The full text of the review indicates a 40% AF miss rate in formal testing, and includes statements like, "...the longer I focus tested this lens, the less sure I was about its focus accuracy," and, "Sometimes, most images are properly focused and when my shots counted, this lens delivered. But sometimes, more images are out of focus than I am comfortable with." To me, that does not equate to, "...occasional AF inconsistency." Which of those statements made it into the concluding paragraph of the review, which is the part most likely to be picked up and quoted, as it was in this post by CRguy?
The observations in the body of the review seem to have been toned down a lot in the summary.
AF inconsistency is a biggie. I will hope that it is correctable via firmware.
By the way, one advantage of reviewing pre-production or early production samples is that Sigma gets the opportunity to fix things before shipping out mass orders to the customers. Probably the only advantage IMO.
Let's hope for the best and keep fingers crossed.