Def watching out for this one! I will wait a few months though for all the reviews and once the newness factor wears off to see what people really think. But I am highly interested for sure.
Red G8R wrote:
The optional USB dock is also interesting:
Newly developed “USB DOCK” exclusively for new product lines
Based on these new lines, we have developed special software (SIGMA Optimization Pro) that can update the lens firmware and adjust parameters such as focus.
Basically Sigma is releasing the 35/1.4 lens as a half-baked product, leaving the user to fiddle around with firmare updates, etc. I just want a lens that AFs properly out of the box, not a beta product.
EB-1 wrote:
Basically Sigma is releasing the 35/1.4 lens as a half-baked product, leaving the user to fiddle around with firmare updates, etc. I just want a lens that AFs properly out of the box, not a beta product.
EBH
Well that's a negative attitude for an unreleased lens. The Sigma 85 didn't have any problems, why would this one?
EB-1 wrote:
Basically Sigma is releasing the 35/1.4 lens as a half-baked product, leaving the user to fiddle around with firmare updates, etc. I just want a lens that AFs properly out of the box, not a beta product.
EBH
You must be from the future since you know how this lens performs.
EB-1 wrote:
Basically Sigma is releasing the 35/1.4 lens as a half-baked product, leaving the user to fiddle around with firmare updates, etc. I just want a lens that AFs properly out of the box, not a beta product.
EBH
No, it just means you have the ability to fine tune the lens to your body because there are slight manufacturing tolerances.
EB-1 wrote:
Basically Sigma is releasing the 35/1.4 lens as a half-baked product, leaving the user to fiddle around with firmare updates, etc. I just want a lens that AFs properly out of the box, not a beta product.
EBH
I am quite certain that it will focus properly right out of the box? They are offering a means to take care of any fine tuning, They are not twisting your arm to buy anything. But it is available.
The last three (pretty expensive!) Nikkor lenses I've bought personally all needed service focus calibration before I dared have them go live in more demanding situations. The last two Sigmas (only one of which is mine though) didn't. Go figure. I take no "wisdom" away from this, it's way to few samples of a statistic to start making "statements" out of it.
You need to get up to the hundreds of lenses in real use to state something like - brand "X" is worse than brand "Y".
It seems LensRentals had no issue with focus accuracy at the end, but they stated that Sigmas are much less resistant to users thrashing them with pure physical violence. If I'm wrong then maybe Roger can correct me.
In the last batch of fifteen Nikkor AFS 35/1.4's that we went through when three customers in a row complained about focusing issues (one of them was a camera fault in the end though), seven were sent off for service immediately. Straight off from the new-in-box condition. We have two cameras that are calibrated well enough to serve as bench testers for lenses.
Out of the six or seven 14-24/2.8 zooms that I've tried extensively, three were seriously decentered.
I seriously doubt there's any real difference between brands when it comes to focusing accuracy and new-in-box calibration nowadays.
And I would very much appreciate if Nikon would do something similar. They have a lot of lenses going back nowadays. I could fix most of those problems in a few minutes in stead of having to wait three days - if just the equipment was available.
BenV wrote:
"Every 35mm F1.4 DG HSM will be checked using Sigma’s own MTF measuring system, “A1,” as will all new lenses under the Global vision categories. This system uses 46-megapixel Foveon direct image sensors to pick up previously undetectable high-frequency details for quality control inspections."
Except that's a 46-megapixel Foveon X3 APS-C sensor, which means in terms of spatial frequency (which is what they are measuring), it is only equivalent to a 15-megapixel sensor or so. That's still pretty good (the pixel pitch approaches that of the D800), just not as amazing as they probably want everyone to think.
taob wrote:
Except that's a 46-megapixel Foveon X3 APS-C sensor, which means in terms of spatial frequency (which is what they are measuring), it is only equivalent to a 15-megapixel sensor or so. That's still pretty good (the pixel pitch approaches that of the D800), just not as amazing as they probably want everyone to think.
Well that will work fine for me. My D3 is 'only' 12mp
Each of three Nikon 1.4G lenses (24, 35, and 85) that I bought required a trip back to Nikon for AF adjustment. I learned my lesson well. Thanks to Nikon's great QC, now I order four copies to select one to keep. And I hope I don't have to increase that number to more than five in the future.
mshi wrote:
Each of three Nikon 1.4G lenses (24, 35, and 85) that I bought required a trip back to Nikon for AF adjustment. I learned my lesson well. Thanks to Nikon's great QC, now I order four copies to select one to keep. And I hope I don't have to increase that number to more than five in the future.
I've had the opposite experience. I have never sent a lens back to Nikon in 30 yrs. I have purchase 3 Sigma lenses and have returned them all for adjustments. I hope their new lenses have increased QC.
