Sigma lens Canon compatibility

Mr Badger

Mr Badger

Didymus
Suspended / Banned
Messages
7,457
Edit My Images
No
I've just bought a used Sigma 100-400 contemporary zoom and reading the instruction leaflet it says the OS (image stabilisation) system isn't compatible with Canon 35mm film cameras apart from the EOS 1V. I found this a bit strange, as all canon EF lenses will work with old EOS film cameras, particularly those from the end of the film days such as the EOS 3, 30, 30v, etc.

I know Sigma is a third party lens manufacturer and has to reverse engineer their way around making lenses work with other makes of camera. However, I can't think why only the EOS 1V will work with their OS system on my lens. Does anyone out there know if the lens will work fully on other latter-day Canon EOS film SLRs (perhaps it being a case that Sigma has only tested it on an EOS 1V?), or whether it definitely won't work, particularly if it's likely to damage the lens or the camera its fitted to?
 
I don't have any solid information to help you. So take this with a pinch of salt.... but let's see if we can work it out.

Canon introduced their first lens with Image Stabilisation in 1995. So logically at least some of the EOS film cameras which were around in 1995, and all of the EOS film cameras which came out after 1995, should have been able to activate the IS. It's interesting to note that the first IS lens was consumer-grade, not professional - a 75-300mm f/4-5.6 - and to me that implies that IS compatibility would not have been a feature that would have been restricted to professional-grade cameras.

So in addition to the EOS 1V, I'd expect the EOS 3 series (3, 30, 300, 3000 and variants) to all be compatible with IS because they all came out in 1998 or later. The EOS 5 series (5, 50, 500, 5000 and variants) might not all be compatible with IS because they came out prior to 1995, though as noted above at least some of them should be,

I can't think of any reason why Sigma's OS should present itself to the camera any differently from Canon's IS. So if a camera is compatible with IS, it should be compatible with OS.

I can't think of any reason why putting an IS/OS lens on a camera which can't use IS/OS would harm either camera or lens. Canon would have to deal with that issue in 1995, and as noted above the camera shouldn't be able to tell the difference between IS and OS.

Hope this helps, if only to reassure you that your reasoning is sound. If you do get a more definitive answer I'd be interested to know about it.
 
As I understand it all EF lenses will work with EOS Film and Digital cameras, Canon have always been a great pains to point that out. I know some old Sigmas wont work with later cameras as the engineering changed but Canon lenses have always been forward and backward compatible. Is it the camera which activates the IS, guess so as it activates when the shutter is partially activated but I don't know if later bodies have a pin dedicated to activation which earlier bodies didn't have. If you have an "old" body maybe have a look and see how many pins it has compared to a newer body. Maybe give Sigma UK a call?
 
Thanks for the replies. (y) I've tried the lens with an EOS 30 and an EOS 3 and I can here the OS system fire up and run when I half press the shutter button (as it does with IS on Canon lenses). The image in the viewfinder looked like the OS system was doing something, so I've taken a couple of shots (with and without OS on) on an EOS 30 to see if it's actually working... being a film camera it might be a week or so before I finish the film and get it developed to find out though! The camera seemed to work fine on a Canon EF IS lens afterwards too, so fingers crossed on that score!

I thought I'd better 'ask the audience' first though, just in case it was a known issue and liable to beak something. It's my first Sigma EF lens, so it's a learning curve for me. The lens seems very nice from first impressions and I like the Sigma dock system, which immediately and very easily updated the firmware to the latest version. I was a bit disappointed when I read the OS wouldn't work with my film cameras, but hopefully this isn't the case.
 
A little more insight as to why some cameras weren't fully compatiable with IS/OS lenses.......

In the early days battery power was a limiting factor and the EOS bodies had a power sharing system whereby the body used the bulk of the available power to advance the film and then the lens was allocated the power to auto-focus and stop down the aperture for shooting. The advent of IS lenses required that the lenses need more power on a continuous basis when shooting bursts and this was at a level beyond the scope of the original power sharing time sequencing.
Later bodies had more powerful batteries and/or a modified power sharing system so that the lenses were given sufficient power to maintain IS/ whilst the film was transported.

HTH
Bob
 
You really are a great font of knowledge.
 
Canon Bob said:
A little more insight as to why some cameras weren't fully compatiable with IS/OS lenses.......

In the early days battery power was a limiting factor and the EOS bodies had a power sharing system whereby the body used the bulk of the available power to advance the film and then the lens was allocated the power to auto-focus and stop down the aperture for shooting. The advent of IS lenses required that the lenses need more power on a continuous basis when shooting bursts and this was at a level beyond the scope of the original power sharing time sequencing.
Later bodies had more powerful batteries and/or a modified power sharing system so that the lenses were given sufficient power to maintain IS/ whilst the film was transported.

HTH
Bob
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info Bob, much appreciated.

On a related subject, I've noticed a difference between my EOS-3 and the later 30 and 30v cameras when fitting an EF 28-135 IS lens (of similar era). When fitting the lens to the 30 or 30v there's a slight noise (a 'chitter') from the camera or lens (I've not listened closely enough to establish which of the two); However, there's no such noise from my ESO-3.

Historically, found my EOS-3 would get through a battery in around a year of gentle use, or later, when Digital cameras had taken over and I was hardly using the EOS-3, the battery would go flat in around a year regardless as to whether or not the camera was used. Long story short, I read a couple of years ago that there was some sort of issue with the EOS-3 and the EF 28-135 IS lens, in that if you fitted it to the camera body without subsequently turning the camera on and off afterwards, then current drain could/would occur.

I tried the above tip, always turning the camera on and off after refitting the 28-135 lens, and after 18 months I'm still on the same 2CR5 battery. Is this proof of an issue and a 'work around'? I'll let you know as time goes on but I've noticed a similar noise when turning the EOS-3 on and off after fitting the 28-135 lens that I hear when I fit this lens to my EOS 30/v cameras.

Based on this, I'd say the electronics were different between these series cameras; so I'll keep you posted as to whether or not the OS system of the Sigma lens seems to work on one or more of the above mentioned cameras.
 
Last edited:
The 5v supply to the lens from the body's dc-dc converter is always present and not 'extinguished' by the power switch on the body. I theorise that the lens would like a chat after being fitted (it has continuous power) and this requires that the body is switched on (albeit briefly). Once the lens has got its response then it probably goes to sleep and power consumption ceases.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top