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 know it will be here.
SIGMA to make a major RF mount announcement in the near future [CR1]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
Four observations:
1) My Sigma Art lenses have been as reliable as my L lenses, and generally sharper, with some exceptions (35mm L II). I've relied on Canon L for supertelephoto, where Sigma's 500 f/4 isn't as good; and on Canon's 100mm L macro, which still stands unbeaten for the sorts of use I have (lots of hand-held, natural light). I think characterizing Sigma Art lenses as generally unreliable is an outdated impression. If you have a Sigma lens built after 2017 with current firmware, it's hard to beat.
2) I've VERY much enjoyed having EF-mount Sigma glass in particular, as I've been able to use quite a number of them on Canon EF, Canon RF, Sony and Panasonic, adapting as appropriate. Before Canon developed decent eye AF, I was able to use Sony, for instance. I see Sigma as the one common language. This is why it'll be easy to move back to Canon with the R5 without much expense. Interestingly, if they're developing RF-specific lenses, these won't have that benefit. Depending on what's on offer, I may stick with EF mount lenses, even for new ones. I had this same dilemma when considering whether to by the Sigma 35mm f/1.2, which was available only in Sony. Which I did, and I don't regret, but will likely sell to help finance an R5 body.
3) I suspect that even if the Sigma lenses use the RF bayonet, they'll still use the EF-mount AF protocols, as these are ones Canon can't monkey with. The RF protocols appear to be quite protectable, as the hardware is now in place for encryption and other mechanisms to really shut out third parties. I don't see much incentive for Canon to deliberately allow Sigma into the tent, and it appears to be no longer the case that third parties can reverse-engineer signals sent in the clear.
4) Sigma has probably been designing like fiends for their upcoming full frame bodies using the L-mount. With nearly identical critical dimensions as RF, they'll have a library of designs ready to go, even as their body efforts have been pretty drastically delayed (even before the virus matter). I suspect that the lenses that come out for RF will be unique, but then will come out redundantly in parallel in L-mount soon after.
1) My Sigma Art lenses have been as reliable as my L lenses, and generally sharper, with some exceptions (35mm L II). I've relied on Canon L for supertelephoto, where Sigma's 500 f/4 isn't as good; and on Canon's 100mm L macro, which still stands unbeaten for the sorts of use I have (lots of hand-held, natural light). I think characterizing Sigma Art lenses as generally unreliable is an outdated impression. If you have a Sigma lens built after 2017 with current firmware, it's hard to beat.
2) I've VERY much enjoyed having EF-mount Sigma glass in particular, as I've been able to use quite a number of them on Canon EF, Canon RF, Sony and Panasonic, adapting as appropriate. Before Canon developed decent eye AF, I was able to use Sony, for instance. I see Sigma as the one common language. This is why it'll be easy to move back to Canon with the R5 without much expense. Interestingly, if they're developing RF-specific lenses, these won't have that benefit. Depending on what's on offer, I may stick with EF mount lenses, even for new ones. I had this same dilemma when considering whether to by the Sigma 35mm f/1.2, which was available only in Sony. Which I did, and I don't regret, but will likely sell to help finance an R5 body.
3) I suspect that even if the Sigma lenses use the RF bayonet, they'll still use the EF-mount AF protocols, as these are ones Canon can't monkey with. The RF protocols appear to be quite protectable, as the hardware is now in place for encryption and other mechanisms to really shut out third parties. I don't see much incentive for Canon to deliberately allow Sigma into the tent, and it appears to be no longer the case that third parties can reverse-engineer signals sent in the clear.
4) Sigma has probably been designing like fiends for their upcoming full frame bodies using the L-mount. With nearly identical critical dimensions as RF, they'll have a library of designs ready to go, even as their body efforts have been pretty drastically delayed (even before the virus matter). I suspect that the lenses that come out for RF will be unique, but then will come out redundantly in parallel in L-mount soon after.
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.
Well, it makes perfect sense and it´s not the question of "will it be possible", it´s the question "when it will happen". Canon market always have been very profitable to sigma lenses. They could have some trouble "finding out" the mount secrets but of course somehow the brand will launch RF lenses. They didn´t did it yet because of the lack of competition between the canon mirrorless vs Sony, so they invest in Sony market. With the upcoming R5 and R6 the game will change and they know the new Canon´s will blow the market!
This is (potentially) great news! I would absolutely consider sigma lenses for both professional use but even more so all those lenses I want but can’t really justify spending top dollar on, like fast primes. I would love it if they brought the smaller, Sony variant 14-24 wide angle zoom to RF. I used to have the EF mount version and it was way too big and heavy for my EOS R, but it was sharp as hell and had a nice character that differs from Canon’s usual L look.
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 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.
Let’s hope Sigma is working on an RF mount, they must realise by now that Canon is serious about the R brand.
Competition for Canon in the lens market can only be a good thing for consumers and Sigma has a good reputation for making quality lenses.
Competition for Canon in the lens market can only be a good thing for consumers and Sigma has a good reputation for making quality lenses.
No it won't, because that lens would be unsatisfactory, it has to be a 10-800 f/1.2, bare minimum, or it's crap.
I won't buy any Sigma until they release the 14-400 1.4 Art. Otherwise any lens they release is no good.
Though I must say the 50mm 1,4 Art is my favorite lense so far and one of the best 50mm lenses at the market =) (unless the super new 50mm rf)
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.
Last edited:
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.
On my 5D Mark IV, I find my Sigma ART 50mm focuses just fine in Live-View, though it's very iffy in DSLR mode.I also have a Sigma 120-300mm Sport, and it does fine in AI Servo, but is iffy for one-shot in DSLR, but fine in Live-View. Since the RF mount is basically only Live-View, I think Sigmas will do fine. When the focusing is done directly from the image sensor data, rather than bouncing the signal down to a focusing sensor, it takes a lot of calibration out of the equation (except for instances where the focus shifts when the aperture is stopped down for the shot, as happened in one of Canon's own RF lenses).
I bet Sigma will sell a lot more RF lenses than L mount lenses.
Actually, I'm surprised it took Sigma so long to come out with M lenses and now RF lenses.
Actually, I'm surprised it took Sigma so long to come out with M lenses and now RF lenses.
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).
Well the L mount has a 20mm flange to focal distance , so chances are there'll be no problem with adapting the 14-24/2.8, 45/1.8 and 35/1.2 mirror lenses to RF. Similarly, all their FE versions of their DSLR primes could easily be adapted to RF (Canon's AF algorithm notwithstanding).
I'm guessing Sigma anticipated various mirrorless flange distances and gave themselves enough wiggle room without resorting to new optical designs.
Personally, I'm grateful for Sigma's new-ish 35/1.2 because it puts the heat on Canon to outdo them with their own RF version : )
Similar threads
