mm Sony E-mount, but instead comes up with new designs that take advantage of the larger Canon RF (54mm) and Nikon Z (55mm) mounts, which can result in significant (smaller) size advantages. Sigma will undoubtably make such lenses available for the 51,6mm L mount, though.
Personally I’m only interested in fast primes and with the RF Mount we can finally get some really fast glass. I hope they continue but I see no reason that can’t implement both strategies as some photographers portability is more important.Sigma...we need to talk...you have created some spectacular lenses since the start of your "Global Vision" in 2013. Now that you've gotten autofocus figured out with mirrorless cameras, let's work on the SIZE of your lenses. The 24mm, 35mm, and 50mm are about perfectly sized, but then you completely lost your minds with the 85mm, 105mm, 135mm, and now with your new 35mm f/1.2 and mirrorless 24-70. LOL
Sigma's goal should be to create more compact lenses for the RF system...but, sadly, when we look at their new Sony lenses, I think we're in for a lot more monster lenses.
I can't imagine AF algorithms are any easer with the Rf mount. But, YES, Canon needs some competition to keep them innovating, and to keep prices a little more reasonable.
Sigma came up with some native FF E mount optical designs because Sony is the biggest snowball (marketwise) rolling down the hill. But the E mount flange distance is 18mm, so any true (narrow diameter) native E mount specific design could not be directly transferred to the 20mm flange distance of the RF mount unless the last lens poked 2mm further out the back (which may or may not be dangerous), so it might have to be re-designed, anyway. They have lots of wide diameter 20mm flange designs and can make more of them so that it's the only reasonable way I see for them to make lenses for the RF system (and Nikon Z mount and L mount alliance).
Sigma prime lenses are VERY good. I’ve enjoyed having them. Sigma zooms, however, are not on the level of Canon zooms by a long shot. The long end of the focal length’s sharpness is not acceptable in my opinion. Also, I realize the price point is fantastic for what we’re getting, I wouldn’t mind paying a tad more if that’s what it takes to make them lighter.