I never said that every copy of Sigma 85 Art is good. that is rediculos claim. I claim that good copy, as per manufacturer's specification, Sigma 85 Art AF lens AF performance when centre AF point used, is consistent.
my copy is average sigma 85 1.4 Art, same as Dustin's copy or many other reputable reviewers that conducted their solid AF performance test. not someone that pointed the lens at the bush and claims AF issues.
Why would not you suggest that that reviewer needs to educate himself and condiuct tests in controlled environment? How do you know about my personal level of manufacturing experience, engineering , educational level, or even what I do in life, my personal experiences, methodologies? ritoric question.. yet you suggested I should educate myself on copy to copy variation subject by googling the net... I spent 4 hours of my life to provide community with well documented and structured information that will be, no doubt, usefull for anyone who is evaluating possibility to puchase Sigma 85 Art lens. I am here to learn , share knowledge with like minded individuals and learn about best industry experience of photogs and Canon enthusiasts that know (veryfiably) what they are talking about. I will take beating and panishment any day from Neuro or Jrista and many others I respect for their service to community, there are hundreds if not thousands cases where they helped forum members. I am one of those people that learned a trick or two from this place.
And what do I learn from you? that Canon L glass Phase Detection AF consistency is 99.5% ( 1 ot 200 out of focus) or that you took 135 shots at 15 feet distance to subject at F7.1 on crop camera and all of them were in perfect focus.. and that at f7.1... that dof of you lens (85mm?) is still razor thin at 15 feet to subject on crop camera.. . Well, that wasn't usefull.
Anyway, I am done with this BS. Go about your business, photography, whatever you do in your life and leave me along.
ExodistPhotography said:
Alex_M said:
sorry, that was in relation to the comment that my lens is well focusing but there are bunch of others bad focusing copies due to copy to copy variation. That person even went as far as telling me that I should educate my self (search on Google, apparently) on what copy to copy variation is. I replied that such a study was already conducted by a reputable company.. so my comment was away from AF consistency context and about Sigma 85 Art copy to copy variation only.
...................
"That Person" :-/
The point I was trying to make to you is that just becuase if your copy is good. That not every copy would be as good or as bad. Most people who have never working in manufacturing have no clue what copy variation is. So please understand I am not or was not trying to be rude or offensive. But I am also not going to sugar coat anything to make anyone feel better either. Cheers, Joe..