Sigma: Our RF lenses have been a great success

Del Paso said:

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...

Click to expand...

Kharan said:

Canon’s computerized testing setup is amazing, though, from what I’ve heard (I’m not privy to any specifics though, it’s all hearsay). No one else in the industry has something quite like it, and the variability of their designs was reduced visibly on the last EF designs. I’m sure every RF lens undergoes the same process as well.
Leica lenses do have sample variations, BTW. There’s a reason why each of their lenses is tested individually and comes with its own report card, and these do vary between samples. What’s great about Leica lenses is that their testing is pretty strict, done with an optical bench, and thus no duds ever leave the factory. Canon couldn’t claim the same years ago, although I get the feeling that today their lenses are pretty damn consistent.

Click to expand...

Del Paso said:

A lot of changes with Canon lens manufacturing have indeed taken place. Not too long ago, I've had to send back two EF lenses to get them replaced or repaired (EF 180 & TSE 24 II). Also had some slightly disappointing EF primes when compared to reliable review results. This never happened with any of the newer EF or RF lenses. But an automated process like Canon's is no 100% guarantee.
Leica's checks after each and every production step are a better yet extremely expensive way. Hand painting the lenses' sides with black paint also costs a lot.
I've had about 20+ Leica lenses, from 15 to 560mm. No, they weren't all mechanically perfect, unlike all of my Canon lenses (!), but optically, never a single reproach. Never had an "Oktober Fest" lens.
Nevertheless, compromises are a necessity. Would you pay $9000 for the 28-70 f/2? I wouldn't ! Canon's process allows a very high quality at a more moderate price.
In Canon's price segment, I'm convinced they opted for the most reasonable choice, also true for Leica. Depends on your definition of reasonable...

Click to expand...

Kharan said:

Canon’s computerized testing setup is amazing, though, from what I’ve heard (I’m not privy to any specifics though, it’s all hearsay). No one else in the industry has something quite like it, and the variability of their designs was reduced visibly on the last EF designs. […]

Click to expand...

P-visie said:

Canon has done major steps in automation of lens production. Automation of production and testing is good for reducing copy to copy variances. DPReview has post (from 2017) about a tour in Canon’s Utsunomiya lens factory.

See: https://www.dpreview.com/articles/4...the-l-series-we-tour-canon-utsunomiya-factory

Click to expand...

koenkooi said:

And lensrentals has a number of articles showing how well Canon succeeded in that. Teardowns show that lenses can be adjusted and measurements show how close the lenses are to each other.

Click to expand...

koenkooi said:

And lensrentals has a number of articles showing how well Canon succeeded in that. Teardowns show that lenses can be adjusted and measurements show how close the lenses are to each other.

Click to expand...

Richard CR said:

except the sigma is a constant F2.8 so it is a more upscale lens that has no competition from canon (yet).

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

BoReynolds said:

So.......WHERE ARE THEY? They were announced in the first quarter and said they would be here in the 4th quarter. Ya can't get anymore 4th quarter than mid December and still NOTHING.

Click to expand...