Sigma family business philosophy

[Andrew Reid]

Kazuto Yamaki is admirable.

He recently agreed to be interviewed on EOSHD, and I hope to bring you that soon.

I think we should think more about the corporate vs private business philosophy of camera companies.

Sony just released the 14-24mm F2.8 GM for $3000. At a time when a lot of pros have less work due to the pandemic and downturn in the economy, I think this pricing is sheer greed.

Meanwhile Sigma have their own 14-24mm F2.8 of similar or even better quality - $1200.

And their affordable 16mm, 30mm, 56mm primes for APS-C - all F1.4 and exceptional performance.

Sony and Canon will likely want $4000+ for their latest cameras.

A reminder that all large publicly listed companies exist purely for the benefit of making as much money as possible for shareholders, and it's also about moving manufacturing to where labour is cheapest - with all the environmental and social impact that brings to the planet too.

Sigma are different and we should support that.

[currensheldon]

Agreed. Love Sigma, both what they make and sell as well as their philosophy. 

Really hoping they can get those APS-C lenses onto Fuji X. Also would love if they continue with F2 (in the vein of the 45mm f2.8, but faster) primes for the L-Mount and other mirrorless mounts. Love their quality and price, but most of their primes and zooms are insanely large and heavy. 

And more cameras too, of course.

[PannySVHS]

Their 45mm 2.8 L-mount lens looks beautiful. Saw some footage from the Sigma factories, which Andrew or someone else posted a few years ago. They handcrafted a huge lens with water. That image has since then put Sigma in my memory plus Kendy Tys videos with the Sigma 30mm 1.4. Search EosHD for him and you will see.

[IronFilm]

9 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

A reminder that all large publicly listed companies exist purely for the benefit of making as much money as possible for shareholders

All companies exist to make a profit, be they big, medium or small sized. 
To not do so would be unsustainable, and result in every one of their employees losing their jobs. This would also result in all their creditors being screwed too. That's very irresponsible of the managing directors! (is why many countries, such as here in NZ, have it as a requirement in law for the company directors to look out for the shareholders' interests, and can be taken to court if they fail to do so) 

Yes, different companies take different strategies to achieve this goal. Sony is leveraging their brand and willing to sacrifice volume of sales in exchange for a higher valued product. While Sigma is going for cut price and sheer volume of sales they hope. 

Also you're not comparing apples with apples here, 12-24mm vs 14-24mm are two quite different lenses. Might seem like "only" 2mm difference, but 2mm at the very widest of wide ends is significant! That explains a large part of the price premium. Plus the Sony 12-24mm is not even shipping yet, let's wait and see for the reviews, perhaps its quality is deserving of the price. 

[fuzzynormal]

2 hours ago, IronFilm said:

All companies exist to make a profit, be they big, medium or small sized.

You have to admit, there's a big difference between public and private though.

[kye]

I've only had one Sigma lens, the 18-35/1.8 but it was a great lens.  I'd buy Sigma again in a heartbeat.

[MrSMW]

I like Sigma. A lot.

I liked the concept of the FP and I think it bodes well for an FP2 .

The FP tempted me so much but the reality I knew was not going to meet my needs.

I like their lenses.

I personally find their fast primes a bit big but think the 18-35mm f1.8 is one of the greatest lenses ever made. It's just a superb thing for the price.

I wish wish wish those APSC primes were available in Fuji X Mount however and came close to going with them recently but the adaptors required decided me against in the end.

But I like them in principle and mainly hope they can bring a camera to market with few or no compromises.

Looking forward to hearing what they have to say.