I might be interested in trying a 60-600 C.
The 60-600 is a heck of a lens. I sold it before I bought my R5 and R6, but my 70-200 and 85 1.4 both work flawlessly with the adapter, so I imagine it's a similar situation with the 60-600.
Upvote
0
I might be interested in trying a 60-600 C.
I'm guessing the pricing will be higher....since the RF pricing is higher than the EF pricing, we'll see 3rd parties follow suit. But still should be a discount to the Canon native glass.I think their 14-24 and 24-70 F2.8 would make a huge impact. From all the reviews I've seen it seems especially the latter is as good as all the "native" mirrorless 24-70 F2.8 (which are all amazing), so having that at $1100 would be great over the RF.
I'm just glad that Sigma made their lenses for L mount which has the same flange distance as RF. The Tamrons for FE might struggle with that depending on the design of the back element.
I'm guessing the pricing will be higher....since the RF pricing is higher than the EF pricing, we'll see 3rd parties follow suit. But still should be a discount to the Canon native glass.
-Brian
Hoping for an RF equivalent of the 14mm F1.8 Art. If it has a control ring, I’d preorder it right away!
Hopefully a bunch of other lenses will help getting the RF price mark-up down
As a nightscape shooter, I would pick up the 14mm f/1.8 if they made an equivalent version in the RF mount.
ML
What would you use the 24 f/3.5 for that requires macro? The distance between the front of the lens and the subject must be extremely small.
I'm guessing the pricing will be higher....since the RF pricing is higher than the EF pricing, we'll see 3rd parties follow suit. But still should be a discount to the Canon native glass.
-Brian
Absolutely agree here!Hopefully with the reduced RF/Z mount flange distances, they can reduce coma in the corners wide open.
Hasn’t Sigma always used the Canon rotation direction? I hope they simply use the Nikon way for Z and Canon way for RF...For Sigma RF zoom lenses, I wish that zoom rotation direction is the Canon way and not the Nikon way. When shooting fast sports with a “wrong way” Sigma zoom, I always struggled to achieve good flow and couldn’t stand it in the long run. It was like trying to ride one of those impossible bicycles with opposite steering. Less of an issue with usages that aren’t time critical.
Hasn’t Sigma always used the Canon rotation direction? I hope they simply use the Nikon way for Z and Canon way for RF...
I agree. Great to adapt their current EF mount lenses so I don't see the point of RF mount without the control ring. The real question is whether they can use the RF protocol and not fall back on the EF protocol (even with RF mount). Changing the zoom direction should be simple in that case and with built-in gyro IS to complement IBIS.I think only their mirrorless designs are worth using on RF cameras. The DSLR ports are super awkward on E-Mount or L-Mount.
With that being said, their DN mirrorless lenses are brilliant. Their 24-70mm f2.8 DN is beautiful, as is their 85mm f1.4 - smaller and more lightweight (by a long shot) than their DSLR equivalents.
But I think their new "i" line is the most brilliant lens lineup yet. I love them: https://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/cas/special/i-series/ - can't wait for these to be available for RF Mount. Those alone are almost worth using L-Mount.
They could stick an RF mount on the back of the old 50/1.4 EX design and I'd buy it. Loved that lens, would still be using my EF mount version if it hadn't gone bad (one of the elements has become badly decentered and its unusable at large apertures). Updated AF would be great too of course.A smaller 50mm 1.4 hsm with rf mount would be nice