And the penny drops: Sigma is making Z mount lenses

Just three to start with, the 16mm f/1.4, 30mm f/1.4, 56mm f/1.4. Al lare DC DN | Contemporary line up but I've used those o n 60mp Sony Alpha 1 and Sigma FpL cameras and they are great lenses.

https://press.sigmaphoto.com/product/02/sigma-nikon-z-mount-lenses/

--
Ellis Vener
To see my work, please visit http://www.ellisvener.com
I am on Instagram @EllisVenerStudio
“It's not about the f-stop." -Jay Maisel

That is exciting! All three seems to be APS-C lenses, which is called DC-lenses in Sigmas terminology.

Ellis Vener said:

This product is developed, manufactured and sold under the license agreement with Nikon Corporation.

Click to expand...

Another Z mount licence like tamron or cosina; not reverse engineered like viltrox or ttartisan (or third party lenses on F mount).

It's a shame they didn't port over the far more interesting 18-50 first; we already have analogues of those lenses from viltrox. Hopefully this doesn't end up like sigma lenses for EF-M (those three primes and nothing else)

Sigma's equivalent to mm on various sensor sizes could use some clean-up.

I get calculated mm for FF, but not calculated f-stop for FF.

astirusty said:

Sigma's equivalent to mm on various sensor sizes could use some clean-up.

I get calculated mm for FF, but not calculated f-stop for FF

Click to expand...

All are DX mount lenses. the focal length of the lens is the focal length of the lens regardless of the size of the format size of the camera it's mount it on, although different formats will change the angle of view.. Like focal length, the aperture doesn't magically change because one of the camera’s format.



if you want to argue that a 50mm lens on an APS-C camera has the same angle of view as a 75mm on a full-frame camera, I will agree with you; and that being a 50mm, at any f-stop it will have a deeper depth of field than a 75mm lens at the same f-stop, I will agree with that too.

Agree, the 18-50 f2 would have been great. Having the 28 f2.8 and 35 and 50 s lenses, the only one which may interest me is the 16 mm 1.4

Ellis Vener said:

astirusty said:

Sigma's equivalent to mm on various sensor sizes could use some clean-up.

I get calculated mm for FF, but not calculated f-stop for FF

Click to expand...

All are DX mount lenses. the focal length of the lens is the focal length of the lens regardless of the size of the format size of the camera it's mount it on, although different formats will change the angle of view.. Like focal length, the aperture doesn't magically change because one of the camera’s format.

if you want to argue that a 50mm lens on an APS-C camera has the same angle of view as a 75mm on a full-frame camera, I will agree with you; and that being a 50mm, at any f-stop it will have a deeper depth of field than a 75mm lens at the same f-stop, I will agree with that too.

Click to expand...

Just to clarify things. I used an online conversion tool (mmCalc ) which was recommended by professional photographer (@ another site). The calculated f-stop being different confused me, but not being an optics expert, I went with calculated mm being correct, questioning calculated f-stop.



What mmCalc should say is DOF will be equivalent to f/4.54 instead what it reports.

What comes up (after calculating) below information shown (screen-snap) and scrolling down is the following text among other text. "Although your lens is "f/2.80" it will have the equivalent depth of field to an "f/4.28" lens. The amount of light your lens lets in will not change, only the depth of field or the "blurry part" of the image."

xlucine said:

xlucine said:

This product is developed, manufactured and sold under the license agreement with Nikon Corporation.

Click to expand...

Another Z mount licence like tamron or cosina; not reverse engineered like viltrox or ttartisan (or third party lenses on F mount).

Click to expand...

Would you mind explaining a bit more about that? Thank you. Are the new Sigma lenses a new design, built for the Z mount (and the others, not)?

xlucine said:

It's a shame they didn't port over the far more interesting 18-50 first; we already have analogues of those lenses from viltrox. Hopefully this doesn't end up like sigma lenses for EF-M (those three primes and nothing else)

Click to expand...

Ernie Misner said:

xlucine said:

Ernie Misner said:

This product is developed, manufactured and sold under the license agreement with Nikon Corporation.

Click to expand...

Another Z mount licence like tamron or cosina; not reverse engineered like viltrox or ttartisan (or third party lenses on F mount).

Click to expand...

Would you mind explaining a bit more about that? Thank you. Are the new Sigma lenses a new design, built for the Z mount (and the others, not)?

Ernie Misner said:

It's a shame they didn't port over the far more interesting 18-50 first; we already have analogues of those lenses from viltrox. Hopefully this doesn't end up like sigma lenses for EF-M (those three primes and nothing else)

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

The quoted text in my post is from sigma's press release - they're stating that the lenses are officially licensed by nikon, i.e. sigma is probably paying nikon some money in return for an explanation of how to make a lens talk Z properly (or just engineering drawings of the mount bayonet, depending on how nice nikon is feeling).

On the other hand the chinese manufacturers haven't made similar statements, which implies that they've worked out the Z mount communication the hard way (i.e. probing the contacts while a nikon lens is attached to a Z body to see what information is being sent).

Sigma's approach takes money and less engineering effort, and might result in a lens that performs better (especially with future firmware updates), but it might also come with restrictions on what lenses sigma can release (imposed by nikon). The exact wording of their agreement is private, so we're unlikely to get the last part officially confirmed or denied.

As the third party lens industry grew while the F mount evolved, AFAIK third party lenses on F were all reverse engineered (starting back when reverse engineering the mount meant using calipers to measure the location of the stop down pin).

The sigma lenses themselves are old designs, the 30mm dates back to 2016 - they're almost certainly the same optical formula as the E, X, EF-M, and M43 versions. So far the only Z-exclusive third party AF lens is the ttartisan one, although I'm still not sure why they didn't release that in more mounts.

xlucine said:

i.e. sigma is probably paying nikon some money in return for an explanation of how to make a lens talk Z properly (or just engineering drawings of the mount bayonet, depending on how nice nikon is feeling).

Click to expand...

If Nikon is requiring a licensing fee it is following a well established business model. For instance, Sony is paid a 5% royalty (not sure if that is of wholesale or retail price) for all accessories authorized by Sony.
I have heard this from multiple sources in the photographic manufacturing world.

You are a bit mixed up. Sigma is not reporting equivalent focal lengths or f-numbers. They are reporting the actual lens specifications, 16mm f1.4, 30mm f1.4, and 56mm f1.4, which is irrespective of the sensor size they are to be used with. The equivalent lenses in full frame would be approximately 24mm f2, 45mm f2, and 85mm f2.

My decision to go from Canon EOS M to Nikon Z rather than Canon RF is looking even better now. I had the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 for EF-M, and it was a great lens. I won't re-buy it for Z since I have a full-frame camera now, but having both SIgma and Tamron officially in the system now is great news.

xlucine said:

Ernie Misner said:

xlucine said:

xlucine said:

This product is developed, manufactured and sold under the license agreement with Nikon Corporation.

Click to expand...

Another Z mount licence like tamron or cosina; not reverse engineered like viltrox or ttartisan (or third party lenses on F mount).

Click to expand...

Would you mind explaining a bit more about that? Thank you. Are the new Sigma lenses a new design, built for the Z mount (and the others, not)?

xlucine said:

It's a shame they didn't port over the far more interesting 18-50 first; we already have analogues of those lenses from viltrox. Hopefully this doesn't end up like sigma lenses for EF-M (those three primes and nothing else)

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

The quoted text in my post is from sigma's press release - they're stating that the lenses are officially licensed by nikon, i.e. sigma is probably paying nikon some money in return for an explanation of how to make a lens talk Z properly (or just engineering drawings of the mount bayonet, depending on how nice nikon is feeling).

On the other hand the chinese manufacturers haven't made similar statements, which implies that they've worked out the Z mount communication the hard way (i.e. probing the contacts while a nikon lens is attached to a Z body to see what information is being sent).

Sigma's approach takes money and less engineering effort, and might result in a lens that performs better (especially with future firmware updates), but it might also come with restrictions on what lenses sigma can release (imposed by nikon). The exact wording of their agreement is private, so we're unlikely to get the last part officially confirmed or denied.

Click to expand...

Excellent information there, much appreciated.

xlucine said:

As the third party lens industry grew while the F mount evolved, AFAIK third party lenses on F were all reverse engineered (starting back when reverse engineering the mount meant using calipers to measure the location of the stop down pin).

The sigma lenses themselves are old designs, the 30mm dates back to 2016 - they're almost certainly the same optical formula as the E, X, EF-M, and M43 versions. So far the only Z-exclusive third party AF lens is the ttartisan one, although I'm still not sure why they didn't release that in more mounts.

Click to expand...

If the Sigma lenses themselves are old designs, can they compete head to head with Nikon's S line lenses - unless offered for a lower price? Perhaps the Sigmas have a special, creative look to the images and bokeh that people are still appreciating.

Ellis Vener said:

Just three to start with, the 16mm f/1.4, 30mm f/1.4, 56mm f/1.4. Al lare DC DN | Contemporary line up but I've used those o n 60mp Sony Alpha 1 and Sigma FpL cameras and they are great lenses. https://press.sigmaphoto.com/product/02/sigma-nikon-z-mount-lenses/

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what 'and the penny drops' means in this context?

Desargues said:

You are a bit mixed up. Sigma is not reporting equivalent focal lengths or f-numbers. They are reporting the actual lens specifications, 16mm f1.4, 30mm f1.4, and 56mm f1.4, which is irrespective of the sensor size they are to be used with. The equivalent lenses in full frame would be approximately 24mm f2, 45mm f2, and 85mm f2.

Click to expand...

No also f/1.4. Only if you will the same FOV and DOF. then you can say f/2 and you have to walk. But if you stay on the same place then is it f/1.4 with a dividend FOV an DOF.

see this interview for context


and also

Ernie Misner said:

xlucine said:

Ernie Misner said:

xlucine said:

Ernie Misner said:

This product is developed, manufactured and sold under the license agreement with Nikon Corporation.

Click to expand...

Another Z mount licence like tamron or cosina; not reverse engineered like viltrox or ttartisan (or third party lenses on F mount).

Click to expand...

Would you mind explaining a bit more about that? Thank you. Are the new Sigma lenses a new design, built for the Z mount (and the others, not)?

Ernie Misner said:

It's a shame they didn't port over the far more interesting 18-50 first; we already have analogues of those lenses from viltrox. Hopefully this doesn't end up like sigma lenses for EF-M (those three primes and nothing else)

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

The quoted text in my post is from sigma's press release - they're stating that the lenses are officially licensed by nikon, i.e. sigma is probably paying nikon some money in return for an explanation of how to make a lens talk Z properly (or just engineering drawings of the mount bayonet, depending on how nice nikon is feeling).

On the other hand the chinese manufacturers haven't made similar statements, which implies that they've worked out the Z mount communication the hard way (i.e. probing the contacts while a nikon lens is attached to a Z body to see what information is being sent).

Sigma's approach takes money and less engineering effort, and might result in a lens that performs better (especially with future firmware updates), but it might also come with restrictions on what lenses sigma can release (imposed by nikon). The exact wording of their agreement is private, so we're unlikely to get the last part officially confirmed or denied.

Click to expand...

Excellent information there, much appreciated.

Ernie Misner said:

As the third party lens industry grew while the F mount evolved, AFAIK third party lenses on F were all reverse engineered (starting back when reverse engineering the mount meant using calipers to measure the location of the stop down pin).

The sigma lenses themselves are old designs, the 30mm dates back to 2016 - they're almost certainly the same optical formula as the E, X, EF-M, and M43 versions. So far the only Z-exclusive third party AF lens is the ttartisan one, although I'm still not sure why they didn't release that in more mounts.

Click to expand...

If the Sigma lenses themselves are old designs, can they compete head to head with Nikon's S line lenses - unless offered for a lower price? Perhaps the Sigmas have a special, creative look to the images and bokeh that people are still appreciating.

Click to expand...

They're 2/3rds of a stop brighter than the S lenses, unless you spend thousands for f/1.2 (or the noct). That's a pretty big plus for sigma, and they're more affordable&compact than the S wide angle lenses. For wide angles, designing the lens to match the sensor makes it much easier to get a cheap, sharp, and bright optic

Hi,

Rather much like 'and the other shoe drops', or at least that's how I understand it. Different phrases and all that.

Stan