It is perform well on SL2 on both AFC and AFS.
On the other hand, it focus poorly on sigma’s own FP on AFC, AFS need also careful that if focus box is large. It tend to focus to background on FP.
For people need state of art AFC, it is not for you. So are many awesome cameras out there.
goldb wrote: RustyBug wrote: chez wrote:
As long as it can lock on and track eyes...if not it's a failure for what so many use this lens for.
Isn't that a function of the camera, moreover than the lens?
Granted, the speed of which the glass can be moved may be reliant on the gearing or method for moving the glass.
Spend the money on glass or gears (linear motors, double motor, triple motor) ... you want great from both, more money. So, if one is trying to isolate to AF performance for a price point, did it compromise somewhere else (build, optics, handling) to retain that price point.
Isolating to a single attribute can be an exercise in the "shell game", if one isn't considerate of the whole.
I just don't expect to get top tier of "everything I want" ... in a mid-curve product.
From what I've read / seen, the 45mm isn't just "not great" at AFC. It is positively bad; worse than budget offerings like samyang. Seems likely a function of software/processing rather than the ability to physically move the glass fast enough but I'll leave that to others to determine.
Clearly the 45 has a following here due to the rendering, but poor close-up performance, relatively small aperture, plus bad AFC is a recipe for very limited appeal IMO. I'm glad sigma went with a more well-rounded performer with the 35/65.
Dec 13, 2020 at 12:57 PM
Previous versions of zhangyue's message #15433096 « Pre-order: Sigma 24mm f/3.5, 35mm f/2 and 65mm f/2 DG DN lenses »
