[JJ_SO]

 

 

No one is going to buy a Sigma style "mirrorless" which actually is a DSLR without mirror, really...

 

BC, the reason why no one (but maybe three or four  ^_^ ) buys Sigma mirrorless and Sigma had no other choice than to go this way, is beyond your horizon. For Sigma, cameras are no real money generating part of their business. I recall the SD 1 Merrill once was priced for 7000, then dropped to 2000, because no one was repaying Sigma's R&D, Customers who already bit the 7000 got a repay after (!). When was the last time CaNikon did repay somebody? Nikon i.e. for malfunctioning, yet expensive lenses which even after warranty repair have a blind VR spot...

 

It is NOT a DSLR without mirror, because without mirror a DSLR would eat battery quicker than the Sigma does and the LV of Nikon is a joke only useful for not moving subjects to do stills or moving subjects to do a video. The list of what Sigma cameras can't do is so much longer than the list in what they are as good as no other current system - no one with the need of an allround-body for every occasion can seriously consider their products. It's niche.

 

For a niche making even a halfway complete group of wide-angle until standard lenses is too much for a small company and do the rest with adapters, which will lead eventually to a 1.3 kg lens in front of a comparably tiny body - that's just the new 85 mm. I wonder, if Sigma's SD quattro could focus a 150-600 without drowning the battery for more than 10 shots, not to mention AF-C... As long as Sigma only makes 3 lenses for µ 4/3, they will not step into mirrorless short flange business. And for their own mount, they offer a range from 4.5 ... 800 mm.

 

I don't know if it's smart to make an APS-C at competitive price and sell and APS-H for  around 1000 more - at the moment both are out of discussion for me due to double as slow proprietary software for Mac. I'm not even remotely tempted to bother with their trash they call an app.

 

I know, all this doesn't help you getting off the dead "DSLR without mirror" horse you're riding until the bones splitter, but it's anyway interesting that you drag this as negative sample and are totally ignoring other MILC concepts doing well. The µ 4/3 appears to be your favourite because their you get the hay for the other dead horse, called the equi(!)valence (Equi = equestre... :lol: ) Knowing for sure that no one will ever make the lenses )10/0.7  sure...) which you think have the equivalent DoF, ignoring the 20 MP µ 4/3 sensor's pixel density issues equivalent to some 50 MP FF. Anyway - it's just impossible to downscale a system, trying to get the same quality out of it the bigger one already has and cut costs, weight and size the same amount of the sensor size's difference. Apart from you, everyone knows that microtech is not micro in terms of costs...