Aside from manual focus lenses, the lenses that Samyang has developed/produced/announced in collaboration with Schneider-Kreuznach are among the few third-party autofocus lens manufacturers that I'm genuinely interested in.
They have some very interesting lenses in the pipeline:
14-24/2.8, 20-50/2, 24-60/2.8, 28-85/2, 28-135/2.8, 60-180/2.8, 200/1.8, and 300/4.
Aside from manual focus lenses, the lenses that Samyang has developed/produced/announced in collaboration with Schneider-Kreuznach are among the few third-party autofocus lens manufacturers that I'm genuinely interested in.
They have some very interesting lenses in the pipeline:
14-24/2.8, 20-50/2, 24-60/2.8, 28-85/2, 28-135/2.8, 60-180/2.8, 200/1.8, and 300/4.
SNJOps wrote:
The Z mount platform has been out for nearly 8 years, in that time only Tamron has received a license to release FF lenses with AF.
As for this recent action by Nikon going after the Chinese lens makers is because a deal with Sigma is coming, Sigma already operate on emount with these same companies being un-licensed by Sony. Time will tell if we ever see Sigma lenses on Z mount but at this stage i'm extremely doubtful.
Again Nikon are perfectly within their right to operate as they see fit but so are their potential customers. Not everyone can afford/justify OEM lens prices but also the unique options that 3rd parties offer like Sigma's 28-105mm f2.8, 14mm f1.4 and 300-600mm f4...Show more →
True for FF, but as you are aware Sigma has 3 APS-C lenses in Z mount that are also licensed.
There is no licensing fees for FE mount, so Sigma can compete on equal terms. If they had to pay a fee to Nikon while other lenses providers don't then it's unfair and can be enough for Sigma to decide to not launch Z mount lenses.
I totally agree that it would be in Nikon's benefit to keep as many lens options as possible for Z mount. And even better if they can make legitimate money from these lenses.
Samyang, Sigma and others will be waiting a long time and probably won't ever see their FF glass on Z mount. I'm sure Nikon have spoken the 3rd paties re lenses, Nikon have made a business decision to protect their lens revenues which is understandable for them but horrible for their customers.
SNJOps wrote:
Samyang, Sigma and others will be waiting a long time and probably won't ever see their FF glass on Z mount. I'm sure Nikon have spoken the 3rd paties re lenses, Nikon have made a business decision to protect their lens revenues which is understandable for them but horrible for their customers.
Then why do we know have 10+ Tamron lenses in Z mount? Some of them directly competing with high volume Nikon lenses?
Why do we have tens of Chinese AF lenses vs zero in RF mount? Had Nikon not noticed them till now?
How about the many Nikon photographers using FE mount lenses through adapter?
bernardl wrote:
Then why do we know have 10+ Tamron lenses in Z mount? Some of them directly competing with high volume Nikon lenses?
Why do we have tens of Chinese AF lenses vs zero in RF mount? Had Nikon not noticed them till now?
How about the many Nikon photographers using FE mount lenses through adapter?
That doesn’t make much sense.
Cheers,
Bernard
The situation with Nikon and Sigma is not the same as Nikon and Tamron. Tamron designs and/or manufactures multiple Nikon-branded Z-mount lenses (the Tamron f/2.8 trio rebrands, the 180-600, and I think the f/1.4 non-S primes). This contractual relationship does not exist between Nikon and Sigma, and for all we know Tamron could have a clause in their contract with Nikon that limits Nikon's cooperation with Sigma, or Sigma' ability to produce FF Z-mount lenses. My guess is that Sigma has been working to obtain a license for Z-mount, and they and/or Tamron have pressured Nikon into enforcing licensing on the lower-cost Chinese competitors. If Tamron and Sigma have to play by the rules, the other manufacturers should have to as well.
Wezre wrote:
My guess is that Sigma has been working to obtain a license for Z-mount, and they and/or Tamron have pressured Nikon into enforcing licensing on the lower-cost Chinese competitors. If Tamron and Sigma have to play by the rules, the other manufacturers should have to as well.
I believe this is close to the truth of the matter. Why would the Japanese companies agree to pay fees and follow rules unless Nikon at least tries to prevent unfair competition by those who ignore or skirt those fees and rules?
MikeEvangelist wrote:
I believe this is close to the truth of the matter. Why would the Japanese companies agree to pay fees and follow rules unless Nikon at least tries to prevent unfair competition by those who ignore or skirt those fees and rules?
Agreed. That has been my theory all along.
Even if Nikon and Sigma didn’t want to work together the MeTi would strongly « encourage » them to for the sake of Japan’s camera industry. That’s how it works here.
