SIGMA will announce two new Contemporary prime lenses soon

Aug 27, 2021
3
2
Canon is Canon.
No cooperation with anybody, except: Canon.
No cooperation with software companys like adobe (see missing camera specific profiles for CR3-Raws in Lightroom & Adobe Camera Raw). "Hey, we got DPP"
No cooperation with third partie lens manufactureres. "Hey, we got nice 2.5-3k RF-L-glasses & cheap beginners glas".

As an long-time user of quite a big EF-camera and lens-equipmenet and an EOS R6 I see myself quite stuck in a dead end with Canon system.
 

mjg79

EOS 90D
Feb 19, 2016
170
105
Canon is Canon.
No cooperation with anybody, except: Canon.
No cooperation with software companys like adobe (see missing camera specific profiles for CR3-Raws in Lightroom & Adobe Camera Raw). "Hey, we got DPP"
No cooperation with third partie lens manufactureres. "Hey, we got nice 2.5-3k RF-L-glasses & cheap beginners glas".

As an long-time user of quite a big EF-camera and lens-equipmenet and an EOS R6 I see myself quite stuck in a dead end with Canon system.

In fairness to Canon I think the "walled garden" approach made sense in the 80s and 90s. Back then many third party options were terrible. It was also very difficult to do things like update autofocus software algorithms in a lens - Canon could quite honestly say to their customers "you're better off just using Canon lenses so we can therefore guarantee they will always work with every EF camera". I remember when they went to digital something changed and a lot of old Sigma glass stopped working and there was pretty much nothing Sigma could do.

Well the world has changed but Canon (and Nikon) haven't yet caught up. Funnily enough the two companies who have best grasped the change, and profited in massive ways, are precisely the two electronic companies who were for years regarded as the worst in terms of insisting on proprietary tech - Apple and Sony. Apple realised there was no point them trying to make every app or accessory for iphones but instead licensing others to do so only made their ecosystem stronger. And Sony learnt that lesson very well - so in the Sony mount you can get not only their lenses but also beautifully crafted manual focus Voigtlander and Zeiss lenses, keenly priced 2.8 offerings from Tamron and some amazing Sigma glass from huge perfectly corrected Art 1.4 lenses to their new DG DN modestly sized but high quality glass. All of it works basically as native as Sony shares the mount information and can therefore have some control over what happens. Indeed the new generation Sigma lenses are generally built to a higher standard (and in Japan and tested before shipping) than Sony GM lenses - they are second only to Canon L and thus really improve the Sony eco-system.

Why the change? Well the world has changed. Manufacturing capability has now spread far and wide. It's no longer the case that only this factory in this country can produce to such high standards. Secondly information and software can now be shared instantly so things like updating firmware cease to be an issue. Thirdly consumers want more choice than any single manufacturer can provide. Even Apple, worth literally trillions of dollars, realised they couldn't provide every app on their phones - better to harness the power of others.

I hope Canon sees that it's in the interests of their customers to work with and not against some of these other companies. I quite understand that right now with the RF system they are making big money selling at introduction-level prices to people with GAS. I couldn't resist buying a couple of RF lenses despite knowing the price will drop in the coming years. But long term there is no chance at all that Canon will produce a 21mm 3.5 manual focus lens. So let Voigtlander do it. Canon won't produce a 45mm 2.8 autofocus lens made to top standards in Japan and designed for soft bokeh. So let Sigma do it. If they made agreements with these other companies they could in return for example let Sigma know they can't release the 24-70 DG DN for a few years in RF mount while they sell the new RF 24-70 L at the current super high price.

I love the RF system - when taken as a whole package I consider it vastly better than the options from Sony, especially with regard to ergonomics and quality control and there's no way I'll stop using Canon. But long term it's going to be frustrating if only Sony users get all the good stuff from Voigtlander, Zeiss, Tamron, Sigma.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rbr and Chaitanya

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,769
4,154
In fairness to Canon I think the "walled garden" approach made sense in the 80s and 90s.

Well the world has changed but Canon (and Nikon) haven't yet caught up.
Interesting points, but I guess I missed the part where this has hurt Canon, who is the global ILC market leader and has been so for nearly two decades.

Actually, I think it’s you who missed that part.
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
6,307
3,842
68
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
Canon is Canon.
No cooperation with anybody, except: Canon.
No cooperation with software companys like adobe (see missing camera specific profiles for CR3-Raws in Lightroom & Adobe Camera Raw). "Hey, we got DPP"
No cooperation with third partie lens manufactureres. "Hey, we got nice 2.5-3k RF-L-glasses & cheap beginners glas".

As an long-time user of quite a big EF-camera and lens-equipmenet and an EOS R6 I see myself quite stuck in a dead end with Canon system.
Regarding software companies that's simply not true. I recently found a quote from Rudy Winston confirming that Canon worked closely with Adobe on a specific lens profile. I don't know why Adobe does not have camera specific profiles for recent Canon cameras, but there may be reasons that we are unaware of and cannot assume it is a decision by Canon.
 

AJ

EOS RP
Sep 11, 2010
744
152
I feel that Sigma would have the headstart with fast primes over Canon. They would proably have their own 16, 20, 35, 50, 85, 135 1.4 or 1.2s out already or coming very soon. When canon comes out ( at a higher price), many people might be like , "Nah i got one already" or " i will get the sigma version it is cheaper"
IMHO that's even more of a reason for Canon to license RF. They could be making money off of every RF-compatible lens that Sigma sells.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,769
4,154
IMHO that's even more of a reason for Canon to license RF. They could be making money off of every RF-compatible lens that Sigma sells.
And losing even more money on every similar Sigma lens bought instead of the Canon counterpart.
 
  • Like
Reactions: unfocused

privatebydesign

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
10,490
5,708
Canon is Canon.
No cooperation with anybody, except: Canon.
No cooperation with software companys like adobe (see missing camera specific profiles for CR3-Raws in Lightroom & Adobe Camera Raw). "Hey, we got DPP"
No cooperation with third partie lens manufactureres. "Hey, we got nice 2.5-3k RF-L-glasses & cheap beginners glas".

As an long-time user of quite a big EF-camera and lens-equipmenet and an EOS R6 I see myself quite stuck in a dead end with Canon system.
What about the Atomos collaboration?

What about Red who sell EF and RF mount option cameras and paid the licensing fees to do so correctly?

It seems when it makes sense to Canon they do work with third parties.
 

mjg79

EOS 90D
Feb 19, 2016
170
105
Interesting points, but I guess I missed the part where this has hurt Canon, who is the global ILC market leader and has been so for nearly two decades.

Actually, I think it’s you who missed that part.

Well I think these issues are a lot more complex than you are suggesting, it doesn't all boil down to a simple case of it must either hurt or not hurt a company. Canon remains number 1, they are the best there is, but it certainly doesn't mean they couldn't do better or provide a better platform for their customers. As recently as 2020 (in a market I know is fast changing) Sony remained the leader in mirrorless sales with Canon growing fast - a decade ago nobody here would have predicted Sony outselling Canon in such a market, indeed it would have been laughed at.

As for hurting Canon - while impossible to quantify, it's a fair assumption that a great many of the Sony sales of recent years would have gone to Canon had Canon moved more quickly into mirrorless. Indeed I have heard personally it said to me and read others online say it over and over that they dislike Sony but feel they have to use them. On fredmiranda's site it's a common refrain among Sony users that they dislike the camera's UI and ergonomics etc but put up with it for the lens choice from third parties - that's a very common theme and has been for several years though I realise that's only a small sampling of users.

Canon had total domination some years back and now is having to fight. Actually this is good for consumers but even if you don't realise it I assure you that Canon themselves are fighting tooth and nail against Sony, the kind of money that has gone into R&D and manufacturing is astronomical, Canon has really pulled out all the stops for the R5 and R6 models, literally billions of dollars has been poured into all this. Moreover huge sums are being put into the R&D and manufacturing for such lenses by the likes of Cosina, Sigma and Tamron.

I am a big Canon fan but I put it to you that when the management of not only Sony, Sigma, Tamron, Cosina, Zeiss and indeed Apple all think that the days of totally walled gardens are gone and one might as well embrace the modern world, I think Canon might be better off considering it too.
 

mjg79

EOS 90D
Feb 19, 2016
170
105
And losing even more money on every similar Sigma lens bought instead of the Canon counterpart.

Alternatively of course it might mean the sale of another Canon R5 camera - with a higher profit margin and shorter lifespan before replacement than the lens instead of Sony getting that sale.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rbr

mjg79

EOS 90D
Feb 19, 2016
170
105
What about the Atomos collaboration?

What about Red who sell EF and RF mount option cameras and paid the licensing fees to do so correctly?

It seems when it makes sense to Canon they do work with third parties.
Years ago people online claimed that Canon partnered with Zeiss for the ZE lenses to make sure they would work perfectly. It was always stated with great confidence by many on the photograph-on-the-net forums but searching now I can't find anything official about it. Thinking about it I am surprised Zeiss would produce such lenses without being certain no issues would be thrown up later on - does anyone know any more?
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
6,307
3,842
68
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
In fairness to Canon I think the "walled garden" approach made sense in the 80s and 90s...Well the world has changed...
I must have missed something. I've owned Sigma, Tamron and Tokina lenses. They have all worked fine with Canon cameras. Are you really just complaining about what you perceive as the slow pace of RF mount third party lenses? Perhaps you are conflating the third party manufacturers' priorities with yours?
 

mjg79

EOS 90D
Feb 19, 2016
170
105
I must have missed something. I've owned Sigma, Tamron and Tokina lenses. They have all worked fine with Canon cameras. Are you really just complaining about what you perceive as the slow pace of RF mount third party lenses? Perhaps you are conflating the third party manufacturers' priorities with yours?

None of those companies has made a single RF mount lens yet while particularly Sigma and Tamron are producing huge numbers for Sony E mount.

As for why - nobody can seem to agree. Sony has made it very easy for third parties to make fully compatible lenses without reverse engineering them. Sigma is working at full capacity to meet demand for their E-mount lenses so perhaps once things calm down they will reverse engineer the Canon RF mount as they once did with EF mount, time will tell. Generally speaking it is better to have something officially licensed with the full specifications rather than reverse engineering though.
 

privatebydesign

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
10,490
5,708
Years ago people online claimed that Canon partnered with Zeiss for the ZE lenses to make sure they would work perfectly. It was always stated with great confidence by many on the photograph-on-the-net forums but searching now I can't find anything official about it. Thinking about it I am surprised Zeiss would produce such lenses without being certain no issues would be thrown up later on - does anyone know any more?
Yes Zeiss 100% paid Canon, in the lens reference numbers assigned by Canon for lens recognition and DPP corrections the Zeiss lenses have their own number and show in EXIF as Zeiss lenses. Sigma, Tokina, Tamron et al don't.

Other third parties piggyback off an older lens number and 'fool' the body into thinking it has a Canon lens mounted. This can cause issues if auto correction is set to on and results in banded rings.
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
6,307
3,842
68
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
...Apple all think that the days of totally walled gardens are gone and one might as well embrace the modern world...
Again, I must be missing something. When you go into Best Buy, how many non Apple computers can you find using the Apple IOS? When you go shopping for smart phones, how many other manufacturers are using the Apple IOS? Honest question, because I don't really follow computer or phones, but I was under the impression that if you want to use an Apple system, you pretty much need an Apple brand. Does Dell, Asis, HP etc. make computers using Apples IOS?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jack Douglas

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,769
4,154
As recently as 2020 (in a market I know is fast changing) Sony remained the leader in mirrorless sales with Canon growing fast.
Sony leads in full frame MILCs. Far more APS-C MILCs are sold than FF and Canon leads there (the EOS M line is the best-selling MILC line globally), 44% of the ILC market is DSLRs and Canon leads there. You can deeply segment the market in many ways. Leica is the global market leader for MILCs with brand names starting with the letter "L" so good for them!

Canon had total domination some years back and now is having to fight.
They have always had to strive to maintain market leadership, and have done so successfully. Sony has gained market share in recent years mainly at the expense of Nikon.

I am a big Canon fan but I put it to you that when the management of not only Sony, Sigma, Tamron, Cosina, Zeiss and indeed Apple all think that the days of totally walled gardens are gone and one might as well embrace the modern world, I think Canon might be better off considering it too.
Even Apple thinks the days of the walled garden are gone? That's news to the world.

Since there's no walled garden, I guess the US Senate are just clueless in their attempt to legislate a breach in those walls.

Here's the thing...when you are blatantly wrong on several points, your credibility suffers and it becomes easier to dismiss your arguments entirely.
 

RayValdez360

Soon to be the greatest.
Jun 6, 2012
720
480
39
Philadelphia
DN = digital native (ie designed for mirrorless)

I'm not sure about DG. Sigma has DC lenses, which I think stands for digital (or maybe DSLR?) compact, which are for APS-C sensor cameras. Regarding DG, the G definitely indicates full frame, and I think the G may have even been similar to Canon's L at one time, so DG refers to the G series for full frame in the DSLR/digital age.

Particularly now sigma uses art, sport and contemporary, I think sigma could probably consider reducing the number of teens they use :)

EDIT: Actually, I think maybe I'm wrong about DG. I think possibly Sigma used to have a G series and a DG series, which were both for full-frame cameras, and the DG series was the higher end series (with D standing for deluxe?). The DC series was equivalent to DG but for ASP-C sensor cameras. Basically, I'm just not sure!
You dont know. My point is proven. LOL.