SIGMA to start producing RF mount lenses in 2021

YuengLinger

EOS R5
CR Pro
Dec 20, 2012
3,542
1,997
USA
I will never buy a Sigma Lens due to autofocus. Only canon Lenses
Some Sigmas AF just great. Here is an older one, the 180mm f/2.8 OS Macro. The lizard is handheld with IBIS on; the spider on a tripod, IBIS off. Note that the spider was blowing around in a breeze quite a bit, so I used Face Detect with Tracking (no Eye). The spider is just a little bigger than a grain of rice, so there is no AF problem at all here, even with the backlight.

Both shots have had no processing, other than my LR CC's default sharpening of 25. RAW converted to jpg, but otherwise SOOC. Both are cropped to about 100%.

I took these yesterday after reading your post. :D
 

Attachments

  • Sigma AF1.jpg
    Sigma AF1.jpg
    885.3 KB · Views: 181
  • Sigma AF3.jpg
    Sigma AF3.jpg
    508 KB · Views: 179
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jd7

justaCanonuser

Grab your camera, go out and shoot!
Feb 12, 2014
857
708
Frankfurt, Germany
I am interested in their 105mm macro and 24mm f3.5 for RF mount. Both look like good options for macro.
We have a Nikon version of Sigma's 105mm f/2.8 macro, much better than Nikon's equivalent (which suffers from lateral color fringing, we tested it). Good lens, I'd regard it on par with Canon's EF 100 mm f/2.8 L USM macro which I love to use. Pretty sure that a new RF version from Sigma will be very attractive, since AF compatibility is with ML cameras not an issue anymore.
 

Nemorino

EOS R5
Aug 29, 2020
254
483
We have a Nikon version of Sigma's 105mm f/2.8 macro
I own the Canon version and I like it very much.
But Sigma released a new mirrorless 105 makro beeing a part of the ART line.
I just compared both and it is a new design. Canon/Nikon with 16 lenses in 11 groups, DN version 17/12.
Here a is link to the fullframe mirrorless lenses of Sigma:
Sigma (DG DN)
 
Last edited:

Nemorino

EOS R5
Aug 29, 2020
254
483
Hoping for a control ring. Helpful with the RP since it doesn't have a lot of direct controls
All existing mirrorless lenses of Sigma have an aperture ring which can be switched to manual or automatic.
Sigma's RF will probably have the same feature.
 

Nemorino

EOS R5
Aug 29, 2020
254
483
I so want the 14-24 DN on my R6. I own it for my A7RIV, and it's the best UWA zoom I've ever used
This lens looks very interesting! You missed it is f/2.8! The DSLR version ist 1,15kg heavy, the DN is just 795g.
I still need a UWA and this would be nice!
 

slclick

PINHOLE
Dec 17, 2013
4,588
2,948
Best thing about Tammy and Siggy macro glass is you are only/mostly concerned about IQ and not AF. Might be a good option until the mythical RF 100L comes along.
 
Mar 31, 2014
1,015
101
71
Center of my universe
Pretty sure that a new RF version from Sigma will be very attractive, since AF compatibility is with ML cameras not an issue anymore.

It will be interesting to see whether the 105mm 'focus by wire' performs like that of the Sigma 70mm, which is quite sloppy. I love the color rendition and sharpness, but after using the 70mm for two and a half years as my primary lens, I still find the focusing frustrating.
 

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Mar 25, 2011
16,716
1,689
Sigma may make a RF mount lens, but it may not have all the features of a fully compatible RF lens using the new high speed communications link. I expect that Canon has a lot of legal barriers and patents that prevent them from being fully compatible.

The 3rd party AF issue is greatly reduced when EF lenses are used with mirrorless bodies. Some lenses may have mechanical issues, if they don't focus and should, its likely they have a mechanical failure that needs repaired.
 

Rumours not rumors

2x90D, 630 (film), 750D, Sigma 70-200 f2.8 Sports
CR Pro
May 12, 2020
15
17
Australia mate (-:
I have a Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Sports Lens in an EF mount which is permanently bolted to one of my Canon EOS 90D's and without question it is the best lens I have ever owned. it should come with gauze and bandaids because the images are so sharp you can cut yourself on them. I have put it up against a mates EF70-200 f/2.8 Mk II and even they admitted they got ripped off and keeps wanting to borrow my Sigma (diddly squat chance of that). The fact the Sigma cost over 1,000 bucks less than the Canon equivalent brings into question how is the cost of the Canon EF justified. The 90D reads all of the lens ID details including it's model, digital correction data, distortion correction and peripheral chromatic correction information. The camera treats the Sigma as though it was a native EF lens. If Sigma releases this 70-200mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Sports Lens in a RF mount, that could be enough to sway me to give Canon R mirrorless bodies a go. The cost of the R bodies is still rather horrific though, especially here in Australia where the going prices are $4,848 for a R6 body only and a whopping $6,849 for the R5 body only (you can knock a few hundred off if you shop around) plus the cost of whatever glass you wish to put with it. The Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8 L IS is a brain-numbing $4,299 here... UV filter optional extra! I got my Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Sports Lens in an EF mount for $1,925, less than half the price of the Canon RF equivalent - of course the Sigma weighs slightly less than Battlestar Galactica and would easily be double the size of the Canon RF but I don't notice the bulk and weight of the Sigma even after a full days shooting, but strewth, I would certainly notice an extra 2 grand in my wallet. Having Sigma bring out their excellent lenses to the RF mount as a more realistic cost option changes the game immensely. One can only hope.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dwarven and jd7

justaCanonuser

Grab your camera, go out and shoot!
Feb 12, 2014
857
708
Frankfurt, Germany
It will be interesting to see whether the 105mm 'focus by wire' performs like that of the Sigma 70mm, which is quite sloppy. I love the color rendition and sharpness, but after using the 70mm for two and a half years as my primary lens, I still find the focusing frustrating.
I am not a focus by wire fan, too, despite two of my most frequently used lenses from Canon have FbW implemented: an EF 85mm f/1.2 L USM and a vintage EF 500mm f/4.5 L USM. In fact the latter has a nice FbW system, no sloppiness and a nice sort of electronic "gear" with three different manual focusing speeds. But if the AF drive is dead, you can't even use the lens manually anymore. The 85mm isn't sloppy if one focuses manually, but it feels very indirect, like the old servo steerings in US cars from the 1970s.
 

dwarven

EOS RP
CR Pro
Dec 12, 2019
294
458
California, US
I have a Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Sports Lens in an EF mount which is permanently bolted to one of my Canon EOS 90D's and without question it is the best lens I have ever owned. it should come with gauze and bandaids because the images are so sharp you can cut yourself on them. I have put it up against a mates EF70-200 f/2.8 Mk II and even they admitted they got ripped off and keeps wanting to borrow my Sigma (diddly squat chance of that). The fact the Sigma cost over 1,000 bucks less than the Canon equivalent brings into question how is the cost of the Canon EF justified. The 90D reads all of the lens ID details including it's model, digital correction data, distortion correction and peripheral chromatic correction information. The camera treats the Sigma as though it was a native EF lens. If Sigma releases this 70-200mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Sports Lens in a RF mount, that could be enough to sway me to give Canon R mirrorless bodies a go. The cost of the R bodies is still rather horrific though, especially here in Australia where the going prices are $4,848 for a R6 body only and a whopping $6,849 for the R5 body only (you can knock a few hundred off if you shop around) plus the cost of whatever glass you wish to put with it. The Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8 L IS is a brain-numbing $4,299 here... UV filter optional extra! I got my Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Sports Lens in an EF mount for $1,925, less than half the price of the Canon RF equivalent - of course the Sigma weighs slightly less than Battlestar Galactica and would easily be double the size of the Canon RF but I don't notice the bulk and weight of the Sigma even after a full days shooting, but strewth, I would certainly notice an extra 2 grand in my wallet. Having Sigma bring out their excellent lenses to the RF mount as a more realistic cost option changes the game immensely. One can only hope.

Yeah, Sigma is killing it. Their Art and Sports lines are far cheaper than first party lenses, and perform better too in many cases. Not to mention their build quality, weather sealing on lower models, and their cheapo models still come with a hood usually. I may not even buy any Canon RF glass at all now that Sigma is entering the ring.
 

Hanley

I'm New Here
Mar 18, 2019
13
23
DPR attempted to compare 1st party 70-200mm/2.8 lenses which is a bit of fun. If you already are in a system then there isn't much choice. It doesn't go into 3rd party versions though. If you want par focal then it is not the best for instance. Depends on your usage but the size/weight makes it unique relative to its peers.
https://www.dpreview.com/videos/912...0-200mm-f2-8-zooms-canon-nikon-sony-panasonic

Sorry, where does it say anywhere in that link that the Canon is "the worst modern 70-200 optically"?

I own the RF 70-200mm, I used to own the EF version, and I can tell you the AF is lightening fast, much quicker than the EF, and the image quality is stunning.
Add to that the fact it's so much smaller and easier to pack in my bag and much lighter to carry, what's not to like?

I remember trying to shoot one handed once with a 5D Mark IV and an EF 7-200 2.8 - it was impossible.
I can do it easily with the R5 and the RF 70-200 2.8.
 

BigAntTVProductions

Hey Fellow Canon Shooters
Oct 13, 2014
309
41
NYC
www.facebook.com
I've used one extending barrel lens or another for 15 years in Asia and USA, never had a problem. I was surprised about the 70-200mm 's design, grumbled a little, and then remembered what I just wrote in the last sentence.

Color? Ok, you're just being silly, right? Pulling our legs? Or are you afraid somebody might confuse it with a SONY?
hmm how about u kind mind ya business sir
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Lucas Tingley

David - Sydney

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
996
833
www.flickr.com
Sorry, where does it say anywhere in that link that the Canon is "the worst modern 70-200 optically"?

I own the RF 70-200mm, I used to own the EF version, and I can tell you the AF is lightening fast, much quicker than the EF, and the image quality is stunning.
Add to that the fact it's so much smaller and easier to pack in my bag and much lighter to carry, what's not to like?

I remember trying to shoot one handed once with a 5D Mark IV and an EF 7-200 2.8 - it was impossible.
I can do it easily with the R5 and the RF 70-200 2.8.
I wasn't the poster that said that the RF70-200mm was the worst optically. I am very happy with my RF70-200mm for all the reasons you mention and sold my previous EF70-200/2.8 ii. That link is the only comparison of different brand 70-200mm lenses that I am aware of. I posted it for interest only. Perhaps comment back to the original poster with your thoughts.