The first SIGMA RF lens arrives in July, more in Q4 of 2024

But... but... wait, I was sure Canon would release a RF-S version of their popular EF-M 22mm and 33mm primes, so it seemed logic that they would open their mount but excluding Sigma's 23mm and 30mm to avoid direct competition.

How Canon management dare think that they can run their business better than I would do?
This is really outrageous.
If Canon shifts the good RF-S lenses to 3rd party, in theory, they will have capacity to replicate recent Sony's f2.8 G lenses; 1st party lenses that competes with 3rd party f2.8 trinities.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
If Canon shifts the good RF-S lenses to 3rd party, in theory, they will have capacity to replicate recent Sony's f2.8 G lenses;
Canon does not really have lenses like that except the RF 200-800.
Canon has L lenses and everything else.
GM is equivalent to L but L is in the middle.
I think that will be mostly what Canon relies on third parties for.
At the same time, I also think Canon should come up with another designation equivalent to G.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Canon does not really have lenses like that except the RF 200-800.
Canon has L lenses and everything else.
GM is equivalent to L but L is in the middle.
I think that will be mostly what Canon relies on third parties for.
At the same time, I also think Canon should come up with another designation equivalent to G.
Non L orange ring, just to troll Sony;)
 
  • Love
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
I think I detect some sarcasm :)

The Sigma 30mm is a full centimeter wider (72mm) than the EF-M one (61mm), but roughly the same length. So that's a good 'replacement' for EF-M people going to RF. The Sigma 23mm however, is a lot longer than the EF-M 22mm, which puts it, for me, in a very different category. If I want something compact like the EF-M 22mm, I'd look at the RF16 and RF28, not at the Sigma 23mm.

Having said all that, the AF on the EF-M Sigma 56mm is actually silent and very smooth, that is not something that can be said for the RF STM primes :)


I just took a look at this lens. WOW that's bigger than the pancake. Was just looking at the list of lenses again and 1.4 would be a nice tradeoff for loosing that lil banger lens...but yeah thats huge in comparison. I have the 30mm and its a huge difference between the two, especially on an m50.

The EFM 22/f2 is really a gem of gems. It's gotta be some crime against 'photo humanity' this wasn't re-released. (insert protest animated gif here).

The rf 16 & rf 28 are always mentioned as alternatives..they are absolutely not, neither in focal length nor aperture. Especially that 16...yuck.
 
Upvote 0
I just took a look at this lens. WOW that's bigger than the pancake. Was just looking at the list of lenses again and 1.4 would be a nice tradeoff for loosing that lil banger lens...but yeah thats huge in comparison. I have the 30mm and its a huge difference between the two, especially on an m50.

The EFM 22/f2 is really a gem of gems. It's gotta be some crime against 'photo humanity' this wasn't re-released. (insert protest animated gif here).

The rf 16 & rf 28 are always mentioned as alternatives..they are absolutely not, neither in focal length nor aperture. Especially that 16...yuck.
Hopefully Canon still makes some RF-S primes.
 
Upvote 0
Not everyone can afford L glass plus the Sigma 24mm f1.4 Art DG DN is an excellent lens that has an optical design that caters to the needs of astro photographers. Sigma have tons of options that Canon don’t currently make/may not ever make including a 14mm f1.4, 20mm f1.4, 65mm f2 and the recent 500mm prime.

As others have stated here many times Canon will decide what 3rd parties can or cannot release on the platform. These APSC lenses pose no threat to Canon and in fact may lead to an increase in body sales.
OH, didn't realize they were APSC. That explains everything!

Yeah, I have the Sigma 28/1.4 and it's sweet. I don't shoot astro but if I could get a 14/1.4 I'd probably START shooting astro! :-D It's my first off-brand lens since the 1990s and I see I've been snooty about brands too long.
 
Upvote 0
I´d like to know if the Tamron/ Sigma lenses will have a dedicated control ring. It would be absolutely awesome if they do!
I have the Sigma RF-S 18-50mm f/2.8 DC DN. It's a very nice lens. It has one oddity to be aware of (once you know about it it's not a problem).

As an existing lens on three other mounts (Sony, Fujifilm, and Leica), it already had a focus ring.

Sigma decided to use it as a switchable Control/Focus ring, like Canon does on its smaller RF lenses.

Unlike Canon however, Sigma did not add a physical switch on the lens to set the ring's function, since Canon also lets that choice be made on the AutoFocus ("AF") tab in the camera's Setup menu. (Adding a physical switch to the lens could have delayed its introduction by many months.)

Unfortunately - at least in the first production run (I got one of the first, in July) - there's no label on the lens saying that it's a dual-function ring, nor is that even mentioned on the instruction sheet.

This caused me some confusion the day I got it because of a pair of decisions I had made in the past:

1) When I got the R7 two years ago, I had set that tab in the Settings menu to make all combined Control/Focus rings into Control rings, since I loved being able to use the Control Ring to regain the f-stop ring on lenses that I had gotten used to on all of my cameras from 1958 until going digital in 2006 (nearly half a century).

2) A year after that, and a few months before I got this lens - I had decided that the control rings on my Control Ring EF-EOS R adapters - being at the body end of the lenses - were too easily jostled by accident, so I had - in a different menu, where you set the functions of buttons and dials - set all Control Rings to be inactive. (I changed to setting the aperture with the ring around the joystick near the eyepiece of the R7.)

This combination of settings turned that ring on the lens (1) into a Control Ring and (2) as a Control Ring, being inactive. Took a while until I figured out what I had done. I reversed the first setting, and made all combined Control/Focus rings into Focus rings. Bingo! The Sigma's manual focus ring now works as expected.

I wrote to Sigma explaining this and urging them to explain this in their instructions for the lens.

If you really want to use that ring on the lens as a Control Ring you can do that, but you'll need to toggle that setting to focus manually. You could set up CF1 and CF2 (on the function dial atop the camera) to be basically the same except for having one use that ring as a Control Ring, and having the other use it for focusing - or you could make that AF menu setting a My Menu shortcut.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
Non L orange ring, just to troll Sony;)
Recently got Canon's new RF 28-70mm f/2.8 IS STM lens. Nice and sharp. According to Canon it has L-quality optics and is fully weather-sealed.

So why no L designation? I guess because it only costs $1,099 list.

So I did some trolling of my own. I found a green rubber band, twisted some red twist ties along its length, and put it on the front of the lens where an L lens would have a red ring, to signify its "No-eL" status - Merry Christmas.

Only knock on this lens is that they cheaped out on manual focus: no separate focus ring, instead it's done with the Control Ring, with an AF-Control-MF slide switch, like on the tiny RF lenses like the RF 16mm. Fortunately, you can activate Full-time Manual Focus in the cameras' AF section of the setup menu, which lets you use the focusing ring while AF is on, as long as you keep the shutter button half pressed while doing that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0