Sigma: Our RF lenses have been a great success

#81
I understand that Tamron will be introducing their 11-20mm for RF-S mount. However I have ordered the Sigma 10-18 for my R7 as I prefer its more compact size to complement my Sigma 18-50. I will use this setup a lot for travel in the next couple of years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
#83
Richard CR said:
times were alot different back then.

a) lenses didn't have to be as precise. CoC was .030mm and most lenses were good enough for 8x12" prints. beyond that you were gratefully covered by observer distance.
b) film wasn't perfectly flat.
c) computers didnt' design lenses back then
d) automated factories didn't grind elements and manufacturer lenses.
e) test equipment for these lenses wasn't nearly as advanced as today.

Leica and Zeiss made the best because they used craftsmen to do every step of the construction of the lenses. they weren't mass market.
Click to expand...
This is still the way Leica make lenses. Partly explaining why they are so expensive.
On the other hand, sample variations are kept to the strict minimum.
I warmly recommend a visit to Wetzlar, really impressive!
(But I still hate their price-lists...) ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#85
SvO2 said:
That seems to pretty directly answer why Canon's not currently allowing full frame lenses.
Click to expand...

I don't see anything there answering my question of why Canon would take a principal decision not to allow fullframe lenses, when they already license on a case-by-case basis? That would be giving up some flexibility, there are no business advantage to give up.

You don't have to agree to understand my point, but if you think I disagree that Canon are keeping their mount strictly controlled in general, then you haven't understood my point at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
#87
Del Paso said:
This is still the way Leica make lenses. Partly explaining why they are so expensive.
On the other hand, sample variations are kept to the strict minimum.
I warmly recommend a visit to Wetzlar, really impressive!
(But I still hate their price-lists...) ;)
Click to expand...
I found this very interesting article.
gmpphoto.blogspot.com

NOBODY MAKES LENSES THE WAY LEICA DOES

gmpphoto.blogspot.com gmpphoto.blogspot.com
which bears out what you say.
It seems that a major reason for their extreme demand of tolerances is that their lenses are designed for their rangefinder focussing and so are over-engineered for autofocus using on-sensor AF with mirrorless or using AFMA to correct for focal length with a DSLR?
 
Upvote 0
#88
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.
Click to expand...
The article implies Sigma has a license to make all lenses it wants, but for now Sigma offers lenses Canon doesn't have, so pro RF-S.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
#89
AlanF said:
I found this very interesting article.
gmpphoto.blogspot.com

NOBODY MAKES LENSES THE WAY LEICA DOES

gmpphoto.blogspot.com gmpphoto.blogspot.com
which bears out what you say.
It seems that a major reason for their extreme demand of tolerances is that their lenses are designed for their rangefinder focussing and so are over-engineered for autofocus using on-sensor AF with mirrorless or using AFMA to correct for focal length with a DSLR?
Click to expand...
What Leica have always stressed in the past is that, with a (properly adjusted!!!) rangefinder, you could set focus on point. and not on a surface.Pin-head focusing! It still is true, especially for WAs and UWAs. Once you're used to it, focusing a Noctilux is quick and ultra precise, If the subject doesn't move!.For moving motives, rangefinders cannot match the speed of modern AF systems. But, as I wrote, rangefinder precision is fantastic for WAs, yet, the longer the focal...
As to SLR lenses, according to Leica, assembly and lens positioning demands are identical. Sample variations are to 99,?? % excluded through manufacturing precision, not through end-checks, what Canon and co. do or should do...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#90
Del Paso said:
What Leica have always stressed in the past is that, with a (properly adjusted!!!) rangefinder, you could set focus on point. and not on a surface.Pin-head focusing! It still is true, especially for WAs and UWAs. Once you're used to it, focusing a Noctilux is quick and ultra precise, If the subject doesn't move!.For moving motives, rangefinders cannot match the speed of modern AF systems. But, as I wrote, rangefinder precision is fantastic for WAs, yet, the longer the focal...
As to SLR lenses, according to Leica, assembly and lens positioning demands are identical. Sample variations are to 99,?? % excluded through manufacturing precision and constant measuring, not through end-checks, what Canon and co. do or should do...Leica have also stressed that neither chart- nor MTF testing do a lens justice. No lens, except repro ones, are developed for flat-chart photography. Also a reason why I reject D. Abbott's quality conclusions, unless for macro lenses. IMHO using a 15mm WA to photograph a flat chart is nonsense, these lenses are made for street or landscapes. And: who often uses 15mm lenses wide open? I definitely prefer Gordon Laing's Brighton Peer pictures. Unfortunately he doesn't seem to be reviewing Canon lenses anymore, all the latest Canon reviews are "so far", and nothing comes...
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0
#91
We crop sensor maggots have a lot to be thankful for. First the R7 is Canon's best body re ergos: on/off/video with one switch -- "right" where is should be -- the scroll-wheel around the joystick is brilliant and having a D-pad instead of a stupid third wheel (we all know what those types are like) is wonderful...you can programs each button, ya know? And we have 3rd-party glass -- the bane of our full frame overlords -- to chose from and it's even better than the "real" thing!

APS-C: living the dream!
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
#96
AlanF said:
You have it 100% the wrong way around. They can patent the physical design of the camera mount, preventing anyone else making an identical mount and sticking it on their own camera frame. But they can't patent the complementary mount that fits into it. In other words, they can't "patent the specific action of how the lens and camera fit together".
Click to expand...

That seems arse about to me (but I'm not an IP lawyer, I've just been through the patent process a few times.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#97
Richard CR said:
a mount has two aspects that do connect. the RF mount has the camera side mount, and also the lens side mount. and how they work together was something that was discussed in patent applications. specifically about load bearing if i recall. if i recall correctly that is why Canon decided the uppermost lug is larger than the other two.
Click to expand...

Yes, my experiences match with what you say here -, how they work together is what I'd expect to be patent'd and that includes specific design requirements for the camera/lens to make it work together.
 
Upvote 0
#98
AlanF said:
How many times do I have to tell you all I am doing is to pass on the information of what you can and cannot patent.
Click to expand...

Strictly speaking, whatever you (or I) say is immaterial, it just matters what a patent examiner decides. If the kiddies at home what proper advice on what's patentable, talk to an IP laywer and pay them money. Applying for patents is a legal process that involves $$$$$ and free advice/comments are worth what you pay for them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Richard CR
Canon Interview: EOS R1 is the true flagship
Replies
266
Views
15K
Omn
O
Canon Rumors
Sigma: No plans to release RF full-frame lenses yet
Replies
143
Views
9K
justaCanonuser
justaCanonuser
Canon Rumors
Chinese Lens Makers May Bring the First Third-Party Full-Frame RF Lenses
Replies
21
Views
2K
AlanF
AlanF
Canon Rumors
Is a non-L RF 70-200 f/2.8 or similar lens on the horizon?
Replies
31
Views
2K
plusnq
P
Richard CR
Patent Application: Kit Zooms for both RF-S and RF
Replies
1
Views
243
Aldherrian
A
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Media
Menu