wishful thinking...or do you have a source ?

We really do not know if this is true. Can be even marketing trick if they are too slow to coming to market so in coming months or year people will be waiting.

Please do not be angry... I invented this rumor, and also I do not have any contact with Sigma.

This is just possible to do, and Sigma is doing great job with aspherical and extra low dispersion glass, so they can do it.

The problem of all the focal reducers is the curvature of field, when the spherical lenses projects the image in a curved plane so the focus changes towards the edges. This can be solved with aspherical lenses. And the CA can be solved with extra low dispersion glass which avoids the RGB wavelengths to separate so much. The problem for small companies is to get ed glass and to grind or mold aspherical lenses, so maybe this is a game for the big boys like Sigma.

But who nows which are the interests of the consortiums... because great focal reducers can change lenses and camera sales.

Maybe we can find a word between fantasy and rumor... maybe "suggestion".

Because "rumor" talks about something that are in the way to become real and "fantasy" just talk about dreams.

Maybe the word "suggestion" will be better because it talks about something that is possible to do but not in the way to become real yet.

@apefos - you seem to be confused about exactly how much influence "a suggestion" such as this has. I'd recommend you'd have far better luck writing to sigma...or even better samyang or voigtlander, and proposing your idea. Of course, if you want to make any headway whatsoever, your proposal should be accompanied by an optical design. While your at it, you might even write canon and propose a focal reducer just for the M series to eos lenses, as an upgrade to their electronic adapter. Of if you really want to stretch out, write to celestron and meade, who already are producing focal reducers for their telescopes. Otherwise you could just buy a metabones and shoot some video and be done with it !

Well obviously. It was represented as something it wasn't, with alot of imagined detail to lead us astray. But even if it's a proposed "suggestion" instead of an invented rumor, it should have been accompanied by some technical information proving what he's proposing would actually resolve the issues he's criticizing. I'd imagine that phd at metabones knew his stuff. Then again, apefos could be an optical design genius, but I'd like alittle information to make the leap. I do know about his anamorphic experiments so I'd be inclined to at least give him the benefit of doubt.

And then there's the absurdity of an "invented rumor" , which, a rumor by it's very definition is a piece of information gathered from another source, even a non-trustworthy source....not completely fabricated. That's simply a fable...and I'm being euphemistic.

+1 grin