# SIGMA to start producing RF mount lenses in 2021



## Canon Rumors Guy (Dec 8, 2020)

> Nikon Rumors is reporting that SIGMA will begin producing lenses for the RF and Z mounts some time in 2021.
> There is no word on how SIGMA will develop for the RF mount. Will we get new optical designs? Will we get the control ring?
> Whatever SIGMA chooses to do with their RF mount lenses, they’re going to be quite welcomed by Canon shooters.



Continue reading...


----------



## edoorn (Dec 8, 2020)

I might pick up a fast 35mm!


----------



## YuengLinger (Dec 8, 2020)

At the very least, the appearance of some tempting Sigma releases should prompt some instant rebates on Canon lenses.


----------



## bbasiaga (Dec 8, 2020)

Lack-of-third-party-glass-complainers are *******.


----------



## Chaitanya (Dec 8, 2020)

*I am interested in their 105mm macro and 24mm f3.5 for RF mount. Both look like good options for macro.*


----------



## Bob Howland (Dec 8, 2020)

Chaitanya said:


> *I am interested in their 105mm macro and 24mm f3.5 for RF mount. Both look like good options for macro.*


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.


----------



## leadin2 (Dec 8, 2020)

If they can release smaller and lighter lens, with quality on par with canon, that will be good.


----------



## Chaitanya (Dec 8, 2020)

Bob Howland said:


> 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.


Sigma 24mm on FF camera has FOV equivalent to 15mm on EF-S camera and wide angle macro is very desirable for herp landscape photography. Take a look at this blog post by Kurt:









Laowa 15mm Wide Angle Macro Lens


Wallace's Flying Frog ( Rhacophorus nigropalmatus ) Laowa 15mm F4 1:1 wide angle macro lens is the first 1:1 wide angle macro lens in th...




orionmystery.blogspot.com


----------



## gruhl28 (Dec 8, 2020)

Hoping for a control ring. Helpful with the RP since it doesn't have a lot of direct controls.


----------



## bradfordswood (Dec 8, 2020)

I would be excited if they could make a standard-ish zoom that is more compact than the current Canon offerings.


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Dec 8, 2020)

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


----------



## Andy Westwood (Dec 8, 2020)

Well, it’s about time they started! They obviously feel Canon is behind the RF mount for the long haul now, something most of us are pleased about too.


----------



## Del Paso (Dec 8, 2020)

Chaitanya said:


> *I am interested in their 105mm macro and 24mm f3.5 for RF mount. Both look like good options for macro.*


Me too !


----------



## Danglin52 (Dec 8, 2020)

I might be interested in trying a 60-600 C.


----------



## chasingrealness (Dec 8, 2020)

I’d like to see them put out some affordable, optically competitive 1.4 primes - 20, 24, 35, 50, 85, 105, and 135mm.


----------



## Surab (Dec 8, 2020)

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.


----------



## YuengLinger (Dec 8, 2020)

I'd go for an Rf version of the 150-600mm--if I don't change my mind and go back to waiting for the Canon 100-500mm...


----------



## STARS84 (Dec 8, 2020)

A smaller 50mm 1.4 hsm with rf mount would be nice


----------



## another_mikey (Dec 8, 2020)

As a nightscape shooter, I would pick up the 14mm f/1.8 if they made an equivalent version in the RF mount.

ML


----------



## dwarven (Dec 8, 2020)

bbasiaga said:


> Lack-of-third-party-glass-complainers are *******.



More like third party glass value seekers.


----------



## Marximusprime (Dec 8, 2020)

Danglin52 said:


> 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.


----------



## Charlie_B (Dec 8, 2020)

120-300mm f2.8 for me


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 8, 2020)

It's not so much the older Art catalog that's interesting, but the DN ones made for mirrorless. That new 85 is interesting.


----------



## Quackator (Dec 8, 2020)

2.0 / 70-135mm ART - yes, please.


----------



## JordanCS13 (Dec 8, 2020)

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, and I've used a LOT for many different systems. It's tack sharp throughout the range, to the corners, even on the 60MP A7R IV. Excellent in other imaging respects as well.


----------



## bbasiaga (Dec 8, 2020)

Surab said:


> 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


----------



## JordanCS13 (Dec 8, 2020)

bbasiaga said:


> 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



I highly doubt it. This is just a mount swap for these lenses, rather than a new design. Sigma already has these dedicated mirrorless designs, and they are the same for both E-mount and L-mount. Don't see any reason why the RF mount ones would be any different. If they add a control ring, they might have a very slight premium, but it won't be a big jump.


----------



## highdesertmesa (Dec 8, 2020)

Exploreshootshare said:


> 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





another_mikey said:


> As a nightscape shooter, I would pick up the 14mm f/1.8 if they made an equivalent version in the RF mount.
> 
> ML



Hopefully with the reduced RF/Z mount flange distances, they can reduce coma in the corners wide open.


----------



## highdesertmesa (Dec 8, 2020)

Zeiss and Voigtlander, we're looking at you now.


----------



## calfoto (Dec 8, 2020)

Bob Howland said:


> 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.



For extreme macro work - I used to use a Nikon Multiphot for macro work, here are some lens descriptions explaining their uses...

*Macro-Nikkor 19mm f/2.8*

The Macro-Nikkor 19mm f/2.8 is designed for 15x-40x, (marked 20x on the lens barrel)
This lens has a RMS microscope screw mount, so an adapter to Nikon-F has to be obtained. Typically, this lens is used in the studio on a tripod, as the working distance is only about 20mm or so.

*Macro-Nikkor 35mm f/4.5*

The Macro-Nikkor 35mm f/4.5 can be used on a standard DSLR, although it too is designed for high magnifications, optimized 8x – 20x, but marked 12x on the lens barrel. Mounted directly on a Nikon body, with the camera on a focus rail. This lens has a RMS microscope screw mount, so an adapter to Nikon-F has to be obtained.


----------



## Surab (Dec 8, 2020)

bbasiaga said:


> 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



Well the FE version costs $1100. We will have to see what Sigma would charge for the RF one.


----------



## anden (Dec 8, 2020)

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.


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Dec 8, 2020)

highdesertmesa said:


> Hopefully with the reduced RF/Z mount flange distances, they can reduce coma in the corners wide open.


Absolutely agree here!


----------



## Kiton (Dec 8, 2020)

I would take their 100-400 right off the bat, lets hope they get this rolling STAT!


----------



## Big_Ant_TV_Media (Dec 8, 2020)

if they can do what canon hasnt done yet an INTERNAL ZOOM RF 2.8 70-200mm or 75-250mm with better zoom rings and good IS & AF then im all in especially if it in black


----------



## Kjsheldo (Dec 8, 2020)

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.


----------



## fred (Dec 9, 2020)

anden said:


> 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...


----------



## Kjsheldo (Dec 9, 2020)

fred said:


> Hasn’t Sigma always used the Canon rotation direction? I hope they simply use the Nikon way for Z and Canon way for RF...



With the mirrorless designs (their DN lenses), you could always choose the rotation direction in the menus (at least on Panasonic cameras). But yes, Sigma's lenses have always been the Canon rotation.


----------



## David - Sydney (Dec 9, 2020)

Kjsheldo said:


> 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.


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.
For the price difference, you can weld an adapter onto a Sigma EF lens and still be ahead.
If they can't do this then the only advantage for RF lenses would be compact primes/pancakes as the current Canon EF40mm + adapter is twice the length and size as the pancake itself.


----------



## dsut4392 (Dec 9, 2020)

STARS84 said:


> A smaller 50mm 1.4 hsm with rf mount would be nice


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.


----------



## David - Sydney (Dec 9, 2020)

gruhl28 said:


> Hoping for a control ring. Helpful with the RP since it doesn't have a lot of direct controls.


I'm intrigued what people use the control ring for. I have a mix of EF and RF lenses now and haven't used the control ring as the R5 has 3 ring/dials + joystick already.


----------



## anden (Dec 9, 2020)

fred said:


> Hasn’t Sigma always used the Canon rotation direction? I hope they simply use the Nikon way for Z and Canon way for RF...


Not on the 50-100 1.8 DC Art for Canon, at least not on the copy I had and which I had this problem with. But if that’s just the exception to the rule, then no worries for coming RF zooms then.


----------



## Marximusprime (Dec 9, 2020)

BigAntTVProductions said:


> if they can do what canon hasnt done yet an INTERNAL ZOOM RF 2.8 70-200mm or 75-250mm with better zoom rings and good IS & AF then im all in especially if it in black



I've adapted my EF 70-200 Sports to the R6 and it works flawlessly. It's the heaviest 70-200, but it's a great piece of glass.


----------



## David - Sydney (Dec 9, 2020)

BigAntTVProductions said:


> if they can do what canon hasnt done yet an INTERNAL ZOOM RF 2.8 70-200mm or 75-250mm with better zoom rings and good IS & AF then im all in especially if it in black


What's the problem with the RF70-200mm/2.8 (external zoom)?


----------



## Lucas Tingley (Dec 9, 2020)

I wonder if they will be able to make the 18-35mm f1.8 and 50-100mm f1.8


----------



## Lucas Tingley (Dec 9, 2020)

Exploreshootshare said:


> 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


 a 14mm 1.4 would be even better


----------



## dominic_siu (Dec 9, 2020)

They will be simply lenses with built in EF to RF adapter, that’s it


----------



## Lucas Tingley (Dec 9, 2020)

dominic_siu said:


> They will be simply lenses with built in EF to RF adapter, that’s it


I think sigma will try to fight canon with revolutionary lenses, not just do that


----------



## slclick (Dec 9, 2020)

That 40 would be something


----------



## highdesertmesa (Dec 9, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> What's the problem with the RF70-200mm/2.8 (external zoom)?



It's not big enough to fill up some people's massive backpacks I guess.


----------



## Bennymiata (Dec 9, 2020)

It's about time!


----------



## addola (Dec 9, 2020)

I am more interested in Tamron than Sigma, but one would expect that Sigma would deliver an entire line-up of lenses to the RF mount, possibly filling in gaps like 135mm & macro lenses before Canon does.


----------



## puffo25 (Dec 9, 2020)

I hope to see a 10mm or 12mm F/1,8 or F/2,0 autofocus RF mount lens for my Canon R5 soon for my night astro and panoramic photography..... Currently the only decent lens is the Samyang 12mm f/2.8 ED AS NCS which is manual focus. It is good but chromatic abberation and overall image quality for example is maybe (?) not as good as the Laowa Venus Optics 12mm f/2.8 Zero Distortion.... Ahyhow, a hope Sigma will come out soon with a brighter and possibly AF fisheye lens for RF mount


----------



## stefang (Dec 9, 2020)

dominic_siu said:


> They will be simply lenses with built in EF to RF adapter, that’s it


That's what I'm expecting too. Maybe not by simply adding 24mm to existing lenses, but my guess is that they will add a converter chip that allows them to use the legacy EF electronics.


----------



## degos (Dec 9, 2020)

highdesertmesa said:


> Hopefully with the reduced RF/Z mount flange distances, they can reduce coma in the corners wide open.



The EF Arts generally have low coma ( or none at all in the case of the 40mm ) and certainly are vastly better than most of their Canon equivalents.

But a shorter flange distance makes correction more difficult since the lightpath angles are more acute.


----------



## HarryFilm (Dec 9, 2020)

leadin2 said:


> If they can release smaller and lighter lens, with quality on par with canon, that will be good.



---

SIGMA needs to get on the bandwagon of high end FAST optical grade plastic lenses where optical grade Acrylic Lenses are NOW the wave of the future! 

Ultra high refractive index for more light gathering power equals FASTER lenses at a lighter weight at a much cheaper price PLUS the actual image quality is physically better due to the INHERENT SHARPNESS of the optical grade Acrylic. That 50mm f/1.2 is now a 50mm f/1.0 at ZEISS OTUS levels of sharpness, with almost NO coma or chromatic aberrations!

A few companies are coming out with those types of lenses next year 2021 so SIGMA has LITTLE TIME to start competing in that arena! Why would I pay $2299 USD for a 50mm f/1.2?

See example:








Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L USM Lens


Buy Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L USM Lens featuring RF-Mount Lens/Full-Frame Format, Aperture Range: f/1.2 to f/16, One UD Element, One Aspherical Element, Ring-Type Ultrasonic Motor AF System, Customizable Control Ring, Rounded 10-Blade Diaphragm. Review Canon null




www.bhphotovideo.com





when I can get a lighter lens that's faster (i.e. f/1.0!), is BRIGHTER (i.e. a refractive index of 1.523 for Acrylic vs fluorite glass at 1.433), is much lighter weight, sharper with less coma and chromatic aberration AND its cheaper at $999 USD!

SIGMA and Canon are playing with fire here! 

They NEED to innovate or the newcomers will EAT THEIR LENSES FOR LUNCH!

V


----------



## Del Paso (Dec 9, 2020)

"SIGMA and Canon are playing with fire here!
They NEED to innovate or the newcomers will EAT THEIR LENSES FOR LUNCH!"

Of course...
We'll get a free plastic lens with every pack of Kellogs cornflakes !


----------



## HarryFilm (Dec 9, 2020)

Del Paso said:


> "SIGMA and Canon are playing with fire here!
> They NEED to innovate or the newcomers will EAT THEIR LENSES FOR LUNCH!"
> 
> Of course...
> We'll get a free plastic lens with every pack of Kellogs cornflakes !



---

See this link for a 50 mm to 800mm Sports/Action/Wildlife super-zoom and 50 mm f/1.0 which I got to test two weeks ago in the wild:






50 mm to 800 mm Fast all-Acrylic Super-Zoom Lens for Canon EF/EF-M, RF, Sony E-Mount and Fuji MF being beta-tested now!


HEADLINE: 50 mm to 800 mm Fast all-Acrylic Super-Zoom Lens for Canon EF/EF-M, RF, Sony E-Mount and Fuji MF being beta-tested now! YES! You heard that right! An under-the-radar Canadian Company based in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada is now now beta-testing in the wild as of December 2020...




www.canonrumors.com





With a built-in NF filter and fantastic polarizing filter for $1899 USD that certainly got my interest!

Their techs indicated they are sending samples to DP-Review in both Seattle and Calgary for a full review!

I've seen the lab and real-world tests and since I use Zeiss Otus lenses quite a lot, I am saying these Acrylic lenses are 99% of Zeiss Sharpness and Image Quality at half the price! (Note: I did think the Zeiss Otus are STILL just a tiny bit better in the corners for sharpness!) In terms of Bang-for-the-Buck, these new Acrylic lenses will give fluorite glass (i.e. Canon L-series) a SERIOUS RUN for the money!

Acrylic is the WAY OF THE FUTURE for new light-weight high performance prime and zoom lenses! (well....until we can finally grow sheets of DIAMOND at a cheap enough price!)

P.S. in case anyone is wondering, Zeiss Otus lenses are actually made in Japan rather than Germany and are basically OEM'ed by Cosina with the glass itself coming from Hoya Corporation in Japan. These NEW Acrylic lens are fully Designed and Made in Canada using 1995-era high-end Sports Servo-Zoom Lens templates from Fujinon where the patents have run out.

NOTE: Fujinon MAKES UTTERLY SUPERB Cinema Zoom Lenses -- The company I consult at have these TOTALLY STUNNING LENSES:









Fujinon 14.5-45mm T2.0 Premier PL Zoom Lens


Buy Fujinon 14.5-45mm T2.0 Premier PL Zoom Lens featuring 14.5-45mm Focal Length, Fast T2.0 Maximum Aperture, For Super 35mm Format Cameras, From the Premier PL Lens Family, 136mm Front Barrel Diameter, 280° Focus Barrel Rotation, Ultra-Wide to Normal Range Zoom. Review Fujinon Premier HK




www.bhphotovideo.com





While not at the stratospheric level of the above lenses, the 1995-era lenses DO NOT HAVE those excessively complex peizo-electric floating lens elements but are still optically SUPERB designs that are PERFECT for a re-do in 2021-era Optical Grade Acrylic! So for simplicity and cost reasons, only the simplest designs were chosen for a "Classic Pro-level Fujinon Lens" re-boot! Using an Automotive Industry analogy, these lenses are going to be the equivalent of the 2021 Ford Bronco resurrection using modern tech and new materials! Classic looks and workhorse capability mated with the best creature comforts of 2021!

I think this reboot will be an incredible success due to fantastic proprietary coatings which STOPS photo-degradation and stops scratches on the physically softer/more pliable plastic lens elements themselves plus they have internal manufacturing which basically "freezes" glass creep of Acyrlic!

Sooooooo, what will SIGMA and CANON DO in response ???


V


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Dec 9, 2020)

Lucas Tingley said:


> a 14mm 1.4 would be even better



ohhhhhh 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...


----------



## gruhl28 (Dec 9, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> I'm intrigued what people use the control ring for. I have a mix of EF and RF lenses now and haven't used the control ring as the R5 has 3 ring/dials + joystick already.


I've been using it for ISO. I probably wouldn't care about it as much if I had an R5 or R6 with more controls, but with the RP it's nice to have a more direct way of changing/setting ISO.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Dec 9, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> What's the problem with the RF70-200mm/2.8 (external zoom)?


There's nothing wrong with the RF70-200mm F2.8L. It's an amazing lens and so fast and sharp when paired with the R5. They might do a version with internal zoom but it will be bigger due to simple physics. The size of the RF is great for carrying and storing in a bag. Like you I cant see the issue, apart from it's not cheap but then quality never is


----------



## gruhl28 (Dec 9, 2020)

Kjsheldo said:


> With the mirrorless designs (their DN lenses), you could always choose the rotation direction in the menus (at least on Panasonic cameras). But yes, Sigma's lenses have always been the Canon rotation.


I've heard of choosing the rotation direction for focusing, but zooming is almost always mechanical, so I don't see how that could be set with a menu.


----------



## Memdroid (Dec 9, 2020)

Sigma is going to steal the wind from Canon if they come up with affordable, high IQ fast primes.


----------



## JPAZ (Dec 9, 2020)

Sold my EF 70-200 f/2.8. Kept my EF 100-400 MKii. Weighing some options and looking at costs. Were there to be a viable Sigma alternative, it could cause Canon to reduce some prices.......One can only hope.


----------



## dwarven (Dec 9, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> I'm intrigued what people use the control ring for. I have a mix of EF and RF lenses now and haven't used the control ring as the R5 has 3 ring/dials + joystick already.



The default setting on my RF 85mm f/2 is exposure comp, which I've used maybe once or twice so far. I'd prefer the lens to be cheaper and just not include the control ring though.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Dec 9, 2020)

L-mount is *******!


----------



## BirdDudeJosh (Dec 9, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> There's nothing wrong with the RF70-200mm F2.8L. It's an amazing lens and so fast and sharp when paired with the R5. They might do a version with internal zoom but it will be bigger due to simple physics. The size of the RF is great for carrying and storing in a bag. Like you I cant see the issue, apart from it's not cheap but then quality never is



Every comparison I have seen suggest it's one of the worst modern 70-200's optically. Not nearly as good as the EF II or III when compared side by side. It's small, light and good enough but clearly compromises were made to obtain the small size and light weight.


----------



## highdesertmesa (Dec 9, 2020)

degos said:


> The EF Arts generally have low coma ( or none at all in the case of the 40mm ) and certainly are vastly better than most of their Canon equivalents.
> 
> But a shorter flange distance makes correction more difficult since the lightpath angles are more acute.



Canon doesn't have a 14 f/1.8, so yeah, the Art is vastly better than a non-existent lens 

I only mention the coma since it since it's a known issue for the Art 14 1.8 when shot wide open, and wide open is where you always want to use it for astro if you could. Maybe Sigma will follow Canon's lead and make wider-aperture lenses for RF, so maybe we can get a larger 14 1.4 that is coma-free by 1.8.


----------



## drob (Dec 9, 2020)

If Rokinon can kick out RF mount lenses, why can’t the smart folks at Sigma or Tamron do it? It’s been a long time coming.


----------



## Lucas Tingley (Dec 9, 2020)

Exploreshootshare said:


> ohhhhhh 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...


if they make it as massive as the 28-70 f2 they could do it


----------



## YuengLinger (Dec 9, 2020)

BigAntTVProductions said:


> if they can do what canon hasnt done yet an INTERNAL ZOOM RF 2.8 70-200mm or 75-250mm with better zoom rings and good IS & AF then im all in especially if it in black


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?


----------



## pahountisg (Dec 9, 2020)

Quackator said:


> 2.0 / 70-135mm ART - yes, please.


even a 24-50 @f 2.0 would be also sweet


----------



## David - Sydney (Dec 9, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> Color? Ok, you're just being silly, right? Pulling our legs? Or are you afraid somebody might confuse it with a SONY?


They only issue I have with Canon's white colour has been the paint chips from normal usage around the mounts/plates. 
It looks like the RF lens bodies are different to the EF ones so hopefully the paint won't chip in the future.


----------



## YuengLinger (Dec 10, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> They only issue I have with Canon's white colour has been the paint chips from normal usage around the mounts/plates.
> It looks like the RF lens bodies are different to the EF ones so hopefully the paint won't chip in the future.


I had not heard that about big white lenses' paint chipping. 

After a little thought, however, I know I shouldn't judge people's preferences. I wouldn't want a pink or neon green lens. Blue or charcoal might work.


----------



## sanj (Dec 10, 2020)

BirdDudeJosh said:


> Every comparison I have seen suggest it's one of the worst modern 70-200's optically. Not nearly as good as the EF II or III when compared side by side. It's small, light and good enough but clearly compromises were made to obtain the small size and light weight.


Could I request for a link to a comparison where it is suggested that 'it' is the worst modern 70-200 optically? Thank you, sir.


----------



## David - Sydney (Dec 10, 2020)

sanj said:


> Could I request for a link to a comparison where it is suggested that 'it' is the worst modern 70-200 optically? Thank you, sir.


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


----------



## David - Sydney (Dec 10, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> I had not heard that about big white lenses' paint chipping.
> After a little thought, however, I know I shouldn't judge people's preferences. I wouldn't want a pink or neon green lens. Blue or charcoal might work.


Doesn't have to be a big white... my EF70-200mm had the paint chipped off it around the EF mount and foot. Canon offers black, white and a sort of grey for the 600/800 f11
White stands out nicely for the big whites in the sporting bays vs Nikon's black lenses. Interesting that Sony copied Canon. Might actually be for heating issues but the trend to change from metal barrels may mean that the colour is less relevant than before.


----------



## steen-ag (Dec 10, 2020)

I will never buy a Sigma Lens due to autofocus. Only canon Lenses


----------



## Steve Dmark2 (Dec 10, 2020)

Lens Road Map please!


----------



## jd7 (Dec 10, 2020)

bbasiaga said:


> Lack-of-third-party-glass-complainers are *******.


As a lack-of-third-party-glass-complainer, I will be very happy to be ******* in this case!


----------



## Lucas Tingley (Dec 10, 2020)

the only thing I am complaining about is the price of rf lenses. thank God for 3rd party manufacturers


----------



## YuengLinger (Dec 11, 2020)

steen-ag said:


> 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.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Dec 11, 2020)

Chaitanya said:


> *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.


----------



## Lucas Tingley (Dec 11, 2020)

pahountisg said:


> even a 24-50 @f 2.0 would be also sweet


maybe a 24-60


----------



## Nemorino (Dec 11, 2020)

justaCanonuser said:


> 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)


----------



## Nemorino (Dec 11, 2020)

gruhl28 said:


> 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 (Dec 11, 2020)

JordanCS13 said:


> 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!


----------



## Lucas Tingley (Dec 11, 2020)

Exploreshootshare said:


> ohhhhhh 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...



and sigma has a16mm 1.4 for cropped sensors, so another reason that it is possible


----------



## slclick (Dec 12, 2020)

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.


----------



## chrysoberyl (Dec 12, 2020)

justaCanonuser said:


> 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 (Dec 13, 2020)

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 (Dec 13, 2020)

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.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Dec 13, 2020)

chrysoberyl said:


> 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.


----------



## Lucas Tingley (Dec 14, 2020)

Exploreshootshare said:


> ohhhhhh 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...



and canon is makin a 14-21mm 1.4. yes, it is definitely possible


----------



## dwarven (Dec 14, 2020)

Rumours not rumors said:


> 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 (Dec 15, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> 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.


----------



## Big_Ant_TV_Media (Dec 15, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> 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


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Dec 15, 2020)

Lucas Tingley said:


> and canon is makin a 14-21mm 1.4. yes, it is definitely possible



Hopefully a lens like the rumored RF 14—21mm is coming. Fingers crossed, although it’ll take forever to save up for this lense


----------



## YuengLinger (Dec 15, 2020)

BigAntTVProductions said:


> hmm how about u kind mind ya business sir


Because participating in online forums is more fun. What is your excuse? Hmmm?


----------



## David - Sydney (Dec 15, 2020)

Hanley said:


> 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 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.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Dec 17, 2020)

BirdDudeJosh said:


> Every comparison I have seen suggest it's one of the worst modern 70-200's optically. Not nearly as good as the EF II or III when compared side by side. It's small, light and good enough but clearly compromises were made to obtain the small size and light weight.


Not sure which reviews you have read as most of the main one's doing direct comparisons say its a better lens, plus have experienced it yourself as my experience is it's a 1st class lens with great optics, especially when paired with the R5.


----------



## BirdDudeJosh (Dec 18, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> Not sure which reviews you have read as most of the main one's doing direct comparisons say its a better lens, plus have experienced it yourself as my experience is it's a 1st class lens with great optics, especially when paired with the R5.


Christopher Frost and Dustin Abbot both clearly illustrate the weaknesses of the RF 70-200 f2.8. I am making the assumption that the reduced size, weight and are a factor in its poor performance but it certainly doesn't live up to the price tag or the expectation. 
Specifically its corners suck wide open at all focal lengths and vignette and distortion middle of the road and certainly not "1st class".


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Dec 23, 2020)

BirdDudeJosh said:


> Christopher Frost and Dustin Abbot both clearly illustrate the weaknesses of the RF 70-200 f2.8. I am making the assumption that the reduced size, weight and are a factor in its poor performance but it certainly doesn't live up to the price tag or the expectation.
> Specifically its corners suck wide open at all focal lengths and vignette and distortion middle of the road and certainly not "1st class".


Well each to their own as they say. I've had no issues at all but then if you pixel peep and push it to extremes, any lens will struggle.


----------



## Johnw (Dec 30, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> I'm intrigued what people use the control ring for. I have a mix of EF and RF lenses now and haven't used the control ring as the R5 has 3 ring/dials + joystick already.


I use it for aperture since I have a couple of manual aperture lenses as well, so that way I always know aperture is a lens ring.


----------



## Coffy83 (Feb 22, 2021)

BirdDudeJosh said:


> Christopher Frost and Dustin Abbot both clearly illustrate the weaknesses of the RF 70-200 f2.8. I am making the assumption that the reduced size, weight and are a factor in its poor performance but it certainly doesn't live up to the price tag or the expectation.
> Specifically its corners suck wide open at all focal lengths and vignette and distortion middle of the road and certainly not "1st class".


Poor performance? Lol
I have had the old EF one and the new one...they are both great but the RF is better. It is an amazing lens and now actually fits mounted on the camera in my small camera bag...what more could you want? I actually did a comparison between 8 135mm prime lenses and for the fun of it included the RF 70-200 in the test...it beat all of them in sharpness and contrast even at f2.8....I don’t think I have to mention the autofocus...best I have ever used.

By the way, I don’t know what reviews you watched, both Frost and Abbot praise the lens. Frost calls it “a masterpiece, not perfect but excellent“.


----------



## JordanCS13 (Feb 22, 2021)

BirdDudeJosh said:


> Christopher Frost and Dustin Abbot both clearly illustrate the weaknesses of the RF 70-200 f2.8. I am making the assumption that the reduced size, weight and are a factor in its poor performance but it certainly doesn't live up to the price tag or the expectation.
> Specifically its corners suck wide open at all focal lengths and vignette and distortion middle of the road and certainly not "1st class".


Dustin Abbott had a bum copy of this lens no doubt. I have never seen images even remotely as bad as his corners in any shots with my lens. I did a comparison test with the RF 70-200/4L last week, and you can see the 100% corner crops throughout the range. It's not absolutely 100% perfect at f/2.8 throughout the range, but it's very good throughout the range. 70mm is the worst focal length for the corners, but even there it's decent.








Canon RF 70-200mm f/4L IS vs. Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS - Admiring Light


I compare the new RF 70-200mm f/4L vs the RF 70-200mm f/2.8L in a battle of the compact mirrorless telephoto zoom lenses.




admiringlight.com


----------



## Nemorino (Mar 1, 2021)

Sigma released another interesting lens for FF mirrorless:
A 28-70mm f/2.8 contemporary priced 850€, weight under 500g and a 67mm filterthread.
Sadly only in E- and L-mount available.

Hope Sigma will join the RF party soon!


----------



## Dmcavoy (Mar 27, 2021)

There has to be some sort of announcement about this soon? Surely? 

Dying to get hold of some cheaper RF lens options.


----------



## Flamingtree (Apr 2, 2021)

Dmcavoy said:


> There has to be some sort of announcement about this soon? Surely?
> 
> Dying to get hold of some cheaper RF lens options.


Absolutely!!

the current pricing is insane and the supply is even worse.


----------



## bdeutsch (Apr 13, 2021)

Nemorino said:


> Hope Sigma will join the RF party soon!


Party? What's a party? I vaguely recall the word. Was that something that happened before 2020?

Deutsch Photography: Wedding, Mitzvah and Corporate Event Photographer NYC


----------



## Ruiloba (May 16, 2021)

Any news about this?


----------



## Ozarker (May 16, 2021)

bdeutsch said:


> Party? What's a party? I vaguely recall the word. Was that something that happened before 2020?
> 
> Deutsch Photography: Wedding, Mitzvah and Corporate Event Photographer NYC


1999


----------



## mjg79 (May 26, 2021)

Flamingtree said:


> Absolutely!!
> 
> the current pricing is insane and the supply is even worse.



Indeed, it would seem like the RF mount would be a real gold mine for Sigma to move into. Over the past 4 or 5 years Sony has allowed the price of many GM lenses to drift down a bit - you can usually find the 85GM and 24GM both for good prices while their 16-35GM and 24-70GM lenses are now quite reasonably priced. 

Canon is of course probably wise from a business point of view still keeping the newer RF L lenses priced high as they are able to recoup some R&D costs and sell them to the pent up demand and GAS-afflicted though I imagine in the medium term Canon will lower prices - They won't want a situation where bread-and-butter professional lenses like their "holy trinity" 2.8 zooms or their fast 50 and 85 are so markedly more expensive than those from their main competitor.

So for the moment it would seem easy pickings for Sigma - they could undercut Canon pricing by several hundred dollars on many lenses and the modern Sigma standards in terms of optics, quality control and build is these days excellent, in many cases superior to Sony and second only to Canon itself. I would particularly like to try their unusual 45mm/2.8 and the 14-24/2.8 for astro due to its low vignette. 

Maybe the problem is the issues around Canon not making the mount open? Given that it's wider than the Sony E-mount one would think physically it would be quite easy to port over their current E-mount lenses so perhaps it is the issue around the licensing, laws etc. I also am surprised that Voigtlander hasn't released any RF mount manual focus glass. Maybe negotiations are all going on behind closed doors and we all just have to keep guessing.


----------



## Flamingtree (May 27, 2021)

mjg79 said:


> Indeed, it would seem like the RF mount would be a real gold mine for Sigma to move into. Over the past 4 or 5 years Sony has allowed the price of many GM lenses to drift down a bit - you can usually find the 85GM and 24GM both for good prices while their 16-35GM and 24-70GM lenses are now quite reasonably priced.
> 
> Canon is of course probably wise from a business point of view still keeping the newer RF L lenses priced high as they are able to recoup some R&D costs and sell them to the pent up demand and GAS-afflicted though I imagine in the medium term Canon will lower prices - They won't want a situation where bread-and-butter professional lenses like their "holy trinity" 2.8 zooms or their fast 50 and 85 are so markedly more expensive than those from their main competitor.
> 
> ...


I can totally see it from canon’s perspective, they are making sweet margins while there is no competitors to their lenses. I doubt rf lenses are actually materially more expensive to make than an ef equivalent. 

My understanding is that sigma et al, had to reverse engineer ef, canon never licensed it. Same must be true for rf. But even if they have cracked the code so to speak, given canon is struggling with production I wonder if sigma are too? No point announcing gear that is impossible to get…

The upshot of all of this is until we see sigma or tamron enter the game in a big way, rf lenses will stay expensive I think.


----------



## slclick (May 27, 2021)

Canon has never gone the route of licensing it's mounts, let them reverse eng it. Seems to have a good track record.


----------



## Bennymiata (May 27, 2021)

I have the Samyang RF 14mm 2.8 AF lens, and it autofocusses very quickly and accurately on my R and my R5.
How come they can do it and Sigma, Tamron et al can't? 
I read an interview with the boss of Sigma a while ago, and he said that their production is at it's limit now. However, I would think that as sales of ef lenses taper off, the secondary lens makers will come out with a large range of RF lenses, mostly converted from Sony mount lenses.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (May 27, 2021)

Bennymiata said:


> I have the Samyang RF 14mm 2.8 AF lens, and it autofocusses very quickly and accurately on my R and my R5.
> How come they can do it and Sigma, Tamron et al can't?
> I read an interview with the boss of Sigma a while ago, and he said that their production is at it's limit now. However, I would think that as sales of ef lenses taper off, the secondary lens makers will come out with a large range of RF lenses, mostly converted from Sony mount lenses.


Those lenses work like adapted EF lenses and do not have the new RF features.
I can't see Sigma doing that.
Their EF lenses were practically Canon lenses.


----------



## Ruiloba (Aug 30, 2021)

Maybe we are going to see some news the 30th of december 2021 ?


----------



## serioussam909 (Sep 13, 2021)

slclick said:


> Canon has never gone the route of licensing it's mounts, let them reverse eng it. Seems to have a good track record.


There's a RED camera with a RF mount now. So it is possible to licence their mount. IDK if Sigma will do it.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Sep 21, 2021)

serioussam909 said:


> There's a RED camera with a RF mount now. So it is possible to licence their mount. IDK if Sigma will do it.


Licensing for cameras does not necessarily mean licensing for lenses.
More cameras will lead to more lens sales.
More lenses does the opposite but could arguably lead to more camera sales.


----------



## bergstrom (Sep 22, 2021)

Nemorino said:


> Sigma released another interesting lens for FF mirrorless:
> A 28-70mm f/2.8 contemporary priced 850€, weight under 500g and a 67mm filterthread.
> Sadly only in E- and L-mount available.
> 
> Hope Sigma will join the RF party soon!



sigma needs to make mark 2 of the 24-105 f4 WITHOUT terrible vignetting.


----------



## serioussam909 (Sep 23, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> Licensing for cameras does not necessarily mean licensing for lenses.
> More cameras will lead to more lens sales.
> More lenses does the opposite but could arguably lead to more camera sales.


One of the reasons why I bought a RF mount camera was its compatibility with EF lenses.


----------



## LogicExtremist (Sep 29, 2021)

New title, "_Sigma wont be producing any RF lenses in 2021, maybe never_", and the other third party companies have stopped in 2021, because Canon and their legal teams put an end to it. They don't want any competition for its overpriced lenses, especially outside the US where prices are sky high, and third-party lenses would have lots more appeal! 

Canon is offering very expensive L-series glass for a lot more money than before, or entry level budget lenses, many of which are a stop darker than their predecessors, for higher prices. The justification that the R5 and R6 can handle higher ISO is a moot point because these aren't the cameras that people would use budget lenses on...

Hang on to your EF lenses people, and buy an adapter, they work perfectly fine on the RF platform.


----------



## bergstrom (Oct 6, 2021)

LogicExtremist said:


> New title, "_Sigma wont be producing any RF lenses in 2021, maybe never_", and the other third party companies have stopped in 2021, because Canon and their legal teams put an end to it. They don't want any competition for its overpriced lenses, especially outside the US where prices are sky high, and third-party lenses would have lots more appeal!
> 
> Canon is offering very expensive L-series glass for a lot more money than before, or entry level budget lenses, many of which are a stop darker than their predecessors, for higher prices. The justification that the R5 and R6 can handle higher ISO is a moot point because these aren't the cameras that people would use budget lenses on...
> 
> Hang on to your EF lenses people, and buy an adapter, they work perfectly fine on the RF platform.



and also don't buy an R5 or R6 if they are suffering from lock up.


----------

