Third party Z mount AF lenses?

donaldejose

WEF: Yes, I am with you on that. The Z f1.2 lens and a 60mp sensor may well make medium format not worth the cost (of bodies and lens for a Fuji GFX 100 kit, for example) and is just the thing that could seduce me into buying more resolution than I need. Eye AF has been working good for me letting me shoot at f1.8 without worrying about missing focus on the nearest eye. I expect it would work just as well at f1.2 because it has even more light to work with. Plus, I expect future iterations of Z bodies will have increased processing power for focus.

spraynpray

donaldejose said:

I am guessing that Nikon Z glass will be so good that most people, including me, will have no desire for an Art lens.

Come on Don, people will always go for more, that's what has got us this far!

mhedges

donaldejose said:

I am guessing that Nikon Z glass will be so good that most people, including me, will have no desire for an Art lens.

Agree. And I'm not sure how much better they could do, especially without designing specifically for Z mount which I don't see happening.

It seemed to me that Sigma's MO with the ART lenses was to throw glass at the problem. Which Nikon has pretty much done with most of the Z lenses, as witnessed by all the complaints about the lens size.

spraynpray said:

Come on Don, people will always go for more, that's what has got us this far!

True. We will see how things go. One thing Sigma had going for it was a lot of Nikon's F mount designs are getting a little old. That's of course not an issue with the Z's.

donaldejose

SNP: Yes they (and myself) will, BUT will Sigma be able to do it? I look at that full frame sensor and image a full body projected on it by a lens and say to myself how in the world can the lens/sensor combination resolve eyelash level detail on a full body image (which my 50mm f1.8S can do on a Z6 and a Z7 sensor would do even better)? I have to wonder how much better lenses can get than the 50mm f1.8 S and the hopefully soon to come f1.2 Z mount lens, for example. Sigma could better the f-mount lenses in an obvious way but will they be able to obviously better the Z mount lenses? Perhaps when we have 60 mp and 100 mp full frame sensors some demonstrable improvements of native Z glass will be able to be observable. Then people will purchase them. It just seems to me we must be approaching the limit of resolution full frame sensor and glass can produce.

tc88

@donaldejose, come on. Debating whether Sigma can do a job good enough for you so that you would consider buying it, while in reality Sigma doesn't care about doing business with you at all in the first place, is a little bit ... self centric.

mhedges

tc88 said:

@donaldejose, come on. Debating whether Sigma can do a job good enough for you so that you would consider buying it, while in reality Sigma doesn't care about doing business with you at all in the first place, is a little bit ... self centric.

What words would you use to describe some random person on the internet who presumes to know if companies care about doing business with folks or not?

tc88

@mhedges, I thought you agreed that Sigma is not going to make lens for Z mount. Please don't be self contradictory.

mhedges

tc88 said:

@mhedges, I thought you agreed that Sigma is not going to make lens for Z mount. Please don't be self contradictory.

I don't think they are going to make lenses specifically designed for Z mount. I do think it is quite possible they port their L/E mount lenses over.

tc88

Dream on. You can come back here and brag about it when that happens. I don't see that happening unless Nikon opens up its mount and begs for others to make lens for it given its meager market share.

Even in the scenario you describe, Sigma will just be harvesting whatever income they can get with minimum effort, not an indicator that it cares about said customers.

mhedges

Jesus christ man what is your problem? All I said was I thought it was possible. As I said before for me I don't really care if it happens or not. Why the heck would I "come back here and brag about it"?

On an unrelated note - mods - any thought to adding a block and/or ignore option?

tc88

@mhedges, this is an internet forum. Have some logic if you want to debate things. You did take position on things. No need to call people name when you are out of arguments.

I said Sigma doesn't care about making lens for Z mount, so donaldejose's hypothesis is irrelevant. You come out and try to call some name instead. Well if you think it's unlikely Sigma will make lens for Z mount, then I'm right. If you think I'm wrong and it's likely, then "dream on" is a fair response because there is no indication that's going to happen, and every indication that's going to not happen.

BTW, I said "you can come back and brag about it if that happens" since I can certainly understand that and won't have a problem. But if you don't want that, I have struck that out.

snakebunk

There are now some reviews on the new Sigma Art 85/1.4 DG DN Art. It is the first lens in the Art DN series of lenses designed for mirrorless. Seems pretty awsome. Much smaller and lighter than the old version, very sharp and relatively inexpensive. Unfortunately it exists for L and E mount only.




I hope at some point Sigma will support the Z mount, otherwise I will probably go with another mirrorless mount. But that is just me of course.

donaldejose

Perhaps my comment was imprecise. I was saying that Sigma Art line, to survive as "the superior Art line," will have to show an obvious improvement in resolution over Nikon's native Z mount lenses. In F-mount this was true; such as when comparing the Nikon 50mm f1.4 against the Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art. I was suggesting that given the excellence of the Nikon Z mount lenses so far Sigma may not be able to design Art glass in a Z mount that shows an obvious similar gain in sharpness sufficient to entice buyers away from the Nikon glass. If third party manufacturers cannot demonstrate superior glass all they have to compete with is a lower price. We will see.

tc88

donaldejose said:

I was saying that Sigma Art line, to survive as "the superior Art line," will have to show an obvious improvement in resolution over Nikon's native Z mount lenses.

Sigma lens won't compete with Z lens. It will mostly be used on Sony E mount. That will determine how successful it is.

donaldejose said:

Sigma may not be able to design Art glass in a Z mount that shows an obvious similar gain in sharpness sufficient to entice buyers away from the Nikon glass.

That may or may not be true, technically there is no reason one way or another.

But between the small market share of Z mount and Nikon locking it up, it's premature to talk about that, because Sigma doesn't care about the Z mount user base right now, so it doesn't care about enticing such users in the first place, and probably won't for a long long time if not ever. That was my main point.

snakebunk

@donaldejose: I mostly agree with your last comment but would like to add that third party lenses are also about filling the gaps and giving us more options. For example I don't think there are any Nikon F1.4 lenses for the Z mount. Third party lenses are also about forcing the native lens maker to keep prices down and to make really great stuff. For example the new Sigma 85/1.4 will push Sony to improve their 85/1.4 and/or lower its price. But, for those who think the current Z mount lenses are all they need I fully understand that they don't see the point in third party lenses like I do.

donaldejose

Oh, I see the point in third party lenses and have been a fan of the Art line, owning both their 35mm f1.4 and their 50mm f1.4. Also, I think all Nikon bodies and glass will be Z mount over the next five years or so. Thus, any third party lens makers who want to sell to Nikon owners are going to have to produce Z mount lenses. While Nikon has not announced a 50mm f1.4 in Z mount they have produced a very excellent f1.8 in Z mount and have announced a 50mm f1.2 lens which many people expect to be sharper than the f1.8. Basically, Nikon is offering a Z 1.2 as the professional upgrade to the Z 1.8 lens in place of the old 1.8 upgraded to 1.4 option in the F mount. Since the Z mount f1.8 is so excellent it remains to be seen if Nikon can produce a sharper f1.2 lens. But can Sigma produce sharper lenses in Z mount than Nikon offers and do so at a lower cost? If so, the rationale for the Art line remains. If not, a price advantage or a unique offering is the only rationale for buying that Sigma Art lens rather than the Nikon Z counterpart. Perhaps a clue to this issue can be found in a comparison between the new Sigma 85mm Art against the Nikon 85mm Z mount lens. So far, that Sigma Art apparently is sharper than the native Sony comparable lens but it is not offered in Z mount for a direct comparison with the native Nikon lens. Perhaps Sigma will simply put the same 85mm glass into a Z mount and then a direct comparison can be made using the same Nikon Z7 body. We will see. I do expect Sigma to offer some lenses for the Z mount market over the next few years. After all, Nikon has promised a professional level body (they actually said D4 equivalent body) soon. The D6 is expected to be the last of the D single digit DSLR bodies with the line transitioning to a mirrorless body after that. Any third party lens maker who expects to sell to Nikon owners in the future will have to produce lenses in Z mount. I am suggesting the past "ART" line advantage in sharpness may well disappear because the Z mount lenses Nikon is producing are so good.

snakebunk

@donaldejose: Thanks for a nice answer. I think my problem is that I have been so happy with the combination of Nikon cameras and Sigma lenses that I am reluctant to change. I think there are really great Nikon cameras coming up and I think Sigma is the best lens manufacturer. The good thing for me is that I am not in a hurry. Lets see.

tc88

snakebunk said:

third party lenses are also about filling the gaps and giving us more options. ... Third party lenses are also about forcing the native lens maker to keep prices down and to make really great stuff.

Very well said. While I mostly buy first party lens, I will be very hesitant in buying into a system without third party lens, because what I can get in that case will be purely by the mercy of the original manufacturer.