There has obviously been ongoing conversation about when Canon would open up the RF mount for companies like SIGMA and Tamron. While we have had confirmation that SIGMA has interest in making lenses for the RF mount, they have given no timeline.

An unknown source has reached out a couple of times about this topic and seem pretty confident that it will happen in the next 6-8 months. The source claims two lenses would initially be a launched, a midrange fast prime lens and a zoom lens of some kind.

No exact information about what these lenses are were given at this time, but I imagine SIGMA has a few designs in the works as they work out the legal things with Canon Inc.

If we had to guess what sort of lenses we'll see first, again… just guessing. We'd think the following two lenses make sense from a business standpoint for both companies.

  • Sigma 50mm f/1.4 (I won't guess on ART or Contemporary)
    I don't think we'd see fast wide angle primes from SIGMA before Canon. Canon has also shown us over the decades, they have no interest in making a new 50mm f/1.4.
  • Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 OS DC
    I think a “fast” RF-S mount zoom would be the most likely out of the gate.

We would not expect much, if any crossover of focal ranges and speed for a long while from Sigma for the RF mount.

This information comes from an unknown source, so please treat it accordingly. We hope that we're going to hear more definitive information in the coming month or two.

We've had no word about Tamron.

Go to discussion...

155 comments

  1. Was hoping for a tele zoom and Macro for start but I guess those will have to wait.
    Why is that? We have like 4-5 macro lenses already, 1.4:1 and 1:2. Frankly I think it's a ridiculous number of macro-branded lenses.

    Additionally, with 70-200, 100-400, 100-500, 100-300/2.8, 200-500/4, 24-240, 55-210, I'm curious which prime you'd like that they're not yet offering?

    In contrast the two lenses suggested would indeed plug some huge holes in the lineup. 50/1.4 must be the most demanded and most obvious "missing" lens, and as soon as we had small-sensor but otherwise pro-type cameras, the question of a purpose-made small-sensor zoom has come up. I find it compelling. Those must be exactly the two first lenses to come, given that neither niche is even rumored by Canon.
    • 0
  2. I'm not entirely sure I'll believe this until the lenses are actually announced with AF :)

    But I could have wished for an RF version of the Sigma 150-600 C (or something similar).
    I find the autofocus in the EF version to be frustrating in use with eye focus active. And Canon's RF 100-500 is just too expensive.
    • 0
  3. But I could have wished for an RF version of the Sigma 150-600 C (or something similar).
    I find the autofocus in the EF version to be frustrating in use with eye focus active. And Canon's RF 100-500 is just too expensive.
    There is no guarantee that the AF would be any better on an RF version.
    There are many EF lenses that autofocus fine.
    • 0
  4. For the crop sensor cameras, wouldn’t it be likely they’d start with their existing 18-50 f/2.8 that they make for other mirrorless mounts?
    • 0
  5. I'm not entirely sure I'll believe this until the lenses are actually announced with AF :)

    But I could have wished for an RF version of the Sigma 150-600 C (or something similar).
    I find the autofocus in the EF version to be frustrating in use with eye focus active. And Canon's RF 100-500 is just too expensive.
    I agree. Not only is the 100-500 expensive it is also not long enough. Canon should have made something like the Sigma or the Sony 200-600.
    • 0
  6. Why is that? We have like 4-5 macro lenses already, 1.4:1 and 1:2. Frankly I think it's a ridiculous number of macro-branded lenses.

    Additionally, with 70-200, 100-400, 100-500, 100-300/2.8, 200-500/4, 24-240, 55-210, I'm curious which prime you'd like that they're not yet offering?

    In contrast the two lenses suggested would indeed plug some huge holes in the lineup. 50/1.4 must be the most demanded and most obvious "missing" lens, and as soon as we had small-sensor but otherwise pro-type cameras, the question of a purpose-made small-sensor zoom has come up. I find it compelling. Those must be exactly the two first lenses to come, given that neither niche is even rumored by Canon.
    that RF 100mm Macro is stupidly overpriced(~$1650 in India) with useless SA control and focus shift features, Sigma's 105mm Macro is quite reasonably priced and a decent lens to start. For Astro photographers their most recent release 14mm is something that would be a great addition to RF mount. Also Sigma has great compact primes under i series definitely worth being ported to RF.
    • 0
  7. The Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS is a pretty popular lens.
    That would be an odd place for Canon to let Sigma start.
    I respectfully disagree. That lens is like 15 years old, and Canon has shown no interest in fast APS-C lenses in a while. The third parties have a lot of offerings in that space, so I think that would be a perfect place for Canon to outsource to them.
    • 0
  8. Hmm usually Sigma starts new mounts with APS-C lenses, so my guess would be the 16mm f/1.4 DC DN, 30mm f/1.4 DC DN, and 56mm f/1.4 DC DN, like they did with Nikon, and also did with EF-M.
    • 0
  9. Hope for the 50 f1.4 as it's my most used lens, so I would happily ditch the adapter I'm using with the EF version of the Sigma, so the ensemble is shorter and more balanced.
    Surely, if they really release this lens, and would cost under 1000€/$, the RF 50 f1.2 L is basically a dead lens, so I'm not so sure Canon would let Sigma do it so early (even if the L version is out from some time, so who wanted a fast 50mm has likely already bought it); also because if I had the L version, I would sold it to buy the new Sigma, and invest the difference in something else, so would also be a loss in prestige for Canon if other people have the same idea, and used market is (relatively) flooded with 50 L's.
    • 0
  10. Hope for the 50 f1.4 as it's my most used lens, so I would happily ditch the adapter I'm using with the EF version of the Sigma, so the ensemble is shorter and more balanced.
    Surely, if they really release this lens, and would cost under 1000€/$, the RF 50 f1.2 L is basically a dead lens, so I'm not so sure Canon would let Sigma do it so early (even if the L version is out from some time, so who wanted a fast 50mm has likely already bought it); also because if I had the L version, I would sold it to buy the new Sigma, and invest the difference in something else, so would also be a loss in prestige for Canon if other people have the same idea, and used market is (relatively) flooded with 50 L's.
    That's some assumptions...
    1. that the 50 1.4 would be good enough to make people dump their RF 50 1.2
    2. even if #1 is true, that people will be willing to take the financial hit of selling the RF 50 1.2 at a loss in a market flooded with RF 50 1.2's and with buyers moving in droves to the Sigma 1.4
    • 0
  11. Why is that? We have like 4-5 macro lenses already, 1.4:1 and 1:2. Frankly I think it's a ridiculous number of macro-branded lenses.

    Additionally, with 70-200, 100-400, 100-500, 100-300/2.8, 200-500/4, 24-240, 55-210, I'm curious which prime you'd like that they're not yet offering?

    In contrast the two lenses suggested would indeed plug some huge holes in the lineup. 50/1.4 must be the most demanded and most obvious "missing" lens, and as soon as we had small-sensor but otherwise pro-type cameras, the question of a purpose-made small-sensor zoom has come up. I find it compelling. Those must be exactly the two first lenses to come, given that neither niche is even rumored by Canon.
    180mm macro is missing. I also prefer the EF 100mm version over the RF one so I’d like a native RF 100mm other than the current one.

    Telephotos are lacking an affordable 500mm f5.6 like Nikon’s and 200-600mm like Sony’s.
    Not a fan on the 100-500RF and other options are either too expensive or limited.

    Been happily shooting Canon 35years. Never been as disappointed. And never ever looked at third party lenses either but now they are desperately needed and not allowed.
    • 0

Leave a comment

Please log in to your forum account to comment