Sigma CEO Kazuto Yamaki said they will not make independently designed MFT lenses. They will keep making lenses for APS-C mirrorless system and then offer them with MFT mount too. Mr. Kazuto said a proper MFT designed lens would require extra costs although obviously would bring a size advantage (smaller lenses). For three reasons Sigma will not do that:
1) The extra costs are too high
2) They have low demand for special MFT designed lenses
3) The MFT lens system is the most “mature” of all mirrorless system and therefore it’s harder to sell their lenses.
Source: Imaging Resource Found via MirrorlessRumors.
The 19mm f/2.8 lens is now in Stock at Amazon US (Click here), Amazon DE (Click here), Amazon UK (Click here) and Amazon France (Click here).
The 30mm f/2.8 lens is now in Stock at Amazon US (Click here), Amazon DE (Click here), Amazon UK (Click here) and Amazon France (Click here).
The 60mm f/2.8 at BHphoto.
77 Responses
Fair and honest reasoning! I think there is the market for such a stellar lens manufacturer though. Someone to put the pressure on Olympus and Panasonic with additional AF and IS lenses would be great. They’ve done it with Canon and Nikon… Give them 2 years, when m43 reaches critical mass, and Sigma we’ll start making them!
m4/3 system has most mature lens collection from ANY format. That is the problem the Sigma and any other is facing.
Alone Olympus is offering their Pro line in the finish 7-210mm and then they have 300mm and 420mm Pro teles.
And that is possible to get with four lenses + TC14.
Sigma would sell a lot if they would make NATIVE m4/3 lenses and then focus to 7-12mm range and then to 50-150mm range with primes and zooms. Or how about just make a 100-300mm zoom as well?
“m4/3 system has most mature lens collection from ANY format.”
Lol, WHAT?
This is just one of the problems a MFT fan boy has: DENIAL.
Um, MFT may have a nice selection, but it’s nowhere CLOSE to Canon or Nikon! Even Sigma make great lenses for FF and APS-C Canikon cameras. To be honest, the real reason why Sigma doesn’t invest more into MFT, is because MFT is losing mirror less market share and Olympus fan boys that don’t buy ANYTHING -Unless it says “Olympus” on it.
And if Sigma isn’t part of MFT, then that means it’s reverse engineering lenses, and that’s expensive. It’s not profitable, if that’s the case. There are many Canikon cameras out in the wild, not that many MFT cameras.
What’s the percentage of m43 owners that can be called Olympus fan boys that wouldn’t buy anything unless it says Olympus? Because if Sigma made a m43 dedicated 9mm 2.8 or 19mm 1.4 I would buy them without much hesitation. I know that’s just me, but do I belong to a 1% minority?
Besides, also a percentage of Nikon or Canon owners often can’t be convinced by no matter what review of third party lenses, only their holy camera brand determines which lenses are good enough for them.
That is very true, but if we were to see the percentage of Canon owners compared to Olympus MFT owners, it would be night and day. Canon has enough of a base, where 3rd parties can still make a profit, Olympus doesn’t.
Oh this is rich. Without even bothering to count Sigma ON THEIR OWN make more lenses (available in all DSLR mounts) than the entire m43’s ecosystem. That is from ONE third party manufacturer… the comments I read on here are just plain sad at times.
They should promote a bit more their lenses… The DN line for M43 is quite good for the price they ask, and I believe the system needs such good quality AF affordable primes.
A 90/2.8 (would make a 135 E-mount feq and 180 MFT feq if I’m correct) for $250 would be a nice addition… and a 110/2.8 why not?
Make a good standard zoom (14-50mm F2.8, 12-60mm F4) with (or even without) IS – And it would sell like hot cakes (!) I also like the robustness of the already existing Sigma DN lenses – Which are also not bad at all – And honestly also not THAT big. ^^
They have said they won’t design for MFT… So at best you’ll get zoom that starts at 16-17 mm, and APS-C sized… You can buy Oly 12-40/2.8 already….
Weatherproof standard primes with Sigma quality will pick up the pro-end users that are still waiting for them.
Why not Sigma just admitted it’s lenses are not good enough for m4/3 instead of giving reason this & that ?
A short prime FL with F2.8 is not good enough for m4/3 & I’ll never buy in such lens .
Why so angry?
The reason Mr. Yamaki gave is perfectly valid. And nobody forces you to buy their f/2.8 primes. They have their place in the market, especially considering staggering lack of affordable options in m4/3. But you are free to choose 2-3 times more expensive options from Olympus or Panasonic. It annoys the hell out of me that there is no cheap standard prime for m4/3. The closest I can get is the Sigma 30/2.8.
I do hope m4/3 grows enough to warrant investment in non-specialty dedicated lenses from third party manufacturers.
The 60mm siggy is a stellar lens by any metric. It is the 3rd sharpest m43s lens and its only $200.
Yes , but is a macro lens .
It is?
I wanted that lens but only if it is. And I could not find any info about that.
It’s not. With reproduction ratio of 1:7.2 (focuses from 0.5 meters), it’s definitely not a macro lens.
but they did design some lenses for olympus if i remember correctly. it a bit harsh to say they are not up to certain standards
Olympus, Leica, Contax.. 🙂
Is not fast enough for me .
As clarify by Sigma itself , lenses are designed in favor of APSC , F2.8 are for both APSC & m4/3 .
do you prefer to shoot always wide open at fast speed aperture like me Yun?
Mostly .
It depend on what FL lens in use , lighting situation & subject’s DOF plus defocusing effect . Sufficient lighting I like to go for F2.2 with 45mm or the 75mm .
i think i never stopped down the 45 sofar
Yeah, I think Oly 75/1.8 is a Sigma design. At least those were the rumors and speculations (and a patent maybe, not sure now).
You say that like it’s a disadvantage. If it actually were a macro lens (it’s not) that would be the lens bargain of the century.
doesnt almaric praise the 60mm? i almost went for it too in the past, very cheap!
You say why it is not good enough “for you”, but not for “m43″… I’m affraid you can’t speak for all m43 owners…
Yun is very demanding in what he wants 🙂
I see! 🙂
I don’t mean to speak on behalf of all m4/3 owners cause I respect different people different perceptions . I only care on highest image quality that the format capable to deliver & therefore definitely not from Sigma lenses , at least in this moment .
No compromise in image quality is what a true photographer should insist .
We could talk a long time about what is a “true” photographer and what are his “needs”… Sadly there’s no beer around 😉
And yet, there are geniuses out there using very basic crappy gear producing photo essays and art that has an impact on the world. But hey, I would rather have an expensive lens that is perfect rather than talent.
😀 There is Sigma 18-35mm/1.8 zoom. Which suprisingly actually has T-stop same as F-stop (very few lens can brag with that, including a lot of m4/3s).
This gives you very nice and very sharp (and fast) “normal” zoom, equiv of 36-70mm.
And not good enough, funny.. these lens are made and tested on their own testbench made from same sensor which is inside SD1. Which is one of most demanding sensors currently existing (tho I guess new Samsung 28mpix APS-C is pretty close, but still its not true raw 15 mpix).
And all new Sigma lens must be good enough to pass this machine (which is reason why all latest Sigma lens are so good in terms of resolution, less in other departments.. lets say color transfer :D).
Other than that, there is actually no need for specific m4/3 mount since we have pretty decent option (if you dont mind weight), called Speedbooster. Latest version from Metabones (EF to m4/3) is actually pretty awesome..
That’s OK, just add a Sigma 90mm F2.8 to the 19/30/60 series, please.
If it’s a 90mm macro lens, I guess they would surely sell quite a few.
” They have low demand for special MFT designed lenses”
That’s because they make APSC lenses.
“The MFT lens system is the most “mature” of all mirrorless system and therefore it’s harder to sell their lenses.”
In that case its established, stable and not likely to vanish. Sounds a better investment than a new startup. A couple of top high quality lenses Sigma and the market could be yours.
Although designed for APS, the focal lengths look very usable on M43 (I don’t believe that any particular focal length is generically incorrect), but it does mean we can forget about looking to Sigma to give us something really wide.
M4/3 makes up about 40% of the mirrorless market. With probably 55% being APS-C. Given that Sony makes up the lion’s share of that market, and the APS-C E-mount market is starved for high quality lenses, it’s pretty evident where the market opportunity is.
Look at M4/3 with the Sigma lenses right now:
Sigma 19/2.8 vs. Panasonic 20mm/1.7 pancake – the Panasonic is more expensive, but really a no-brainer in terms of quality and speed and size.
Sigma 30/2.8 vs… ??? – I guess there’s the more expensive Oly 25mm/1.8, but a slow-ish narrow-normal not really a focal length people are asking for, I guess.
Sigma 60/2.8 vs. Oly 60/2.8 macro – The Sigma’s a superb lens, probably a better short tele than the Oly even, but the macro functionality and weather sealing is pretty hard to turn down for the extra money…
Unless Sigma wants to come out with a 90mm (macro?!) or an ultra-wide (<10mm) which would be impractical for APS-C, I can totally understand their stance on the market.
More lenses is nice, but I don't know if M4/3 really needs 3rd party manufacturers at this point, except to bring down prices or introduce a nice mid-range (f2.8-4) normal zoom.
And aren’t those lenses repurposed from Sigma DP cameras? I think they just have one extra element to make them work with ILCs and normal sensors or something like that.
This is what happens when the trend will not catch. Sigma has about the same consultant as Nokia, Microsoft, or N / C. fuckoff marketing specialist without innovative thinking, courage and creativity
Sigma are idiots
just because they not want design mft specific lenses?
Everything Sigma does these days is crap. Starting by the Quattro and ending at the failure with m43 lenses.
One missed opportunity after the other…
according to reviews some of their lenses do very well…there is no such thing as crap there. Dpreview forum users used the name Bigma alot, prob used in a negative way, but imo they act on prejudice… I did shoot alot from 2004-2006 with a sigma 28 f/1.8 and loved the photos.
Yes
A few years ago Sigma CEO admitted that they are the OEM for many Olympus, Panasonic and some Sony lenses. This was further underlined by the sigma patent for the Olympus 75 1.8. They already have the manufacturing contracts no need to compete with themselves.
Olympus manufacturers its own lenses.
But almost all use glass from Hoya or the another glass manufacturer.
A 60mm 1.8 MACRO MFT art lens with IS would be much welcomed and bought. SIGMA*s execs were not in school when there was match lessons going on. Allso should Sigma make proper telephoto 250mm f2.8 IS ART or 400 5.6 IS art lens for MFT it would sell well. There are still huge holes in the system.
Oh sure… Everybody knows better which m4/3 lenses would sell well, than Sigma managers themselves. They had no time for school, because they are spending time grinding glass from kindergarten on…
Or: consumers may know better what they want themselves, than a company’s management.
They don’t know better. Every single manufacturer thought mirrorless would be for P&S “ugraders” when it’s SLR users who buys them.
Take into account that Sigma is relatively small company and despite growing, it still has limited resources. They even had trouble meeting demand for their most popular lenses for weeks and months after launch. I don’t see them going: “Hey, we’re having trouble making enough of those lenses, so let’s just make even less of them, and put those resources into making some glass for a niche market. Yaaay”. Sorry, not gonna happen. The only reason that 19/30/60 trio even exists is because those are
probably slightly redesigned versions of lenses fixed on Sigma dp
cameras.
And 60mm f/1.8 macro lens? Wouldn’t that be the first in the world? I don’t remember ever seeing a macro lens faster than f/2.8 or so (I think there’s a f/2.5 or something like that, not sure).
I remember a tamron 2.0, let me check. Yes, 60mm 2.0.
there’s the Oly Zuiko 50mm 2.0 as well…
there’s no rules that macros can’t have large aperture – yet it kind of makes sense. razorthin DOF is not helpfull for macro, where you struggle to get as much in focus as you can. (and use artificial light even)
So optimizing lenses for performance at say f4 or f5.6 rather than getting the largest aperture possible makes total sense on macros.
I think most of the telephoto lenses design for APS-C mirrorless could be really a nice addition for MFT.. Imagine a 120-300mm F/2.8 or even the 50-150 stabilized (would be a very nice choice for GH4 user and BMCC)….
Sigma has very few mirrorless lenses, though, even for APS-C. Just the trio of 2.8 primes. All their other lenses are for DSLRs and they said the focus mechanisms aren’t really up to snuff for mirrorless/Live View/CDAF.
Those who are for video with Panasonic or BMCC and wants stabilizated video, they have two options;
A) shoot 4k and then do stabilization in post production before processing to 1080.
B) Get a stabilization rig.
Optical image stabilization isn’t good for video, it doesn’t stabilizate the Z axis and the optical stabilization has its limits and looks bad in move.
I think the problem why they are not more sold is that they are slow for modern digital prime…they should be f/2 with 300 eur ptice tag
There’s a fourth reason, but Sigma didn’t want to say it though it is true.. MFT lenses are very good quality and value, and therefore harder for Sigma to compete with. On the other hand, esp Sony lenses, those are very ordinary quality and value, and also few and far between. Unless you buy Zeiss, there is nothing really good. This’d is also the same for cropped sensor DSLRs, not many really good lenses unless your put FF lenses on them.
They actually sort of did say that, indirectly anyway, when discussing the big quality and price gulf between Sony’s regular lenses and the Zeiss options.
What shocks me is how truly average is the Zeiss ZA 12-70 f/4.
Thank you, this was a useful post.
Maybe there is one more reason: Every company wants to invest in products with a healty future…………And not a product which end is near. But thats just one of my fears. I think M43 must survive. Its the only system which i can handle with my very small hands and somewhat weak body.
Companies can help ensure a healthy future for micro four thirds by investing in new m43 products and being more willing to compete in that arena. It seems clear that Canon and Nikon are so afraid of ceding sales to mirrorless ILC’s that they are downsizing and lowball-pricing DSLR’s in a bid to weaken and kill off the mirrorless breed. Their own cameras in the ILC market exhibit weaknesses and carry high price tags that make their strategy clear.
Oh, come on , Mr. Yamaki. Using computer lens design technology, your lens wizards could scale down the 10-20mm f/3.5 just a bit and provide some much-needed competition in the wide-to-“normal” micro four thirds range. It’s not as if Sigma would have to start from scratch and reinvent the wheel for every micro four thirds lens.
It’s not developing cost, it’s all about production fee. Amd just down scaling doesn’t work,
because you need to scale down to every things for motor, gear , anything,
It’s impossible, or it cause problem about AF speed or something weakness.
Well, they don’t learn it, do they?
They made the same mistake regarding FT and nearly nobody wanted to purchase the Sigma FT lenses that were bigger and performed on a lowrer level than their Zzuiko and PannyLeica counterparts. But then – it’s up to them. And earning money in APS-C land certainly is easier.
APSC will continue to dominate. If Sony implements their new 5 axis in their flagship APSC model camera plus adds touch screen…game over Oly ….GAME OVER. As in no continues, start back at the beginning and no saved data!
Uhhh yeah no. Aps-c lenses arent very far off in size to their ff counterparts, also the iq difference from similar gen sensors arent that different from m43s. Also, there is only one aps-c mirrorless system with a respectable lens library (fuji). You sony fanboys love to bloviate about camera bodies, but their systems are severely lacking in other ways.
I’m an Olympus fanboy. I own the A7 and EP5. I stand by my statement.
You could be an engineer at olympus and it wouldnt matter, your initial statement doesnt hold water for reasons i pointed out.
Yet, it holds water for me. Your error is in trying to tell someone what they think isn’t correct, when what they think is, in fact, correct.
Very true. M43 is coming to a close. Sony’s implementation of IBIS has really shown that there are no benefits to M43. Of course Olympus can just make a FF m43 format to compete.
3) The MFT lens system is the most “mature” of all mirrorless system and therefore it’s harder to sell their lenses.
I agree with that for the most part…but I also think (if keeping in mind the incredible Art lenses that Sigma has recently produced for FF)..that if Sigma made very fast primes with AF specifically for MFT there is room for some lenses we have all been craving that have not been introduced. For instance ….if Sigma made a MFT specific lens 42.5mm f/1.2 and it came in at $900-1000 it would sell.
Well, so they designed Lecia 25 1,4 and 75 1,8, and they made money with that.
NO NEW NEWS????????????
Admin on holiday????