good news then. Just thinking: should you, perhaps, consider conducting your reviews with at least couple of copies of the lens on hand in future? that would certainly help in drawing more accurate conclusions and avoid false positives? I do not for a second question creadibilty of your reviews! It is that for the last 2 months I keep hearing noise on internet that Sigma 135 Art glass has an akward AWB skew problem and is not as sharp as people think it is (with reference to your review page).
Now that your reviews are extremely popular and became an authoritative source of information for the great many photo enthusiasts globaly, perhaps, it is a good time now to start offering reviews based on multiple copies? I am sure that your vendors will accomodate.
TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
SecureGSM said:
Dustin,
Thank you for the exellent follow up to the initial review. I am glad that you liked the second copy of the lens better than the first one.
I noticed that the "skewed AWB" issue was likely resolved as well? at least looking at OOC JPGs in the video, I was unable to detect any meaningful difference in the colour temperatures between the Milvus and Sigma lens. Unless you have used custom WB settings for each lens individually.
That's right. There was something wonky in that first copy that played havoc with the metering on my 5D Mark IV. I found saturation levels more on parity, too, though the Zeiss still exhibits superior color performance.