Sigma says the E-mount too small for FF.

jonikon · Oct 29, 2014

Sigma seems to think so because it was designed for APS-C and states this is the reason they can not make high quality FF lenses for E mount.

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sigm...ult-to-deisgn-high-quality-full-frame-lenses/

Do you think Sigma is right? Is this the reason Sony has not developed high quality FF lenses for the E mount?

- Jon

SQLGuy · Oct 29, 2014

Sony, and Zeiss, have developed high quality full frame lenses for E-mount.

Sigma doesn't currently make short-registration full frame lenses (Zeiss, Sony, and Voigtlander do), so it would be expensive for them to start and probably not nearly as profitable as their DSLR lens business. So they make excuses.

I'm not sure, though, why they don't want to basically build an adapter into some of their more popular lenses. The Art 50/1.4 if it was as long as with a Canon adapter but able to natively AF and EXIF on E-mount might be worth the likely price of $1100. OTOH, the 55/1.8 is awfully good, and only a bit slower, and less expensive than that, so it still may be a situation where they wouldn't be able to sell enough of these relatively easily converted lenses to even make that worth their while.

Son Of Mustang Ford · Oct 29, 2014

I thought the FE 55mm f18 was a very highly regarded lens. Sounds like Sigma need some new lens designers.(it might be difficult but Sony have already proven that it is clearly not impossible).

EinsteinsGhost · Oct 29, 2014

jonikon said:
Sigma seems to think so because it was designed for APS-C and states this is the reason they can not make high quality FF lenses for E mount.

I said this a while ago. Look at their best lenses... they are monstrous in size, designed to compete with monstrous Otus.

Making a lens small and as good will require more than that... see FE 55. Hence my suggestion back then, and now, Sigma should stop pointing at Sony from preventing them from making FE lenses.

Ayoh · Oct 29, 2014

jonikon said:
Sigma seems to think so because it was designed for APS-C and states this is the reason they can not make high quality FF lenses for E mount.

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sigm...ult-to-deisgn-high-quality-full-frame-lenses/

Do you think Sigma is right? Is this the reason Sony has not developed high quality FF lenses for the E mount?

- Jon

I do not think the diameter is prohibitive. Sony's own examples show that quality lenses are feasible.

He has made some other strange statements in the past. In a prior interview he claimed Pentax lenses are more expensive to design and manufacture than other mounts as they still use mechanical aperture levers and that is why certain Sigma lenses are not available in K mount. However Nikon F and Sony A mount both also use mechanical lever systems yet Sigma makes lenses for those mounts. The credible answer he could have provided is that the market is small for Pentax so its harder to justify a business case for certain lenses, particularly exotics. The same reason would explain lack of E mount lenses. Yet he seems to prefer to shift the cause to the camera manufacturer rather than say something along the lines of "the market is too small at the moment".

I imagine that when Sony FE cameras start to claim a big share of the market the lens mount diameter will suddenly not be a problem for Sigma anymore..

Mel Snyder · Oct 29, 2014

SQLGuy said:
Sony, and Zeiss, have developed high quality full frame lenses for E-mount.

Sigma doesn't currently make short-registration full frame lenses (Zeiss, Sony, and Voigtlander do), so it would be expensive for them to start and probably not nearly as profitable as their DSLR lens business. So they make excuses.

I'm not sure, though, why they don't want to basically build an adapter into some of their more popular lenses. The Art 50/1.4 if it was as long as with a Canon adapter but able to natively AF and EXIF on E-mount might be worth the likely price of $1100. OTOH, the 55/1.8 is awfully good, and only a bit slower, and less expensive than that, so it still may be a situation where they wouldn't be able to sell enough of these relatively easily converted lenses to even make that worth their while.

SQLGuy · Oct 29, 2014

Mel Snyder said:
SQLGuy said:

Sony, and Zeiss, have developed high quality full frame lenses for E-mount.

Sigma doesn't currently make short-registration full frame lenses (Zeiss, Sony, and Voigtlander do), so it would be expensive for them to start and probably not nearly as profitable as their DSLR lens business. So they make excuses.

I'm not sure, though, why they don't want to basically build an adapter into some of their more popular lenses. The Art 50/1.4 if it was as long as with a Canon adapter but able to natively AF and EXIF on E-mount might be worth the likely price of $1100. OTOH, the 55/1.8 is awfully good, and only a bit slower, and less expensive than that, so it still may be a situation where they wouldn't be able to sell enough of these relatively easily converted lenses to even make that worth their while.

Click to expand...

val1 · Oct 29, 2014

I think he has a valid point. The size of the mount and the short throw distance are problematic. There are clearly not enough good lenses for the FE mount to make any real determination. The 35mm 2.8 is good but not stellar. Note, this means the lens design is challenging not impossible. Sigma has made a wise decision to go upmarket. As a small company, they hope this will let them avoid some of the issues associated with the lower end market evaporation. I would imagine the heart of the problem for sigma is ROI. Why spend more money making a harder to design lens etc when the return on investment is smaller? Sigma sells ALOT more nikon and canon lenses than they do sony. While folks here may thinks sony is the answer the fact of the matter is sony is a small small part of the full frame market.

Abrak · Oct 29, 2014

One would imagine that if (and it is a big if) there is an opportunity in the FE mount it would be in providing budget lenses. Sony has made it clear it is aiming its lenses at the high end and obviously with Zeiss it was never in doubt. But the A7 are relatively low priced FF cameras and a second hand A7 will probably be under US$800 this time next year. So the A7 have plenty of potential for being the lowest cost entry point into FF if they have some lower cost lenses to match.

I am not sure why a manufacturer would wish to compete with the 55 f1.8 on quality but there is an awful lot of room to compete on price.

EinsteinsGhost · Oct 29, 2014

val1 said:
I think he has a valid point. The size of the mount and the short throw distance are problematic. There are clearly not enough good lenses for the FE mount to make any real determination. The 35mm 2.8 is good but not stellar. Note, this means the lens design is challenging not impossible. Sigma has made a wise decision to go upmarket. As a small company, they hope this will let them avoid some of the issues associated with the lower end market evaporation. I would imagine the heart of the problem for sigma is ROI. Why spend more money making a harder to design lens etc when the return on investment is smaller? Sigma sells ALOT more nikon and canon lenses than they do sony. While folks here may thinks sony is the answer the fact of the matter is sony is a small small part of the full frame market.

...is that they have used over-sized optics on SLR mount, so the increased demand of compactness with high IQ was always going to be an issue for them (I said this when Sigma was blaming Sony for not working with it to allow it to develop FE lenses, something along those lines). These excuses from Sigma simply come across as political game. It should just either deliver or shut up and stay out.

Hint to Sigma: You don't have to push lenses all the way to the sensor to build them. If you don't someone else will... Zeiss just did: Loxia. Sony has too with more to come.

OpticsEngineer · Oct 29, 2014

"Do you think Sigma is right?"

I think Sony and Zeiss knew the E-mount full frame was coming long before Sigma did, and they patented some lens designs that locked out some third party competition. Just a complete guess on my part though.

robert1955 · Oct 29, 2014

If I've got my numbers correct, and he was really talking about diameter, not flange distance, this is a [foveon

]red herring

Both Nikon and Leica are 44.0mm wide, Sony E is 46.1mm

MoreorLess · Oct 29, 2014

robert1955 said:
If I've got my numbers correct, and he was really talking about diameter, not flange distance, this is a [foveon]red herring

Both Nikon and Leica are 44.0mm wide, Sony E is 46.1mm

Sigma doesn't make M-mount lenses as far as I'm aware(although Leica and others had issues when moving to digital) but I would guess the difference with the Nikon F-mount is that your talking about a much longer flange distance. If the issue is light hitting the sensor at extreme angles then a longer flange distance would help.

FujLiver · Oct 30, 2014

jonikon said:
Sigma seems to think so because it was designed for APS-C and states this is the reason they can not make high quality FF lenses for E mount.

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sigm...ult-to-deisgn-high-quality-full-frame-lenses/

Do you think Sigma is right? Is this the reason Sony has not developed high quality FF lenses for the E mount?

- Jon

Obviously limits of Sigma technology They have done a great job with the 35mm and 50mm Art but have more play with the register distance and haven't really optimised these lenses for lightweight Of course the counter argument is that the Sony Zeiss 35mm and 55mm are terrific so are Zeiss and Sony in a different universe ? And what about Leica with their smaller mount ? The Leica 35mm FLE, 50mm Summilux and APO and 90mm APO are considered the best in their FL for 35mm ever made

Focus Breather · Oct 30, 2014

jonikon said:
Sigma seems to think so because it was designed for APS-C and states this is the reason they can not make high quality FF lenses for E mount.

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sigm...ult-to-deisgn-high-quality-full-frame-lenses/

Do you think Sigma is right? Is this the reason Sony has not developed high quality FF lenses for the E mount?

- Jon

Sony is developing curved sensor , now for fixed lens cameras. But, in the future, maybe we could see e-mount curved sensor cameras. This little curving of the sensor could make more room for the FF sensor in e-mount.

blue_skies · Oct 30, 2014

jonikon said:
Sigma seems to think so because it was designed for APS-C and states this is the reason they can not make high quality FF lenses for E mount.

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sigm...ult-to-deisgn-high-quality-full-frame-lenses/

Do you think Sigma is right? Is this the reason Sony has not developed high quality FF lenses for the E mount?

- Jon

That is utter nonsense: put an A-mount adapter on the E-mount, and then mount an A-mount Sigma lens. Now, all of a sudden, it works just fine?

I have yet to see a lens design with an aperture larger than the sensor and so close the the mount blocks the rays - I think that it is physically impossible to design such a lens, and why would you? (I am thinking perhaps a 1,000mm f/1.2 lens

Any normal lens will project outward from its exit pupil, somewhere suspended in front of the sensor. Lens-mount and diameter play no role in this, other than that it dictates that the exit pupil is outside of the camera body, inside the lens somewhere. And, as we have learned, it shouldn't be too close to the sensor - see the problems with WA RF lenses.

Why Sigma would claim such a thing is beyond me. Is he a spokesman for Sigma? Or just misinformed.

quezra · Oct 30, 2014

blue_skies said:
jonikon said:

Sigma seems to think so because it was designed for APS-C and states this is the reason they can not make high quality FF lenses for E mount.

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sigm...ult-to-deisgn-high-quality-full-frame-lenses/

Do you think Sigma is right? Is this the reason Sony has not developed high quality FF lenses for the E mount?

- Jon

Click to expand...

That is utter nonsense: put an A-mount adapter on the E-mount, and then mount an A-mount Sigma lens. Now, all of a sudden, it works just fine?

Exactly. The challenge is that Sony and Zeiss know how to make the lenses a little smaller. If you want to make them take advantage of the selling point of mirrorless, which is that you make a smaller lens, then yes the design process is different, but not necessarily harder. If you want to make your normal FF designs, you still can, as Samyang prove (in fact, so does the Sony FE kit lens, which clearly could have been designed for SLR given its wide actual gap between rear element and sensor).

Basically, Sigma is shifting the goalposts. They were asked months ago whether they would build lenses for FF E-mount and the answer was "if there is demand". Now the critical acclaim of the three A7 cameras has demonstrated demand in several key professional and consumer demographics, they are giving new excuses. It's too bad, more competition in the lens segment would only help us as consumers.

Focus Breather · Oct 30, 2014

jonikon said:
Sigma seems to think so because it was designed for APS-C...

I wonder what would be Sigma`s excuse for not making APS-C zoom lenses for e-mount then. I would like to see 50-150mm from Sigma for example.

Joel Benford · Oct 30, 2014

jonikon said:
Sigma seems to think so because it was designed for APS-C and states this is the reason they can not make high quality FF lenses for E mount.

They don't actually say that, somebody put those words in their mouth. They actually say that it makes things difficult, and they'd have to do some study on it. Which seems entirely reasonable to me.

For me, the real question is: whay aren't they working on it? An obvious answer would be "FE has been doing well lately, but it's nothing compared to the existing user base of four SLR mounts. When we think it's the best use of money and engineers, we'll work on FE."

RobDJW · Oct 30, 2014

Joel Benford said:
jonikon said:

Sigma seems to think so because it was designed for APS-C and states this is the reason they can not make high quality FF lenses for E mount.

Click to expand...

They don't actually say that, somebody put those words in their mouth. They actually say that it makes things difficult, and they'd have to do some study on it. Which seems entirely reasonable to me.

For me, the real question is: whay aren't they working on it? An obvious answer would be "FE has been doing well lately, but it's nothing compared to the existing user base of four SLR mounts. When we think it's the best use of money and engineers, we'll work on FE."

I really like to know why they don't fill the gap for E - mount. The 17-70 2.8-4 would sell like hotcakes i think. -- https://www.flickr.com/photos/rdjfoto/

Sigma says the E-mount too small for FF.

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Leading Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts