SKL2017 Posted April 25, 2019 Share #1 Posted April 25, 2019 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) Disappointed! Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Edited April 25, 2019 by SKL2017 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/296588-leica-sl-firmware-35-sigma-mc-21-not-supported/?do=findComment&comment=3729012'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 25, 2019 Posted April 25, 2019 Hi SKL2017, Take a look here Leica SL (firmware 3.5) + sigma MC-21- not supported. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
CptSlevin Posted April 25, 2019 Share #2 Posted April 25, 2019 They ditched Leica SL. Terrible move Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/296588-leica-sl-firmware-35-sigma-mc-21-not-supported/?do=findComment&comment=3729212'>More sharing options...
Vieri Posted April 26, 2019 Share #3 Posted April 26, 2019 Basically, they want you to buy new L-mount Sigma lenses rather than recycle your existing other-mount Sigma lenses on L cameras. So much for "alliance"... Best regards, Vieri Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caissa Posted April 26, 2019 Share #4 Posted April 26, 2019 (edited) That is really nonsense. You could just as well say they want you to buy a Panasonic camera, because there everything is supported. So they want us to update to 47 MP, IBIS and 187 MP high res mode, better flash support, stable tethering and all with the SL lenses .... very interesting. But credible ? Not really. But this is definitely the better solution than to switch to X1D and buy the whole range of expensive lenses again. (Up until now the alliance was/is a clever idea for users.) And with the L-mount exchange service probably even the older lenses can be "recycled" to "native-mount". Depends on the price if this is a valid solution. (But probably clearly better than only adapted.) By the way, while the native lenses will come in autumn, the MC-21 is available now already. Edited April 26, 2019 by caissa 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted April 27, 2019 Share #5 Posted April 27, 2019 On 4/26/2019 at 4:40 PM, Vieri said: Basically, they want you to buy new L-mount Sigma lenses rather than recycle your existing other-mount Sigma lenses on L cameras. So much for "alliance"... Best regards, Vieri No. That statement just doesn't make sense. More likely that they have found a 4 year old camera with a 4 year old processor doesn't give them the performance they want with the adaptor and they don't want the negative feedback that would bring from existing SL owners. Probably the same reason that the Novoflex adaptor doesn't support AF on the S1 or S1R. Old tech on new bodies or new tech on old bodies. There's two sets of communication going on (lens to adaptor and adaptor to body) and it's likely the adaptor can't make up for the deficiencies of the SL. It's not like the Novoflex was ever brilliant with AF lenses. I don't think Sigma want that being blamed on them. Secondly Sigma will be offering a mount exchange service so you can make your current EF lens fully compatible with the SL, including CAF. If you own a bunch of Sigma lenses it'll be more expensive. Most probably own a couple... Thirdly, Novoflex do have a working adaptor, sort of. So there's an option. But I doubt Sigma want that performance from that adaptor so they'll skip the SL. It's reasonable to think the alliance is for products going forward, not older tech. Gordon 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicaiste Posted April 27, 2019 Share #6 Posted April 27, 2019 It is the SL that doesn’t support the Sigma adapter, not the opposite. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted April 28, 2019 Share #7 Posted April 28, 2019 Advertisement (gone after registration) 2 hours ago, Leicaiste said: It is the SL that doesn’t support the Sigma adapter, not the opposite. That's not how I read it. Sigma says they have changed the specification of the adaptor and it will no longer be compatible. That seems to indicate it's at their end. I don't think cameras support adaptors. It's the adaptor that fools the camera into thinking it has a compatible lens strapped to it. Isn't it? Gordon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicaiste Posted April 28, 2019 Share #8 Posted April 28, 2019 Is it a Leica or Sigma decision ?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbretteville Posted April 29, 2019 Share #9 Posted April 29, 2019 Well that sucks, as this is what I had planned for a log zoom for use when shooting airshows. Guess I'll have to rethink, but at least I don't have to buy one and be dissapointed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted May 1, 2019 Share #10 Posted May 1, 2019 On 4/30/2019 at 6:10 AM, cbretteville said: Well that sucks, as this is what I had planned for a log zoom for use when shooting airshows. Guess I'll have to rethink, but at least I don't have to buy one and be dissapointed. True. It is a shame the long Sigma zooms won't work properly on the SL. I think I'll still try a 60-600 on my S1R but I would have liked it to work on the SL as a backup. It should also work on the SL2. Gordon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vieri Posted May 2, 2019 Share #11 Posted May 2, 2019 On 4/28/2019 at 12:06 AM, FlashGordonPhotography said: No. That statement just doesn't make sense. More likely that they have found a 4 year old camera with a 4 year old processor doesn't give them the performance they want with the adaptor and they don't want the negative feedback that would bring from existing SL owners. Probably the same reason that the Novoflex adaptor doesn't support AF on the S1 or S1R. Old tech on new bodies or new tech on old bodies. There's two sets of communication going on (lens to adaptor and adaptor to body) and it's likely the adaptor can't make up for the deficiencies of the SL. It's not like the Novoflex was ever brilliant with AF lenses. I don't think Sigma want that being blamed on them. Secondly Sigma will be offering a mount exchange service so you can make your current EF lens fully compatible with the SL, including CAF. If you own a bunch of Sigma lenses it'll be more expensive. Most probably own a couple... Thirdly, Novoflex do have a working adaptor, sort of. So there's an option. But I doubt Sigma want that performance from that adaptor so they'll skip the SL. It's reasonable to think the alliance is for products going forward, not older tech. Gordon Chill Gordon, OK? Adapter work just with software, that's all, and they can add / remove support as they please. Plus, AF performance is a function of the lens, not of the adapter. Given proper protocol communication, which in this case should be a given since it's an alliance, not reverse engineering, the lens will behave exactly as it does on a native body. Exactly. So, perhaps, my statement makes a little more sense than you credit me for. Take it easy, best regards Vieri Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted May 2, 2019 Share #12 Posted May 2, 2019 (edited) 5 hours ago, Vieri said: Chill Gordon, OK? Adapter work just with software, that's all, and they can add / remove support as they please. Plus, AF performance is a function of the lens, not of the adapter. Given proper protocol communication, which in this case should be a given since it's an alliance, not reverse engineering, the lens will behave exactly as it does on a native body. Exactly. So, perhaps, my statement makes a little more sense than you credit me for. Take it easy, best regards Vieri No. It still doesn't. AF performance is not determined by the lens alone, ever. It's also a function of how fast the body can send information to the lens and how fast it can receive information from the lens. AF performance of an adapted lens will be determined by the lens, body and the adaptors ability or willingness to translate between the two. In the case of the SL, we have an older body with an older processor and CDAF focusing that's trying to drive a modern PDAF lens. AF performance in this situation is in three parts. The lenses ability to AF. The bodies ability to send AF signals to the *lens*. And the adaptors ability to translate CDAF focus directions to PDAF focus signals. All will affect AF performance in an adapted lens. All three have firmware and latency. It's not just a tube and a set of wires. A PDAF lens does not react like it does natively when attached to a PDAF body. Sigma seem to feel that it's not possible to write software into the adaptor that will allow this to happen in a way they will be happy with so they have instead made the adaptor block all communication with the lenses for the SL. They could have offered reduced AF performance or manual focus. But they make the adaptor block all communication. You stated, "Basically, they want you to buy new L-mount Sigma lenses rather than recycle your existing other-mount Sigma lenses on L cameras.", as if it's purely a marketing driven decision. This is highly unlikely. You don't need to buy new lenses. You can have you current lenses changed to an L mount. The difference will be that they will be CDAF native lenses rather than the adapted PDAF lenses they were before modification. So you don't need to buy new lenses at all. Having a mount replacement service is almost exactly "recycling" existing mount lenses. You also have the option of using the existing Novoflex adaptor. Gordon p.s. I am always chilled Edited May 2, 2019 by FlashGordonPhotography 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted May 2, 2019 Share #13 Posted May 2, 2019 (edited) 2 minutes ago, FlashGordonPhotography said: Edited May 2, 2019 by FlashGordonPhotography duplicate post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vieri Posted May 3, 2019 Share #14 Posted May 3, 2019 8 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said: No. It still doesn't. AF performance is not determined by the lens alone, ever. It's also a function of how fast the body can send information to the lens and how fast it can receive information from the lens. AF performance of an adapted lens will be determined by the lens, body and the adaptors ability or willingness to translate between the two. In the case of the SL, we have an older body with an older processor and CDAF focusing that's trying to drive a modern PDAF lens. AF performance in this situation is in three parts. The lenses ability to AF. The bodies ability to send AF signals to the *lens*. And the adaptors ability to translate CDAF focus directions to PDAF focus signals. All will affect AF performance in an adapted lens. All three have firmware and latency. It's not just a tube and a set of wires. A PDAF lens does not react like it does natively when attached to a PDAF body. Sigma seem to feel that it's not possible to write software into the adaptor that will allow this to happen in a way they will be happy with so they have instead made the adaptor block all communication with the lenses for the SL. They could have offered reduced AF performance or manual focus. But they make the adaptor block all communication. You stated, "Basically, they want you to buy new L-mount Sigma lenses rather than recycle your existing other-mount Sigma lenses on L cameras.", as if it's purely a marketing driven decision. This is highly unlikely. You don't need to buy new lenses. You can have you current lenses changed to an L mount. The difference will be that they will be CDAF native lenses rather than the adapted PDAF lenses they were before modification. So you don't need to buy new lenses at all. Having a mount replacement service is almost exactly "recycling" existing mount lenses. You also have the option of using the existing Novoflex adaptor. Gordon p.s. I am always chilled Whatever, Gordon. Your arrogant tone prevents me to continue a discussion with you, I am sorry. Fun to note that you don't even notice that you are proving my point in this last message of yours, and interesting to see how you seem to believe that repeating things arrogantly will make you right. Keep your attitude as if you were speaking as the sole proprietor of the truth, not the first time by the way, and continue discuss with your own good self - I am done here. Best regards, Vieri Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicaiste Posted May 3, 2019 Share #15 Posted May 3, 2019 Before making any more assumption I will wait to see if the SL2 supports the MC-21. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted May 3, 2019 Share #16 Posted May 3, 2019 2 hours ago, Vieri said: Whatever, Gordon. Your arrogant tone prevents me to continue a discussion with you, I am sorry. Fun to note that you don't even notice that you are proving my point in this last message of yours, and interesting to see how you seem to believe that repeating things arrogantly will make you right. Keep your attitude as if you were speaking as the sole proprietor of the truth, not the first time by the way, and continue discuss with your own good self - I am done here. Best regards, Vieri Apologies Vieri, if that's how it comes across to you. That's not how it's written. Is anything I've written been factually incorrect? If so please feel free to point that out and I will apologise and correct my mistakes. Gordon 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vieri Posted May 3, 2019 Share #17 Posted May 3, 2019 1 hour ago, FlashGordonPhotography said: Apologies Vieri, if that's how it comes across to you. That's not how it's written. Is anything I've written been factually incorrect? If so please feel free to point that out and I will apologise and correct my mistakes. Gordon Gordon, it is written how it is written and it's out there for all to see. You know, people can decide for themselves, they don't need to be told "how it's written". You see? Again that patronising / arrogant tone of yours coming out. It's a pity, because with all the curt "No. Yes. You are wrong. What you say doesn't make any sense." and all your (usual, sadly) similar pleasantries, you make what you actually say of no interest whatsoever for me. As a result, as I said, I have no interest in continuing this conversation with you, sorry. Best regards, Vieri Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
3DPopStar Posted May 6, 2019 Share #18 Posted May 6, 2019 This is terrible. I just literally ordered the MC-21 from B&H and had to cancel it right away. As a sidenote, I just updated my SL to the latest firmware and have noticed that EF mount lenses that were totally dead with the Novoflex adapter now seem to have come to life. I borrowed my buddy's Canon 200mm f2.8 a couple of months ago and couldn't get it to autofocus on the SL at all. I tried it after the firmware upgrade and got it to work and ended up using it for a shoot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now