« on: January 12, 2013, 04:41:53 AM »
I can't comment on the Sigma 35/1.4, but I do have the Sigma 50/1.4. Many reviews slate the AF performance. My first copy was front focusing by a massive margin, but it seemed consistent. My second copy, while slower to AF than the Canon 50/1.4, never misses. I've tried it on four bodies and I've never needed AFMA to get sharp results, even at f1.4.Actually I'll be going to the post office in 5 minutes to send back my new Sigma 35mm 1.4 because it can't lock focus properly (changes between front, back, and no proper focus at all), and AMFA seems to be unable to correct the irregular focus (obviously since the lens can never decide what to do). But I am definitely getting a new copy and not just making a return - the shots I did manage to get were amazing, and the lens holds a lot of promise.
Btw - that was my first Sigma lens in a lineup of Canon and Tokina lenses - none of which have ever had to be returned.
(But judging from the general comments all over the place I got a very rare lemon).
I know this comment is off topic,sorry...but mad spill did you read the review about your lens at The Digital Picture?
While it is not perfect, I’m finding the Sigma 35 to perform close to the Canon 35 L in AF accuracy. A somewhat consistent and quite noticeable front focus problem on both of my 5D Mark III bodies required AFMA to correct. You may want to capture multiple images in situations with especially shallow DOF – which will be closer to MFD (Minimum Focus Distance). Note that the focus-and-recompose technique can begin to fail as shallower DOF is achieved."
Expecting results close to perfection from a Sigma prime these days isn't unreasonable.