Sigma: Our RF lenses have been a great success

Richard CR · Oct 20, 2024

phototrend-fr interviewed France's Sigma rep. They touched on quite a few topics, but the discussion around the RF mount is of interest to us.

Sigma: Our RF lenses have been a great success

phototrend-fr interviewed France’s Sigma rep. They touched on quite a few topics, but the discussion around the RF mount is of interest to us. Now, I should emphasize that this was a local…

www.canonrumors.com

mimbu · Oct 20, 2024

So the 6 (six!) DC DN lenses have been allowed onto RF mount. Six lenses that do not compete with any Canon products, in a format that Canon seems to not care about at all.

Let's see how many (if any) of the 30+ DG DN full frame lenses will be allowed onto RF.

Richard CR · Oct 20, 2024

mimbu said:
So the 6 (six!) DC DN lenses have been allowed onto RF mount. Six lenses that do not compete with any Canon products, in a format that Canon seems to not care about at all.

Let's see how many (if any) of the 30+ DG DN full frame lenses will be allowed onto RF.

a business like Sigma may have looked at the Canon RF market and realized they could make an absolute killing on the RF-S side because there were no competing products at all, and that it was the easist path forward.

mimbu · Oct 20, 2024

Richard CR said:
a business like Sigma may have looked at the Canon RF market and realized they could make an absolute killing on the RF-S side because there were no competing products at all, and that it was the easist path forward.

Sigma has 6 APS-C lenses in their lineup, and 30 FF lenses. Why do you think that is? Could it be that they sell a LOT MORE full frame lenses? Or are they just that dumb and they keep releasing more & more FF lenses when the "real demand" is with APS-C?

Believe it or not, Sigma is not dumb. They make incredible FF lenses and sell a LOT of them. Except not on RF, where for "some reason" they only sell APS-C. This isn't rocket science, Sigma is not allowed to sell FF glass on RF. Maybe that will change. Maybe not. But let's not try to make the nariative something that is obviously not true. Sigma would be selling FF on RF if they were allowed to.

P-visie · Oct 20, 2024

mimbu said:
Sigma has 6 APS-C lenses in their lineup, and 30 FF lenses. Why do you think that is? Could it be that they sell a LOT MORE full frame lenses? Or are they just that dumb and they keep releasing more & more FF lenses when the "real demand" is with APS-C?

Believe it or not, Sigma is not dumb. They make incredible FF lenses and sell a LOT of them. Except not on RF, where for "some reason" they only sell APS-C. This isn't rocket science, Sigma is not allowed to sell FF glass on RF. Maybe that will change. Maybe not. But let's not try to make the nariative something that is obviously not true. Sigma would be selling FF on RF if they were allowed to.

Canon is not unique: Sigma has only three APS-C lenses for the Nikon Z-mount.

mimbu · Oct 20, 2024

P-visie said:
Canon is not unique: Sigma has only three APS-C lenses for the Nikon Z-mount.

Correct, and for the same reason that Sigma has only APS-C lenses on RF mount.

I hope that both Canon and Nikon open their mounts more fully as that is what would be best for users of both mounts. Both Sigma and Tamron offer incredible glass at very competitive prices. I also want to see Sony pushed to remove some of the restrictions that exist in their mount license such as no TCs and a maximum frame rate of 15fps. Strong competition between systems is what will result in the best products on every system.

Exploreshootshare · Oct 20, 2024

mimbu said:
They make incredible FF lenses and sell a LOT of them.

I totally agree. I wish for a Sigma 20mm F1.4 at the moment or a 14mm lens. They are really great.

mimbu said:
Except not on RF, where for "some reason" they only sell APS-C. This isn't rocket science, Sigma is not allowed to sell FF glass on RF. Maybe that will change. Maybe not.

Hopefully, at one point they will be allowed to sell at least some FF lenses.

mimbu said:
But let's not try to make the nariative something that is obviously not true. Sigma would be selling FF on RF if they were allowed to.

I think the narrative "Sigma is going to make a killing selling RFS" can still be true in this context. Take the Sigma 10-18mm F2.8 for example. It has to "compete" with an imho crappy RF-s 10-18mm F4.5 - 6.3. Unless you want a tiny lens, absolutely need the control ring or simply don´t care about F-numbers, everybody will opt for the Sigma version. Users of R10 & R7 with their upmarket cameras will an attract a lot of users for the sigma version. The Sigma 10-18mm does not really have a competitor here, so it is going to sell like crazy.

If you compare the competition for this lens for e.g. the e-mount market, there are more viable options. Sony at least has a 10-18mm with a constant F4 aperture, Samyang offers a 13mm f2 and 16mm f2 and Sony offers a 16mm F2.8 pancake. Lots of options which lead to fewer sales for Sigma compared to the RF mount. So, therefore, the narrative still stands. But, there is a second unspoken part to it: Sigma would also make a killing with FF lenses in the rf mount.

Berowne · Oct 20, 2024

Remember the days, when there was one and the same Mount on many Cameras from different brands? So there was a lot of competition between lens-manufacturers. Have lenses been better? I think not.

Grockle · Oct 20, 2024

I’m certainly finding that the Sigma 18-50 really fulfils my requirements on the R7. It’s so compact compared to my old EF-S 17-55 f2.8, (especially with the adaptor), it’s a joy to use. It’s sharp across the field, and with the IBIS I don’t even notice the lack of stabilisation. After waiting ages for Canon to do something similar, I guess they are not going to, so this looks like the way to go. I’ll be getting the 10-18 asap, which will replace my Tokina 11-16 f2.8. Very pleased with the quality of the Sigma products.

Stig Nygaard · Oct 20, 2024

Richard CR said:
a business like Sigma may have looked at the Canon RF market and realized they could make an absolute killing on the RF-S side because there were no competing products at all, and that it was the easist path forward.

There's a "narrative" of Canon not allowing fullframe lenses that people like believe and complain about.
But probably nobody complaining actually knows. And me neither.
But releasing lenses on a new mount is not just a principal paper decision. You cannot release the full range of lenses at once for practical investment and production reasons.
If I was Sigma I would think exactly like Richard writes. There is/was a big hole in Canon's APS-C lens lineup just begging for someone to fill, and it was the obvious place for Sigma to start.
Sure I understand it is frustrating for fullframe users waiting for Sigma to release the lens they are hoping for. But once the currently announced APS-C lenses has all hit the streets in January, lets see what (hopefully) comes next from Sigma before making any fast conclusions...

koenkooi · Oct 20, 2024

Sigma doesn’t produce any full frame lenses I’m interested in and Canon isn’t producing crop bodies I’m interested in. It feels a bit weird to be suddenly cured of GAS

Now, if Canon does a Fuji XM5 style body….

AlanF · Oct 20, 2024

Stig Nygaard said:
There's a "narrative" of Canon not allowing fullframe lenses that people like believe and complain about.
But probably nobody complaining actually knows. And me neither.
But releasing lenses on a new mount is not just a principal paper decision. You cannot release the full range of lenses at once for practical investment and production reasons.
If I was Sigma I would think exactly like Richard writes. There is/was a big hole in Canon's APS-C lens lineup just begging for someone to fill, and it was the obvious place for Sigma to start.
Sure I understand it is frustrating for fullframe users waiting for Sigma to release the lens they are hoping for. But once the currently announced APS-C lenses has all hit the streets in January, lets see what comes next from Sigma before making any fast conclusions...

You may have missed this, which has been discussed here, or I have missed evidence that this report is wrong.

Viltrox Says Canon has Demanded They Stop Selling RF-Mount Lenses

There are no third party RF AF lenses on the market.

petapixel.com

koenkooi · Oct 20, 2024

AlanF said:
You may have missed this, which has been discussed here, or I have missed evidence that this report is wrong.

Viltrox Says Canon has Demanded They Stop Selling RF-Mount Lenses

There are no third party RF AF lenses on the market.

petapixel.com

No one has published the reason for the C&D, Canon Germany vaguely handwaved about ‘IP’ in their press release, that’s it.

It could be a matter of someone liberating the RF protocol documents from a Canon server and selling them to Viltrox.
It could be Canon wanting to crush all competition for RF lenses.

And it could be both

Richard CR · Oct 20, 2024

mimbu said:
Sigma has 6 APS-C lenses in their lineup, and 30 FF lenses. Why do you think that is? Could it be that they sell a LOT MORE full frame lenses? Or are they just that dumb and they keep releasing more & more FF lenses when the "real demand" is with APS-C?

Believe it or not, Sigma is not dumb. They make incredible FF lenses and sell a LOT of them. Except not on RF, where for "some reason" they only sell APS-C. This isn't rocket science, Sigma is not allowed to sell FF glass on RF. Maybe that will change. Maybe not. But let's not try to make the nariative something that is obviously not true. Sigma would be selling FF on RF if they were allowed to.

well there's a problem. the last I tooked Sigma makes lenses across a multitude of platforms.

you decided to ignore what I wrote and come up with your own theories - again.

As I said, a business, such as Sigma would have looked at what would deliver the best profit, the easiest and quickest once the agreements with Canon were signed, and that may have been the RF-S because there was exactly zero competition for their lenses.

Considering as well, that Sigma isn't a big shop, they could have looked at it and went 6 lenses to get out for the mount is the limit to what we want to do right now.

I'm not sure where you are going with as far as full frame, no one denies that sigma makes great full frame lenses, but I don't know and you certainly don't know how they came to the decision of the lenses they came with first of all.

the "obviously not true" has no basis of fact actually - it's really just a theory - don't confuse the two.
Neither Sigma nor Canon has stated that Sigma or any other approved vendor is prevented from making full-frame RF lenses.

Now if by the middle of next year we haven't seen any Sigma full frame lenses move over to the RF mount, you may have a point.

AlanF · Oct 20, 2024

koenkooi said:
No one has published the reason for the C&D, Canon Germany vaguely handwaved about ‘IP’ in their press release, that’s it.

It could be a matter of someone liberating the RF protocol documents from a Canon server and selling them to Viltrox.
It could be Canon wanting to crush all competition for RF lenses.

And it could be both

Whatever the reason, if that report is correct, it does show for a fact that Canon has prevented a 3rd party AF lens. Legally, they can do it only if there was an IP infringement but a small company has to weigh up their legal costs against profits, and Viltrox aren't going to make billions from RF FF lenses. Sigma, on the other hand, may have another agenda with Canon.

Stig Nygaard · Oct 20, 2024

AlanF said:
You may have missed this, which has been discussed here, or I have missed evidence that this report is wrong.

Viltrox Says Canon has Demanded They Stop Selling RF-Mount Lenses

There are no third party RF AF lenses on the market.

petapixel.com

No I have not missed that. Actually that story started on dpreview, and I think I more less "seeded" it by starting a thread on dpreview forum, which is mentioned in the story:

Viltrox representative reports Canon told the company 'to stop selling all RF mount products'

The details remain scarce, but according to a conversation a DPReview forum member had with a Viltrox representative, Canon told the third-party optics manufacturer 'to stop selling all RF mount products.'

www.dpreview.com

And Canon has also admitted that they require permission to do RF lenses. At least certain kind of lenses making use of the protocol of the lens RF mount (but details are unclear).

My comment was only about the narrative that Canon in general as a principal doesn't allow fullframe lenses vs allowing some crop-lenses.

PS. Funny you write "evidence that this report is wrong". I have no reason to believe that the report about Viltrox is wrong.
But in general the difference between saying "evidence that this report is wrong" vs "evidence that this report is right" tells something about the narrative one wants to believe. And when it comes to the "Canon doesn't allow fullframe lenses" theory, that is purely based on guessing (and frustrations?). But a lot of people talk about it as a fact, though I see Sigma's choosing to look at APS-C first as a logical step.

Richard CR · Oct 20, 2024

koenkooi said:
No one has published the reason for the C&D, Canon Germany vaguely handwaved about ‘IP’ in their press release, that’s it.

It could be a matter of someone liberating the RF protocol documents from a Canon server and selling them to Viltrox.
It could be Canon wanting to crush all competition for RF lenses.

And it could be both

Reps say the craziest of things - and a lot of what happened doesn't jive from my understanding of the protocols that lenses can use.

I'm not sure it would have held up in court - because if they were using the EF protocol, they would have to then prove that the EF protocol on the RF mount (which is patented but widely used outside of Canon) is a patent infringement.

so it would have had to have been the a) the electronic contacts + b) auto focus logic + c) RF mount

probably more viltrox and samyang just didn't want to have that fight.

Richard CR · Oct 20, 2024

AlanF said:
Whatever the reason, if that report is correct, it does show for a fact that Canon has prevented a 3rd party AF lens. Legally, they can do it only if there was an IP infringement but a small company has to weigh up their legal costs against profits, and Viltrox aren't going to make billions from RF FF lenses. Sigma, on the other hand, may have another agenda with Canon.

the physical mount itself is patented.

not to mention the base protocols.

"AF specific"? I mean there is some patents that deal with the lens based algorithms, I guess it depends on how much they copied from Canon or mimicked.

but it probably wasn't worth the fight for Viltrox as you mentioned

Richard CR · Oct 20, 2024

Berowne said:
Remember the days, when there was one and the same Mount on many Cameras from different brands? So there was a lot of competition between lens-manufacturers. Have lenses been better? I think not.

are lenses better now you mean? I assume you mean M42 mount? or maybe R mount?
C/Y was close i guess.

AlanF · Oct 20, 2024

Stig Nygaard said:
PS. Funny you write "evidence that this report is wrong". I have no reason to believe that the report about Viltrox is wrong.
But in general the difference between saying "evidence that this report is wrong" vs "evidence that this report is right" tells something about the narrative one wants to believe. And when it comes to the "Canon doesn't allow fullframe lenses" theory, that is purely based on guessing (and frustrations?). But a lot of people talk about it as a fact, though I see Sigma's choosing to look at APS-C first as a logical step.

Nothing funny at all. If things are not certain or I do not have comprehensive knowledge, I always have a caveat. It's always possible, indeed likely, that new knowledge comes to light or I have missed something.

Search

Search

Sigma: Our RF lenses have been a great success

Richard CR