Sigma announces they will make lenses for Micro Four Thirds!
The lens above is the 30mm f/2.8 mockup for NEX. Where is the m43 mockup? I hope the m43 verison is as fast as the Four Thirds Sigma 30mm f/1.4 .
More about the NEX/Ricoh/Sigma announcements at: Mirrorlessrumors.
-
I told you all good things come in three! After Zeiss and Schneider also Sigma officially announced “The launch of new lenses for Micro Four Thirds and E-mount camera systems.”
Press release:
“The Sigma Corporation is pleased to announce the development of new lenses for Micro Four Thirds and E-mount camera system.
As demand for compact system cameras increase, we intend to meet the requirements of users and develop new lenses for these systems, utilizing our advanced interchangeable lens development technology.
Detailed information including specifications, product names, pricing and launch schedules will be announced in due course.
A mockup will be displayed at Sigma’s booth during CP+, a camera and photo imaging show, held in Pacifico Yokohama Japan from February 9th, 2011.”
Sigma made a lot of Four Thirds lenses and I would love to see some of them redesigned for Micro Four Thirds (Click on lens name to see current auctions on eBay):
Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6
Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8
Sigma 18-50mm f/3.5-5.6
Sigma 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6
Sigma 24mm f/1.8
Sigma 30mm f/1.4
Sigma 50mm f/1.4
Sigma 50-500mm f/4-6.3
Sigma 55-500mm f/4-5.6
Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8
Sigma 105mm f/2.8
Sigma 135-400mm f/4-5.6
Sigma 150mm f/2.8
Sigma 300-800mm f/5.6
If you have some Sigma rumor to share contact me at 43rumors@gmail.com or use the contact form on the right sidebar. Thanks!
Share
Recent comments
Comment from George: yes they are cause they are for 4/3.. If...Comment from marsupial2go: Sigma is more affordable than a lot of o...
Comment from dCap: oh, boo!...
Comment from roger porter: 50-150 2.8 Please!!!! that's my vote......
naturfokussiert
2 years ago |Hmm, so I guess the E-mount and mFT lens will be the same but only with different mounts. That means they are designed for the bigger sensor of the Nex. So there will be no size advantage for mFT to APS-C.
Miroslav
2 years ago |“the E-mount and mFT lens will be the same but only with different mounts”
Definitely, they did that with DSLR lenses. Nevertheless, Sigma will cover the holes in m4/3 lens lineup and enable people to save a bit on lenses – they won’t be as expensive as Olympus and Panasonic lenses. And they won’t make only one lens a year like Leica or Cosina.
cL
2 years ago |I think that’s what Sigma is good for the industry in general. It gives affordable option with reasonable quality. Not going to be as good as Oly or Panny/Leica, but at least people won’t be complaining about m4/3 is too expensive anymore with Sigma doing some actual m4/3 lenses.
Dummy00001
2 years ago |> So there will be no size advantage for mFT to APS-C.
As long as we have Oly and Pannay which we can rely on for quality lenses, I do not mind having an option of cheaper adapted lenses.
At least the lenses would be AF-capable and that is a plus over old lens + adapter.
Chris
2 years ago |There will still be a size advantage for wide-angle lenses compared to DSLRs.
Chris k
2 years ago |Have you seen the m43 9-18? It is considerably smaller than any APS-C UWA.
If that is a 30/2.8, it must be a macro. That’s GREAT news, considering the sky-high price of the Panny macro. Price it at $300 and I’ll buy it.
Chris k
2 years ago |Oops, sorry, when I posted I mentally inserted a “not” in your post for some reason. Sorry about that, ignore my first paragraph!
Reza
2 years ago |Interesting but not thrilling. The advantage of m43 is potentially smaller lens size compared to something like E-mount. This announcement means same lenses will be introduced with only different mounts, which means you will have almost the same size lens for either E-mount or m43. If the lenses are equal in size, it’d be a logical choice to go with E-mount for the larger sensor.
snowflake
2 years ago |Regarding size and weight of a Apsc lens
I do not think that the size issue is that important for those of us who are buying additional lenses, so converting APSc compatible lenses to m4/3 is not that big a deal, plus we get the advantage of using the “sweet spot” of the lens for a sharper image.
The reason I say this is that if one is committed to carrying additional lenses, they are committed to carry extra weight anyways. My camera bag keeps getting bigger and bigger. Adding an additional 20 to 40 percent to the weight of a single lens is pretty small compared to the total weight carried.
Gareth Lovering
2 years ago |If Sigma did use the same lenses for 4/3 and M4/3 but with a different fitting what about OIS on longer lenses for Panny users?
cL
2 years ago |I hope they don’t just port their existing lenses to m4/3, because their 4/3 lenses are actually FF lenses with 4/3 mount, so they’re quite big. Their AF is also finicky.
I think the announcement means they’re going to make new lenses with same optics but shared between Sony E-mount and m4/3, both have smaller mount than FF, APS-C or 4/3.
DonTom
2 years ago |Snowflake, that may apply to you, but definitely not for me. I am always looking to reduce the load I carry. If I wanted a bigger system, I would have bought a DSLR.
M43 is many things to many people. To me, it is an acceptable set of compromises in a smaller package than a DSLR.
I won’t be buying a native mount lens that has “waste” glass in it…..one compromise too far!
cL
2 years ago |Yes, people who buy 4/3 and m4/3 are different types of people. m4/3 people want smaller size, so give them large lenses then they won’t buy them.
People who don’t mind larger loads are more concerned about optical quality, that they’re willing to sacrifice loads. Given the current trend, most people care more about size more and that’s where the market for m4/3 or E-mount is.
Heiko
2 years ago |What the heck?
Where is the 30mm F1.4 mockup…
Greg
2 years ago |We may finally get the optically super simple and cheap 50mm 1.8 lens…
grzybu
2 years ago |Medicore lens which has soft edges on NEX can be sharp from center to the edges in m4/3.
Maybe at least Sigma will release cheap 50/1.8 with AF?
Greg
2 years ago |I begin to suspect that this is such an obviously cheap and efficient optical formula for portraits that they’ve deliberately delayed its manufacturing one so they can sell overpriced primes like the Panaleica 45/2.8 (I have it
).
Voldenuit
2 years ago |Lots of cheap 50/1.4s and 50/1.8s have lousy bokeh, as normal primes were usually not designed to be used as portrait lenses.
There are good ones (takumar 50/1.4, rokkor 58/1.2, 50 summilux-R etc), but these are in the minority.
(ME45/2.8 and SMC-Takumar 50/1.4 owner. Saving up for a CV 50/1.1)
sneye
2 years ago |Why am I not excited?
cL
2 years ago |Because it’s Sigma?
Miklos Rabi
2 years ago |The Sigma 150 macro is a great lens. I really would like to use a m43 version of it on my GH2.
napalm
2 years ago |i have a 30mm f1.4 for 4/3. aside from the yellowish tinge, it’s quite a good lens. same as in 4/3, it will be the same size as the aps-c versions. no surprise here, i bet people will still buy it for practical reasons
napalm
2 years ago |more lenses is always good!
Michael Devitt
2 years ago |Does Sigma 30mm F1.4 HSM autofocus on mFT?
napalm
2 years ago |it does but painfully slow. even the 70-300mm zuiko focuses faster on my E-P1
Michael Devitt
2 years ago |Sigma lenses (EX 50mm, 30mm) have pleasant bokeh, decent sharpness and reasonable price, so good news. The mirror-less versions are expected to be significantly smaller. And with CDAF method, Sigma is front/back focus free.
Reverse Stream Swimmer
2 years ago |Is Sigma Corporation invited?
Does Oly / Pana want to share the lens protocol stack?
I seriously doubt this.
Oly / Pana have several (Aug 2008) years of advantages over competition with respect to silent motor drive and aperture control, especially for video, where Sigma yet has no clue.
I think this is a single party annonuncement by Sigma, and that they have to crack the MFT protocol by reverse engineering.
Nevertheless, a lens with elementary AF performance is better thanpure mechanical, as well as the aperture control implemented.
Agent00soul
2 years ago |Sigma is already a member of 4/3 consortium and have produced 4/3 lenses. The protocol ought to be the same for m4/3 (with add-ons though).
cL
2 years ago |4/3 is open consortium. Anybody can join 4/3 consortium. Once they applied and joined, they can use the standard. No illegal reverse engineering is needed. Go to http://www.four-thirds.org/en/index.html for detail.
Michael Devitt
2 years ago |Olympus High-End lens mock-up: http://dpreview.com/news/1102/11020905olympuszuikomockup.asp
cL
2 years ago |This is really exciting. Given the front element, it looks like it’s going to be an ultra wide angle. Is it the rumored 12mm? I hope so.
henrik
2 years ago |Whatever, it is good to bring more competition to the market. Pana and Oly aren’t delivering the lenses users need and want. Let’s hope things heat up a bit now.
thec
2 years ago |this is great!!!
please bring in the 50/1.4 & 30/1.4
George
2 years ago |it seems most will be manual focus again
and like other manual focus lenses almost noone will buy them
cL
2 years ago |Sigma isn’t targeting super high-end market like Zeiss or voightlander, so probably AF is available. Sigma’s 4/3 lenses are AF with HSM. You can be sour grape if you want.
George
2 years ago |yes they are cause they are for 4/3.. If you read the statement from Sigma, they will probably do it for Emount than adapt it to m4/3
Michael Meissner
2 years ago |I dunno, I guess it is a sign that m4/3rds has enough market share to tempt Sigma, but having been burned with their lackluster approach to the 4/3rds mount, I wouldn’t put too much hope.
I’ve owned 3 Sigma lenses, 18-125mm, 55-200mm, and the 30mm.
The first two were soft until I tried setting aperture priority to f/8 to stop the lenses down, and used a camera with image stabilization. Then the lenses became ok, though the 55-200mm was still soft at 200mm. When I bought the 40-150mm and later 50-200mm lenses, I no longer used these lenses and eventually I sold both of them.
The 30mm has a reputation for bad sample variation, and stories of users having to play lens roulette to get a good lens were numerous. I bought mine used from a seller that had a good copy. With the newer E-30, E-5, E-620, and E-600 you can spend some time adjusting the microfocus so that it focuses correctly (but that is using phase detect auto focus, the contrast detect auto focus that the m4/3rds cameras use is supposed to be more accurate but slower).
I use the 30mm as a low light specialist lens, and only shoot with it about 1.5% of the time. I’ve had the 30mm for 3 years now, and the 14-150mm for about 5 months, and already I’ve shot much more with the 14-150mm. On the E-P2, it focuses rather slow (maybe even slower than the 50mm lens), and is rather noisy. I note that Panasonic says for the newer models that S-AF may work, but you should plan on manually focusing the lenses for critical work.
While Sigma did bring out several lenses in classic 4/3rds format, they often were hard to come by. When Sigma would refresh the lens design, often times if the previous version had 4/3rds support, they often dropped in the new lens.
That being said, there were a few Sigma lenses that people liked like the 18-50mm f/2.8 lens.
compositor20
2 years ago |2 lenses that would sell well for both formats are a 24mm f1.8 and a 50mm f1.8 lens they would be a 50mm and a 100 in micro four thirds and a 36 and a 75 in aps-c
Jules
2 years ago |A police is not allowed to give a ticket saying : “I au sure you would have burned the red light”. At least not where I live.
Now, I sense there is a bit of that in some of the talk backs, when in fact Sigma has not even announced what they plan for m43.
snowflake
2 years ago |I am excited to see Sigma decide to make m4/3 compatible lenses.
Converter/compressor Idea
What I think would be a good idea would be to make instead of a dedicated lens, make a converter available that instead of increasing the focal length, decreased the focal length of their full frame, optically stabilized, with auto focus lenses, which could now be attached to a m4/3 camera body. The full frame focal length would now be same in the m4/3, but 2 f stops of light would be gained. (This would also improve the image stabilization range, or actually preserve what it would have been).
In terms of manufacturing costs, no new lens would have to be made, make the same canon full frame, fast focus, image stabilized lens already made, just put all the necessary adaptations in the converter.
This would really catch the attention of full frame photographers and even they would then join the m4/3r’s revolution.
The cost of a telephoto lens increases dramatically with a lower f stop. The gain of two f stops on a super telephoto lens would add more than 2 thousand dollars to the price of a lens, far less than the price of the adaptor and a m4/3 camera body, not to mention the savings in weight such a system would provide.
For example
Canon EF USM 70-200mm f/2.8 $1,499
Canon EF USM 70-200mm f/4 $ 710
Canon EF IS USM 300mm f/2.8 $4,879
Canon EF IS USM 300mm f/4 $1,400
and this is only an increase in 1 f stop.
Snowflake
dCap
2 years ago |if they are just going to adapt the NEX lenses by giving them an m43 mount then for me this is a: no sale
I want lenses designed specifically for the m43 mount (like the Voigt 25/0.95 = made to measure for m43 only)
Mr. Reeee
2 years ago |Agreed.
Sigma isn’t on the same level as Voightländer, OR Leica, OR Zeiss, OR Schneider.
These are the important M4/3 announcements as far as I’m concerned.
I’d much rather see a few great lenses than a slew mediocre ones.
Many of us here are looking for good, fast primes, a couple of good macros, etc… all that create a wider range of lenses and give us more flexibility. One of the big disappointments with the current M4/3 lens selection are the near duplication of lens sizes (?) from the various M4/3 partners.
spam
2 years ago |But Sigma will launch cheap AF-lenses which is important to a lot of conusmers. And that’s much more important for the MFT market share than a few excellent, but expensive (and possibly manual focus) lenses from Zeiss and other high end makers.
@ dCap: I agree that lenses designed for the MFT sensor size is important in some areas (mostly wide angle to normal), but lenses for APS-C sized sensors wont be much bigger that “real” MFT lenses for longer focal lengths.
ronbot
2 years ago |Keep in mind that the flange distance of the e mount is 18mm, which is 2mm shorter than m43′s 20mm. In addition, the flange distance of the nx mount is 25.5, which is longer than m43′s.
This means that it won’t be as trivial as attaching a built-in adapter at the end of an APS-C optimized lens, like what they have done to make 4/3 lenses since Nikon, Canon, and etc. all have longer flange distances than 4/3.
It would be interesting to see how Sigma et al., who have decided to support both m4/3 and e-mount would design the lenses.
dCap
2 years ago |its not the back length differences that I’m concerned about … we have a small but 12mp sensor, its higher resolution than APS or even FX (where it would be 48mp), I can’t get my head around the conversion to APS.
If sigma make a lens (today) they will make it for APS resolution (or in FX), and we’ll potentially get a substandard lens [just stick a m43 mount on that and pop it in a box].
OR (the right thing to do!) they make it for m43 resolution and we win big! And it also gets a different mount for the Sony, and probably Samsung why not. This would be the smart thing to do – just because the Sony/Sam sensors are not quite so packed with pixels they still get a super lens by default, even if it is potentially over engineered. That would be good for Sig sales. And of course the shorter back element to chip distance that mirrorless defines is GOOD for lens design, it makes it simpler, and uses less materials. Should be good for price.
One big positive is that Sigma are cheaper than Can/Nik in FX lenses and DX/APS lenses, so a little price pressure on Oly/Pan is a good thing for us too. Since – to date – we’ve be paying over the what these lenses should cost (20/1.7, 17/2.8, 14/2.5 anyone!?)
JeremyT
2 years ago |Woohoo! Happy day!
Now I just wish they’d make m4/3 mount bodies… oh well, one can dream!
dCap
2 years ago |Sigma said:
“… for Micro Four Thirds and E-mount camera system”
AND E-MOUNT!
isn’t that the Olympus E-5 (and its discontinued models)
Mistral75
2 years ago |dCap
2 years ago |oh, boo!
ChrisGH2
2 years ago |Fantastic News!! Can;t wait to see the lineup.
25mm Prime at f1.4 or faster
Fast 50mm Protrait/Macro
Pro Telephoto Zoom at f2.8 with OS….
Come on Sigma!
cL
2 years ago |This is very realistic. Sigma could probably make actual m4/3 lenses instead of ports.
roger porter
2 years ago |50-150 2.8 Please!!!! that’s my vote… their highly underrated lens that’s already in (and out) of production.
marsupial2go
2 years ago |Sigma is more affordable than a lot of other makers, which is more compatible with my pocketbook. I don’t care if Sigma isn’t perfect, but it’s perfect enough for me. I’ll buy a low-cost junk zoom from Sigma and I’ll be happy.