Well an obvious potential hold up is Sigma is part of the L mount alliance. They might like to have some lenses that are only for cameras with that mount. They do make Sony E mount lenses, but these lenses all have more capabilities on L mount cameras than Sony E mount cameras. Both Sony and Sigma seem comfortable with that arrangement.
The other obvious hold up is that compared to other brands many Canon shooters were a bit later to adopt mirrorless. There needs to be a healthy market share of RF shooters for Sigma to develop lenses for the RF mount. Further complicating the lack of RF shooters is that even those who buy RF cameras can use EF lenses quite effectively. Using the old A-mount is not much of an option for Sony, and that may be part of the reason Sigma made lenses for them sooner. Note Sigma makes even fewer lenses for Nikon Z mount (just 3 APS-C lenses) than for Canon RF mount (they make 10 RF mount APS-C lenses).
I don't think it is the RF mount is too complex as the article suggests, because Sigma RF APS-C lenses work fine, so obviously Sigma knows how to make lenses work on the RF mount.
I suspect that something is going on, however, as the newish Sigma 12 f/1.4 and the new 15 f/1.4 are only avaialble on Fuji X, Sony E, and Canon RF mounts, and the 23 f/1.4, and all four of the APS-C zooms are only available in those same 3 mounts and L mount, whereas the older 16 f/1.4, 30 f/1.4, and 56 f/1.4 trio are available in all those mounts plus Nikon Z and m4/3rds.
It seems to me Canon is perhaps moving into a more preferred status with Sigma. Perhaps not as preferred as Sony or even Fuji, but I would not be surprised to see Sigma enter the market for FF RF lenses before too long. Just speculation of course at this point, but I doubt Canon is going to stand in the way of Sigma offering such lenses and as RF cameras become more common I expect Sigma to see the market and offer such lenses.
p.1 #4 · Canon Says it’s up to Sigma to Make Full-Frame RF Lenses
burningheart wrote:
If one looks at the date of the posted rumour I think that says it all.
Ha, it could be April fools, but I could also see it being legit because Canon might say it's open, but if they are keeping everything very secret about the mount and it's very complex/costly to reverse engineer, then I could see the 3rd parties spending their resources elsewhere.
What I do not understand if the article is true, then why did Canon tell Samyang to stop producing their RF AF lenses? I happened to get both those Samyang AF lenses before they were banned, and the 85mm is one of my favorite lenses of all times with being half the weight of the Canon RF 85 f/1.2L that I dumped.
p.1 #6 · Canon Says it’s up to Sigma to Make Full-Frame RF Lenses
"Probably a shell company set up specifically to sell RF versions of the Meike lenses under a different brand. That way when Canon decides to sue the pants off them, there are no assets to go after. That shell company can just be shut down and another one will pop up. This might end up being the way the Chinese brands get their lenses onto RF."
My thoughts exactly...
p.1 #7 · Canon Says it’s up to Sigma to Make Full-Frame RF Lenses
burningheart wrote:
If one looks at the date of the posted rumour I think that says it all.
It's not an April Fool's Day joke.
The original statements from Canon were published on March 27th in Phototrend, and CR reported on them briefly in an article published on March 28th. The story published yesterday is just CR expanding on its earlier reporting. It is a coincidence that yesterday was April 1st.
p.1 #8 · Canon Says it’s up to Sigma to Make Full-Frame RF Lenses
artsupreme wrote:
What I do not understand if the article is true, then why did Canon tell Samyang to stop producing their RF AF lenses? I happened to get both those Samyang AF lenses before they were banned...
That is the question, isn't it? Personally, assuming we can take what Canon said at face value, it may very well be a recent decision (which Canon "forgot" to mention) and that is why we don't see RF mount lenses that are AF and for FF from 3rd party yet.
p.1 #9 · Canon Says it’s up to Sigma to Make Full-Frame RF Lenses
Canon has blocked Sigma and Tamron from entering the RF line and make money. Canon has the STM line the VC and the L line. It's going to be tough for Sigma or Tamron to make any money and compete with the price structure Canon has. How would they structure their pricing and produce a better alternative.
Apr 02, 2026 at 03:29 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · Canon Says it’s up to Sigma to Make Full-Frame RF Lenses
artsupreme wrote:
Ha, it could be April fools, but I could also see it being legit because Canon might say it's open, but if they are keeping everything very secret about the mount and it's very complex/costly to reverse engineer, then I could see the 3rd parties spending their resources elsewhere.
What I do not understand if the article is true, then why did Canon tell Samyang to stop producing their RF AF lenses? I happened to get both those Samyang AF lenses before they were banned, and the 85mm is one of my favorite lenses of all times with being half the weight of the Canon RF 85 f/1.2L that I dumped....Show more →
I think the answer probably isn't that complicated. Before Canon had established its RF line of lenses, they didn't want competition at least until they got a certain return on investment. Now that their RF line is well established they would be happy for some third party lens maker (certainly Sigma, maybe Samyang) to offer some lenses to fill the gaps. They have let Sigma do that with APS-C lenses for a number of years. They might be less excited about direct competition, but it seems now they might allow Sigma even to do that. My guess is that it is a complicated dance. They would probably love Sigma to introduce some of their lenses (e.g., 135 f/1.4, 200 f/2, 300-600 f/4) that provide capabilities they don't intend to provide. That adds capability to the system and they might even tolerate some competition to allow that. They are no doubt less thrilled with lenses that directly compete with some of their money makers (e.g., 24-70 f/2.8 or the VCM lenses), but it seems they are recognizing that having Sigma build at least some FF RF lenses could be a good thing for the system.
Apr 02, 2026 at 03:31 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · Canon Says it’s up to Sigma to Make Full-Frame RF Lenses
campy wrote:
Canon has blocked Sigma and Tamron from entering the RF line and make money. Canon has the STM line the VC and the L line. It's going to be tough for Sigma or Tamron to make any money and compete with the price structure Canon has. How would they structure their pricing and produce a better alternative.
Here are lenses that Sigma makes for other mounts that don't really have direct FF competitors from Canon:
p.1 #16 · Canon Says it’s up to Sigma to Make Full-Frame RF Lenses
campy wrote:
Canon has blocked Sigma and Tamron from entering the RF line...
That has certainly been assumption that brand warriors have run with these past few years.
However, these quotes by Canon executives explicitly say they have *not* done that. I think the likelihood that they are lying is small (they would have used more weasel words).
Why Canon has not commented publicly before now is a puzzle, given how much Internet hatred has been slung their way.
p.1 #17 · Canon Says it’s up to Sigma to Make Full-Frame RF Lenses
I just went through a tough decision process over the last month. I have a R5 and the only RF lenses I had were the 24-105 stm, 35 f1.8 and RF 100-400. I also have a couple of EF lenses but I kept going back and forth between buying a high end L lens or switch to Sony and get the A7RV and have the option of buying nearly any lens available. I like the Canon in my hands and the menu system so much better than the Sony so I went with the RF 70-200 f2.8 non Z, but I still may grab a Sony A7RIII as a second system and one of those cheap Chinese lenses everyone seems to like.
p.1 #18 · Canon Says it’s up to Sigma to Make Full-Frame RF Lenses
campy wrote:
I just went through a tough decision process over the last month. I have a R5 and the only RF lenses I had were the 24-105 stm, 35 f1.8 and RF 100-400. I also have a couple of EF lenses but I kept going back and forth between buying a high end L lens or switch to Sony and get the A7RV and have the option of buying nearly any lens available. I like the Canon in my hands and the menu system so much better than the Sony so I went with the RF 70-200 f2.8 non Z, but I still may grab a Sony A7RIII as a second system and one of those cheap Chinese lenses everyone seems to like....Show more →
If you are interested in inexpensive Chinese autofocus lenses for Canon RF, you may want to check out Yongnuo.
I checked it out and it says to remove the lens you need to press the button on the lens and not the camera. Is that their way of getting around the restriction?
p.1 #20 · Canon Says it’s up to Sigma to Make Full-Frame RF Lenses
garyvot wrote:
That has certainly been assumption that brand warriors have run with these past few years.
However, these quotes by Canon executives explicitly say they have *not* done that. I think the likelihood that they are lying is small (they would have used more weasel words).
Why Canon has not commented publicly before now is a puzzle, given how much Internet hatred has been slung their way.
There is a difference between blocking or having a licensing agreement. It's pretty clear in the Canon statement that they will license RF and RF-s not differentiating by image circle. It may be a high price for Sigma on RF so they chose not to. Maybe there was some new contract reached, but who knows. In the past Sigma said they did not need the Canon RF market as they were at capacity, but that may not be accurate now. RF market may be increasing as old DSLRs and users die out, the newer folks are going to be RF users.
