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.I will never buy a Sigma Lens due to autofocus. Only canon Lenses
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.I am interested in their 105mm macro and 24mm f3.5 for RF mount. Both look like good options for macro.
I own the Canon version and I like it very much.We have a Nikon version of Sigma's 105mm f/2.8 macro
and sigma has a16mm 1.4 for cropped sensors, so another reason that it is possibleohhhhhh yes, it would be. I wouldn’t only preorder it ASAP, I’d jump on a plane and fly to the factory and get the lense to avoid it being „backordered“ for months
I just didnt dare to dream of an F1.4...
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.Pretty sure that a new RF version from Sigma will be very attractive, since AF compatibility is with ML cameras not an issue anymore.
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.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.
and canon is makin a 14-21mm 1.4. yes, it is definitely possibleohhhhhh yes, it would be. I wouldn’t only preorder it ASAP, I’d jump on a plane and fly to the factory and get the lense to avoid it being „backordered“ for months
I just didnt dare to dream of an F1.4...
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.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.
Sorry, where does it say anywhere in that link that the Canon is "the worst modern 70-200 optically"?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.
hmm how about u kind mind ya business sirI'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?
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.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.