Still in my lane. But that thread reflection is odd. I use the lens hood almost 100% of the time anyway, even indoors. I’ve learned the hood protects these expensive front elements from a lot more than just reflections.
AlphaPhotography wrote:
How do we let Sony know to switch to matte before they ship our lenses next month? 🤔
I just emailed Sony about it..we shall see what they say but any changes would be who knows for which batch of lenses if they decide to fix this.
Very odd oversight I would say but luckily I use hoods all the time
GMPhotography wrote:
I’m curious anyone have a 85 to look at handy
Looking at the GM I can see a similar "issue" but no Sun for me to test it now. The glass is a lot more recessed than the Sigma where the glass is very close to the front. So the GM has a LOT more thread surface to reflect.
I work in the automotive industry and our prototype plastic parts always have a different surface than the serial parts. Could this be the case here as well? I would be shocked by a mistake like that.
One more possible advantage of Sigma 135 would be that it can be used with TCs when you cut out baffle that is inside. I have tested my F-mount Sigma 135 on manual Novoflex adapter with both Sony TCs: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1582388/0#14748398
But ultimately I decided against modifying my E-mount Sigma when I tested flare difference between F-mount on adapter vs E-mount. Flare was much worse on F-mount when I shined light into lens from corner position. I am not sure if lack of baffle or adapter itself has caused that. Add to that that I would want fast AF at 189/2.5 or 270/3.6. I am not even sure if it would AF.
Justin Stone wrote:
Maybe as a guide for assembly, like a screw...
"What are the ribs inside the barrel top even for?"
Googling. Nothing so far. A guide for assembly as you wrote or perhaps these multiple "threads/screws" are used to stop reflections that otherwise might come from a flat service, or maybe just aesthetics.
?