# Sigma 35 1.4 compatibility with future canon cameras



## sunnyVan (May 3, 2013)

Is there any reason to believe that this sigma lens won't be compatible with future Canon camera? I have never used non-canon lenses before. Can someone shed some light on this issue? Or is it just made-up nonsense? By the way, it's a wonderful lens priced fairly and made with sincerity.


----------



## unfocused (May 3, 2013)

I'm pretty sure that's why Sigma introduced the docking station for firmware upgrades. 

Canon and Nikon may change their firmware in the future to try to shut third party lenses out of some features. By offering a docking station, major firmware upgrades can be added to the lenses at home. Sigma can release new firmware and, hopefully, stay one step ahead.


----------



## aj1575 (May 3, 2013)

I think this is mainly made-up to cut into the sales of 3rd party lensmakers. It would be possible to make a DSLR body, that only accepts EF lenses. But to do so, there should be something in the lens that lets them identify as an EF lens. I do not think that Canon has anything like this in their older EF-lenses.

So if Canon likes to keep its compatibility to their old lenses, then the Sigma lenses will also keep working on EOS bodies.

It will be interesting to see, if we will get 3rd party lenses for the EOS-M or the Nikon 1, or it Canikon buildt this "feature" into their new mirrorles cameras.


----------



## distant.star (May 3, 2013)

unfocused said:


> I'm pretty sure that's why Sigma introduced the docking station for firmware upgrades.
> 
> Canon and Nikon may change their firmware in the future to try to shut third party lenses out of some features. By offering a docking station, major firmware upgrades can be added to the lenses at home. Sigma can release new firmware and, hopefully, stay one step ahead.



That's the rationale I used when I handed them $900 for the new 35mm f/1.4. I had never used a non-Canon lens, and I wasn't looking forward to owning a brick when Canon locked out third party lenses.

I also think the Canon users would scream too vehemently about such a move. Locking out some functionality on batteries is one thing, but lenses would not go down easily!


----------



## risc32 (May 3, 2013)

3rd party lenses being abandoned is real, but i think it hasn't been done with anything recent. there are many older 3rd party lenses that are either completely useless, or only work in manual focus mode. There are usually a few at b&h or Adorama's used department(they state it). Once i nearly bought a manual focus only sigma 500mm f something(can't recall), but then decided against it.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 3, 2013)

aj1575 said:


> I think this is mainly made-up to cut into the sales of 3rd party lensmakers.



3rd party lenses 'borrow' lens codes from old Canon lenses. In some cases, this has caused problems - for example, off-center AF points not working properly on 40/50/60D and 7D bodies for many Tamron lenses. Of course, Canon lenses were affected, too...which probably annoyed the 4-5 people using a 20 year old 35-80mm zoom lens on a recent dSLR.


----------



## rumorzmonger (May 3, 2013)

aj1575 said:


> I think this is mainly made-up to cut into the sales of 3rd party lensmakers. It would be possible to make a DSLR body, that only accepts EF lenses. But to do so, there should be something in the lens that lets them identify as an EF lens. I do not think that Canon has anything like this in their older EF-lenses.
> 
> So if Canon likes to keep its compatibility to their old lenses, then the Sigma lenses will also keep working on EOS bodies.
> 
> It will be interesting to see, if we will get 3rd party lenses for the EOS-M or the Nikon 1, or it Canikon buildt this "feature" into their new mirrorles cameras.




Nikon has already patented a technology that could - potentially - prevent the use of third-party lenses on Nikon cameras:

http://petapixel.com/2013/04/14/nikon-patent-shows-password-protection-for-lensbody-combinations/


----------



## sunnyVan (May 3, 2013)

I can still exchange for the canon 35L now. But I'm weary of paying extra 4-500 dollars.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 3, 2013)

I've had 5 or 6 Sigma Lenses that failed to work after a new Canon camera model appeared. It happened twice, but hasn't been a issue for newer Sigma lenses made in the last 10 years. 


Certainly, it can happen again. Most of my lenses could not be updated, but I did pay Sigma $100+ to update my 105mm Macro.


Those who say it cannot happen only need look back to the past, its already happened twice, because after Sigma fixed them, they broke again with a new Canon model. All Canon lenses worked fine, Sigma had done a poor job of reverse engineering.

I'd hope that at least the very few Sigma lenses that have upgradable firmware could be fixed by the user, but that is a unknown. Certainly, most of them might require a hardware fix.

http://photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00UWyX


----------



## lol (May 3, 2013)

Personally I look at this a little differently. Don't worry too far in the future, look at what's best for the near future. Even if the worst were to happen with a future model, you can continue to use it with existing equipment for its working life. Unless they release a firmware to break it...


----------



## Nishi Drew (May 3, 2013)

Agree with the docking station making the new lenses "future proof", I bet it would rather be in Sigma's interest for CaNikon to change up their protocols, as they will sell loads of those docks once that happens


----------



## unfocused (May 3, 2013)

Keep in mind too that there is more than a little risk for any camera manufacturer who would completely shut out third-party lens makers. 

They'd have to consider the ill-will they'd be generating among their best customers, since those who buy third-party lenses are also the ones with the discretionary income to buy Canon lenses and Canon cameras. Is it really worth it to antagonize those customers?

Canon doesn't operate a monopoly. If they make it impossible to use third-party lenses, that will only drive customers to Nikon. Right now, the two companies compete relentlessly over insignificant differences in their products. Ceding the third-party compatibility issue to the other side would be handing them a massive competitive advantage. 

Shutting out Sigma, Tokina or Tamron would also mean shutting out Zeiss. Granted, it's a very small market, but I don't think either Canon nor Nikon would want to hand over these high-end luxury buyers to the other side. 

Yes, I can see Canon and Nikon engineering new features into their lenses and trying to keep those features from being accessible by third party lenses, but that's a far different case than completely shutting out a competitor's lenses.


----------



## PhotographAdventure (May 3, 2013)

It's such a small price to pay when so much other stuff can happen in life.


----------



## risc32 (May 3, 2013)

just like to add, i don't think that would shutout Zeiss, as I think they have an agreement with Canon, so it's all cool. also, I can't imagine canon or nikon is worried about making people mad for shutting out 3rd party lenses.


----------



## jcollett (May 3, 2013)

unfocused said:


> Keep in mind too that there is more than a little risk for any camera manufacturer who would completely shut out third-party lens makers.
> 
> They'd have to consider the ill-will they'd be generating among their best customers, since those who buy third-party lenses are also the ones with the discretionary income to buy Canon lenses and Canon cameras. Is it really worth it to antagonize those customers?
> 
> ...



While there would be backlash, do not think companies are afraid to do so. For proof, just look at what Canon did in 1987 with the development of the EF mount.


----------



## AJ (May 3, 2013)

If the theoretical future incompatibility keeps you awake at night, then get the Canon.

If spending an extra 400 bucks keeps you awake at night, then get the Sigma


----------



## klickflip (May 3, 2013)

I think this would be financial & loyalty suicide on Canon or Nikons behalf, The only sigma I own is the 35 1.4 art which is superb much better than the canon 35L, its the only sigma lens I've considered in 10 years as a pro. Many many other semi pro's and amateurs buy lots of sigmas to save a bit and get nearly the same IQ as USM or L lenses at a lot cheaper cost. I can justify the cost of L's against my business and to myself for the quality. But many cannot and are still very happy with decent Sigma, tamron or tokina lenses. 

I had a few FD sigmas when I was a student and rookie pro as I couldnt possibly afford a L, and theres many more students, amateurs and semi pros buying cameras than pros. 

Do a poll I'd say most 7D or 60D owners have a sigma lens or two whilst most 5D II/III and 1D owners will have mostly Ls. If consumers were tied into buying more expensive USM or L lenses or the crap basic canon zooms then they would switch to other manufacturers that have not and would not lock out 3rd party manufacturers. 

Freemarket development is great in camera tech land, and from the new sigmas, canon can learn a lot from them I believe, unless they decided that Sigmas are getting too good and putting them to shame in which they might try to lock them out. But users would have a huge outcry imho. I think the new sigma's are really good for canon R&D to push the game up.

Canon & Nikon are kings but is also a servant of its population..


----------



## brad-man (May 3, 2013)

The only thing keeping _me_ up at night is waiting for the announcement of the new Sigma 135...


----------



## Rocguy (May 3, 2013)

If Canon theoretically disallowed 3rd party lenses would this include the Zeiss ZE lensens? I kind of thought they were somehow "authorized" 3rd party lenses. I dont' think it would stop me from buying the one that I want but I'm just curious.


----------



## emag (May 3, 2013)

I'm reminded of the videotape recording development days. IIRC, many manufacturers had agreed on the 8mm format, then Sony jumped the gun with Betamax. JVC's VHS format was technically inferior to Beta, but JVC had the sense to license other manufacturers to use the VHS format for a small royalty/licensing fee. Sony did not follow that business model with Beta and it died rather quickly. As my income and demands change, I buy L lenses if I can and the best 3rd party lenses when I can't justify the expense - even if I can afford it (hobbyist, not pro). I'm not certain Canon would lose a significant amount of sales if they set up a royalty/licensing arrangement with Sigma/Tamron/Tokina for autofocus/aperture control in lenses. AF on my old Sigma 400/5.6 works fine but not aperture. For the limited amount of use it sees I'm content to be stuck at 5.6, I just don't use it often enough to warrant replacement with the Canon, though in that case it has little to do with price. If price was not a factor, I'd be shooting Zeiss anyway.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (May 3, 2013)

You gotta buy what works for you today, nothing lasts forever.
If you wait and wait thrn you'll never do it.

I have a couple of Sigmas just now and have owned several over the years, it seemed to be E-ttl and then E-ttl ii that screwed up third party lenses. I've only rver used dc or dg lenses with my DSLR.

As far as I can ascertain older sigmas were the worst, tamrons had some failure and tokinas almost unheard of.

The problem is that in the film days folk held onto their bodies for years and the changes were very incremental.

Folk had to become better photographers.

Now a lot of folk just buy the latest body: ta-da better photographs!

So these problems have the potential to be flung up with greater frequency.

Not heard of any dc or dg problems. Maybe they've cracked it.


----------



## lilmsmaggie (May 3, 2013)

IMHO Nikon's patent is not meant to prevent the use of 3rd party lenses but to address theft. It looks more like a password protection mechanism where body and lens share a pass code. So, bottomline, as long as you know the pass code and they match -- No Problemo 8) So, if you steal my lens and don't have the pass code you're SOOL, cause you won't be able to mount that lens to any other camera.

From what I've heard over the years, Japanese companies such as Canon, Nikon, Olympus and Zeiss actually have partnerships with other Japanese lens manufacturers such as Cosina, that produce lenses for them, so I don't see the benefit of either Nikon or Canon changing this relationship to lock out Sigma or Tamron for producing lenses for either a Canon or Nikon mount -- unless of course they're expanding or ramping up their production to increase product availability of non-premium lenses.

Zeiss and Canon have a very close relationship. And Zeiss works very close with Cosina as well to the extent of actually having Zeiss personnel oversee and monitor production at Cosina's factory in Japan. These relationships probably exist with Sigma and Canon as well. After all, these manufacturing partnerships have existed for decades. 

Or maybe they're afraid that Samyang, aka Bower, aka Rokinon, aka ProOptic, is just getting too good at producing low cost, quality optics !!




rumorzmonger said:


> Nikon has already patented a technology that could - potentially - prevent the use of third-party lenses on Nikon cameras:
> 
> http://petapixel.com/2013/04/14/nikon-patent-shows-password-protection-for-lensbody-combinations/


----------



## risc32 (May 3, 2013)

I'm going to go out on a limb to say i doubt canon's relationship with sigma is at all similar to what they have with zeiss. 

Also, the betamax format didn't die quickly, it outlived VHS. my betamax died a few years ago, and it was much better than VHS. not that winners and losers are picked by specs.


----------



## Hobby Shooter (May 4, 2013)

Don't worry about it. If it fits with your current camera, then it will never not fit with your current camera. You're buying it to use it now. And as other have said, there is no reason to believe Canon would alter anything to make it not fit with future bodies.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (May 4, 2013)

risc32 said:


> I'm going to go out on a limb to say i doubt canon's relationship with sigma is at all similar to what they have with zeiss.
> 
> Also, the betamax format didn't die quickly, it outlived VHS. my betamax died a few years ago, and it was much better than VHS. not that winners and losers are picked by specs.



I shoot on betacamsx and digibeta to this day. Beta didn't die, it just got even better and better. 

Look inside an HDCAM camcorder and you'll find what looks like a betamax cassette (although the tape material and recording technology is entirely different.


----------



## Ellen Schmidtee (May 4, 2013)

klickflip said:


> Do a poll I'd say most 7D or 60D owners have a sigma lens or two whilst most 5D II/III and 1D owners will have mostly Ls. If consumers were tied into buying more expensive USM or L lenses or the crap basic canon zooms then they would switch to other manufacturers that have not and would not lock out 3rd party manufacturers.



Looking at what people around me buy, it's the other way around.

People with cheaper cameras buy Canon lenses only, maybe 3 of them. People who have 5Dmk2 have a few L lenses, but a few Sigma lenses as well. E.g. I have three L lenses, but I also have three Sigma lenses, and a co-worker has at least two L lenses, but also at least one Sigma lens.

If Canon blocked my Sigma lenses out, I'd take my time, and replace all my equipment with something that isn't Canon. I spent a nice amount of my hard earned cash on Sigma lenses, I'm not going to stick with a manufacturer who thinks it has the right to prevent me from using it with it's newer cameras, much the less block me from using it with the camera I've already bought.


----------



## brad-man (May 4, 2013)

I don't believe Canon would piss off their customers with such a move, but I certainly do have more confidence knowing that the usb dock is there (even though I don't have one yet). In any case, I will always keep a copy of the last working firmware version in storage, you know, just in case


----------



## Rienzphotoz (May 4, 2013)

sunnyVan said:


> Is there any reason to believe that this sigma lens won't be compatible with future Canon camera? I have never used non-canon lenses before. Can someone shed some light on this issue? Or is it just made-up nonsense? By the way, it's a wonderful lens priced fairly and made with sincerity.


As of now, I don't think there is any cause to believe that it won't be compatible with the future Canon camera ... but I think that Canikon mess with their firmware updates to make AF or some other functionality not to work as well as it should ... but on this Sigma lens you can upgrade firmware, so I see no near future risk.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (May 4, 2013)

klickflip said:


> Do a poll I'd say most 7D or 60D owners have a sigma lens or two whilst most 5D II/III and 1D owners will have mostly Ls. If consumers were tied into buying more expensive USM or L lenses or the crap basic canon zooms then they would switch to other manufacturers that have not and would not lock out 3rd party manufacturers.



Dunno about that, Sigma havd always been pretty canny at identifying gaps in other manufacturers ranges, witness sigma getting an 18-50 in EF mount before the first ef-s digital rebel, lenses like the 12-24 for which there is no csnon equivalent, the 50-500, the 70mm macro one of the few macros that makes some sense to cropped and full frame owners.

It seems they are tackling the manufacturers head on with some of their new primes like the 35mm f1.4, and of course the groundbreaking f1.8 zoom.

Sigma can spread the R&d costs of a lens over 6 mounts so can take bigger risks.
Quite often somebody will have a sigma because they are keener priced, sometimes because they are better and sometimes because nobody else fills the gap!


----------

