New Source unveils why SIGMA has NO PLANS to make X-MOUNT lenses… and what Fuji did WRONG (according to SIGMA)!

[Patrick FR]

Waiting Godot: http://www.fujirumors.com/new-source-unveils-why-sigma-will-not-make-x-mount-lenses-and-what-fuji-did-wrong-according-to-sigma/

[gordonrussell76]

To be honest how bothered are we really. I mean if Sigma could put out lens that were as good at a quarter or half of the price then maybe, but otherwize I think the Fuji lens line up is pretty comprehensive and good value.

 

Do we have as many lens as Canon and Nikon. Probably not, but what we do have is exteme quality that punches well above its price point in comparison. Canon and Nikon have a lot of layering in their ranges, 4 different 50mm for example L Glass etc.

 

Lets take my favourite lens as a good comparison point the XF 35mm 1.4, the Sigma equivalent for Canon/Nikon mount is £359 the current street price of the Fuji £375 so for basically an extra £16 I get a lens that in my opinion has equal or better IQ plus is designed specifically to work with my camera, and has an Aperture ring.

 

I think the Aperture ring is probably the thing that has killed 3rd party lens the most. I don't think any of them have any appetite to develop a lens with that functionality as no other brands have that technology so the dev cost can't be covered. However releasing a lens without one is going to immediately lose out to the equivalent Fuji lens. Once you have used one fuji lens with an aperture ring, even if its a zoom with an unmarked ring, its very very hard to go back to one without. Part of the appeal of the X-T1 to me is that with a prime on it, I can look at the camera and at a glance see what my set up is before I even switch it on. Why would I buy a lens that does not do that unless there was a significant cost saving.

 

Sigma are not stupid and have worked that out, but its no bad thing.

 

I also think that Fuji is making serious inroads with the X-T10 finally allowing reviewers to recant there views. I think the only sticking point now is all the mis-information about the X-Trans sensor, once that dies down further it will improve.

I have had a few fellow enthusiasts say oh but the X-Trans RAW files look really bad and are hard to process. I was like er take a look at my flickr and then lets talk about that. That was 3 years ago, now capture one and Scottie Wangs ICC profiles and my processing time is so quick compared to Lightroom its not funny.

 

G

[milandro]

Shame!... but not for the reason that I ( or anyone else) would need a wider selection of lenses available than there are already or that Fuji will be able to provide in time, the reason why this is a shame is that competition makes people be all that little more alert when it is there than when there isn’t any.

 

I think that Zeiss is not particularly eager to provide us with any more product since they have not followed up with any other lenses yet ( and whatever they provided wasn’t shockingly better and in some cases was worse than what Fuji gave us) and the only competition is coming from non autofocus or otherwise automatic lenses which of course miss a very important selling point.

 

There would have been certainly some market niche to be filled. Fuji has been extremely reluctant to provide mirrorless users with long lenses, zooms or otherwise.

 

Now, those lenses are precisely the ones which would be benefiting of autofocus and automatisms the most.

 

Wideangles with autofocus are not precisely a necessity, but good autofocus long lenses are.

 

This, coupled to  an even better autofocus and tracking which some people are screaming for (not me but that’s irrelevant) would have been a very nice market for Sigma.

 

As for Fuji having made a “ mistake” in having developed their own bayonet to keep competitors away, I am sure that “ Mr. Fuji”    thinks otherwise!

[Max_Elmar]

I know I've stated this elsewhere, but I'm pretty sure there are some side agreements in place with the big 3rd party lens manufacturers and the original equipment manufacturers. The electronic Tamron, Sigma, and Tokina lenses could all be rendered non-functional with a firmware update from Canon, Nikon, or Sony. Those 3rd party MFGs have been known to make lenses that get OEM branding. There is probably collusion to keep them out of the Fuji market.

 

Meanwhile, Rokinon/Samyang keeps rocking our world - no autofocus or OIS, but the glass is really good, much to Zeiss's dismay. The Koreans play different games. Good for them. Good for Fuji, too - as the high-quality, manual-focus Korean glass doesn't compete in the exactly same market as the Fuji glass. Looking hard at the new 21/1.4 over here...a new, dedicated, APS-C mirrorless lens... and I really like that focal length on APS-C... (about 1/2 the price of the Fuji 23/1.4...)

[Blacksheep]

Fuji makes great glass. I don't cry myself to sleep at night because I don't have a Sigma lens! 

[quincy]

Yeah... and what lenses do they have for micro four thirds?

 

Art AF 19mm 2.8

Art AF 30mm 2.8

Art AF 60mm 2.8

 

Lenses that would give us approximately the same performance regarding depth of field & noise (not brightness / shutter speed) for Fuji's APS-C system would be:

 

25mm, 39mm & 78mm F/3.6

 

Nothing I'd really care for, to be honest.

[Sator-Photography]

I suspect that the real problem is that Sigma realised that Fuji makes such good lenses that even Zeiss struggled to make autofocus lenses that competed with it. Sigma is probably wise in not even trying.

[9.V.III]

Now that we have a 33mm f1.0 on the way, everything Sigma is "meh".