 |
  |
 |
Thanks useful information: 51
All my other lenses are "L" and all have needed micro adjustment on the camera body. The sigma hub lets me set the lens to its optimum settings for any camera.Originally Posted by Tannin
- - - Updated - - -
All my other lenses are "L" and all have needed micro adjustment on the camera body. The sigma hub lets me set the lens to its optimum settings for any camera.
i've had to send my 100L macro and 70-200 2.8 II down to Canon for calibration before, and they are not even that fast lenses
sigma, tamron, tokina etc third party companies have to reverse engineer canon's af system, so you can't expect them to be completely perfect, also there is the problem with copy to copy variance between body and lenses, if you are unlucky and the body and lens falls out of each other's tolerance you will have to calibrate or micro-adjust, especially when you play with fast lenses like the f1.4 and 1.2's since dof is so small and unforgiving, this applies to everyone, not just sigma, i mean there is a reason canon includes micro adjust function in their bodies, but now sigma gives us this dock so we can fine tune the lens and not just a simple AFMA without having to send it into sigma meaning no down time, i don't see how that is a bad thing
back on topic, went out dinner today and had chance to compare my new sigma to my friend's old sigma 50 1.4, granted it's not apple to apple comparison since he shoots nikon d800 and i shoot canon 5d3 but fwiw going off the lcd screen we both agree that while the old sigma holds its own when it comes to bokeh/oof rendering the new sigma really takes it to a new level, while not night and day difference it's not hard to see the new sigma has smoother bokeh, and we both agree with the better sharpness, smoother bokeh and better contrast the new sigma easily gave a more 3d look that the old sigma can't replicate (again this is off our respective lcd screens though so feel free to take this with a grain of salt)
was shooting in low light venue (talking about 1/80 iso6400 f1.4 lighting) and i was pleasantly surprised to find the sigma hit pretty much every shot
i am becoming more and more in love with this new lens i have to admit
Threadstarter
Obviously you "don't get" it, Tony.Surely you would be aware that most manufacturers work to a given tolerance for AF accuracy, among other things, in their production processes. I'm surprised you've been lucky enough not to have needed adjustments to either lens or camera body, as you say, but good luck sometimes isn't enough. Ever heard of someone getting a so-called "bad copy" of a lens? All that means is the effect of manufacturing tolerance on any lens-body combination is cumulative. That's why there's an AF Fine Tune option in most decent cameras these days, including Canon. What's more, the lens will "wear in" over time and move off the factory settings for AF. Sigma have recognised that most users don't want to be without their equipment while it's sent to the factory/supplier for adjustment back to standard. Bravo Sigma for taking this approach.
Here's a small example of why this is necessary. If you have a body that's, say, +15 points (still within manufacturing tolerances, btw) and a lens that's +10 points (also still within manufacturer's tolerances), together the lens/body combo would be out by +25! No way to adjust for that in the body using AF Fine Tune. Only alternative is to send both to the experts for adjustment on the bench ... until now. You can use the Sigma dock system to compensate for the lens on that body, or just make your own adjustments to a much finer tolerance than the manufacturer can do in normal production processes.
This sounds like you have a degree of disrespect for Sigma, suggesting it "Seems like a massive admission of incompetence..." Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but the comparative tests on these new lenses from Sigma are showing they deserve more respect than that. I personally like that if I now buy a new Sigma lens, and it needs adjusting for my camera body, I won't need to do without either camera or lens to achieve that. Bravo Sigma!
Last edited by WhoDo; 18-05-2014 at 9:36am.
Waz
Be who you are and say what you mean, because those who matter don't mind don't matter and those who mind don't matter - Dr. Seuss...
D700 x 2 | Nikkor AF 50 f/1.8D | Nikkor AF 85 f/1.8D | Optex OPM2930 tripod/monopod | Enthusiasm ...
firmware!
As manufacturers introduce newer cameras in the future, and some have been known to introduce some incompatibilities with 3rd party gear .. the owner now has a way to upload any fixes via firmware fixes themselves rather than going through the hassle of getting the gear back to the service centre for what is in effect a very simple fix.
It wasn't all that long ago that Nikon introduced a firmware update for a recent camera which stuffed compatibility with some Sigma lenses. Up to this new firmware the lenses worked fine, but the firmware update killed that. Sigma has a firmware update service to fix the incompatibility issues which is free, but not all their lenses can be updated via firmware too.
Those lenses that are compatible with the USB dock didn't require a trip back to the service centre, the firmware was downloaded locally and uploaded to the lens by the user in the comfort of their own home.
I vaguely remember a problem with some Sigma lenses relating to a Canon camera body too, many years back too.
The focus tweaking features are a bonus I guess!
Also note that the Sigma software also allows for tweaking the speed of focusing(not just the accuracy) for certain lenses to suit a particular purpose or style of useage.
I'll actually go further and say that I think the software could be even better, that is it's currently limited in what it should be able to do.
Many(if not all) fast lenses suffer from focus shift as you stop the lens down. This could easily be accounted for by software like this, where you may have an option to set focus distance tweaks on the basis of aperture value set.
So hopefully Sigma has the ability to further improve the software used with the dock.
Overall tho, the point is that the USB dock is an optional accessory that the user has the option of buying or not. It's not compulsory for the lens to work properly.
It doesn't come with the lens, so it's not forced upon you in any way, but if you're having issues a specific lens, this is simply a way to account for it without the need to go through the problem of sending a lens back to have it tweaked or re set, or whatever.
I actually think that manufacturers of camera bodies should allow the ability to tune lens parameters from within the camera body itself.
I'd rather see this focus tuning/tweaking thing all done in camera, in real time whilst the lens is attached to the camera and via a computer of some sort(tablet/laptop/phone/whatever).
I would be nicer to have the ability to tune focus for a certain lens based on specific AF points(or areas) on the sensor, which could take into account various optical issues for lenses or troublesome af points in cameras.(note that there are some mirrorless cameras that allow this degree of fine tuning too! .. Olympus OMD-M1 comes to mind for some reason)
AF fine tune is all well and good up to a point, but it is severely limited in what it can do.
Nikon D800E, D300, D70s
{Nikon}; -> 50/1.2 : 500/8 : 105/2.8VR Micro : 180/2.8 ais : 105mm f/1.8 ais : 24mm/2 ais
{Sigma}; ->10-20/4-5.6 : 50/1.4 : 12-24/4.5-5.6II : 150-600mm|S
{Tamron}; -> 17-50/2.8 : 28-75/2.8 : 70-200/2.8 : 300/2.8 SP MF : 24-70/2.8VC
{Yongnuo}; -> YN35/2N : YN50/1.8N
a few naysayers were commenting on how this is a cop out by Sigma instead of dealing with the lenses themselves they are asking the consumers to do it which I can understand where they are coming from but I tend to look at it that I have the tools at my disposal to fine the lens myself without having down time (not to mention as Arthur said no one is forcing you to buy the dock you can send it to sigma) and more importantly if the money saved by sigma from not having to deal with as much warranty returns goes into more R&D and lower prices on lenses to me that's a win in my books
Last edited by basketballfreak6; 18-05-2014 at 11:43am.
Got Sigma's 35 1.4, if thats anything to go by super keen to pick up their new 50! And can't wait for the 24Sigma really has pulled up their socks.
I'd rather just buy a lens that works properly in the first place, as every single lens I have ever bought from Canon and Tokina has. Sigma has always been notorious for spotty quality control, why don't they just improve that? Still strikes me as a huge cop-out. Still, it's better than doing nothing about the problem, I suppose.
- - - Updated - - -
Now there is an answer that is making a lot more sense!
Last edited by Tannin; 18-05-2014 at 5:09pm.
Threadstarter
You still don't get it, Tony! The lens can be a perfectly working example and STILL need adjustment to match the body on which it is used. Very few manufacturers, especially Canon, spend sufficient time in production on each copy to make them accurately focus on the bench, let alone on every body ever produced for that mount. They work within a set of tolerance guidelines. Near enough is good enough, including Canon.
If you'd been following the development of Sigma's new serious lenses, ART and SPORT series for example, you'd see that the dock and the lenses that it accepts are part of a VAST improvement in quality control - even rivalling the OTUS at 4x the price. Pity Canon, Nikon and Tokina apparently aren't as committed to continuous improvement as Sigma. If you still don't get it after that explanation, I guess you're not really trying, eh?
think about it for a second, when was the last time you saw another 3rd party manufacturer produce auto focusing f/1.4 lenses, companies like Tamron and Tokina sure doesn't, i guarantee you when they do all the complaints about "x manufacturer lenses can't focus/have bad quality control" will start popping up for them too
again super fast lenses with f/1.2-4 apertures have such small dof there is very little tolerance for error and variation so it's not uncommon for adjustment/calibration to be required, also again if canon lenses are so perfect and there are never issues why do they include AFMA function in their bodies in the first place? not to mention it's always the minority that has had issues that are often the loudest whereas people that have no problems never says anything which just exaggerates how bad the issue really is
anyway i am done with this topic, i am just going to go enjoy shooting with what many (and myself included) considers the best auto focusing 50mm lens money can buy right now
- - - Updated - - -
mate i have the sigma 35 as well and i am telling you the bokeh on this 50 is something elseGot Sigma's 35 1.4, if thats anything to go by super keen to pick up their new 50! And can't wait for the 24
Last edited by basketballfreak6; 18-05-2014 at 7:48pm.
For what its worth...the 35 needed no adjustment at all on the hub. Spot on straight out of the box. The 50 needed 0 at 400mm,-10 at 600 & 1500mm. Still here,no freight,no loss of use.
Pure luck!
Some of us geddit, others don't.
Many stories abound of 1st party gear not cooperating perfectly all of the time.
it happens and is a fact of life.
On the whole, I've been rather lucky myself too. I'm a bit paranoid of not getting a lens that works perfectly too tho.
If I get a 3rd party lens, I prefer to get it from a local real shop .. gives me somewhere real to annoy if this 3rd party gear gives me grief.
Strangely tho, of the two lenses that did give me grief, one I got S/H(Tammy 28-75/2.8) and the other I got new from an online source(Nikon 80-200/2.8D).
Bot these lenses backfocused at their longer focal length settings .. but worked perfectly at a focal length below that.
AF fine tune in this instance was useless .. fix the long end, at the expense of all the other available focal lengths.
The 28-75 was less annoying as the DOF was deep enough(even at f/2.8) at 75mm that it wasn't so obvious unless I cropped to 100% pixel view.
The NIKON!! 80-200 was a different matter tho. it was obvious in almost any image captured at 200mm that focus was missed in most situations.
When focus was captured correctly the lens worked well(and I wouldn't have upgraded to the Tamron 70-200/2.8 all those years ago).
If it weren't for the backfocusing of the 80-200, I'd still have it(I reckon).
From about '08-'09, I'd always thought how handy it would be to have access to the software that manufacturers have that will allow focus fine tuning at various points .. rather than the (almost gimmicky) AF fine tune.
Tony, just because you've had luck in not having lenses that have tolerance variations doesn't mean the issue doesn't exist.
If you have ever followed LensRental's blog, you will have read that the genuine manufacturer's aren't immune to this issue either.
One thing I like about Roger Cicala's blog, is the point that it seems to be based on a wide variety of experiences .. not just a single instance of it.
(plus that point that I like his sense of humour in the way he writes too).
He has written about their need to adjust lenses to work better, and how they have invested 100's of thousands of dollars in new testing equipment to make it a simpler and quicker task for themselves, as the manufacturer's service centres turnaround times aren't suitable for a rental company's requirements(of having their stock, in stock to get to their customers).
The problems with the non Sigma gear is that they don't have access to the software to adjust the lenses in the same manner, and can only do lens adjustments in a global manner.
So if a lens comes back to them and has focus anomalies in the same way that Roger's own Sigma 35/1.4 did, they really can't do anything about it other than back to the manufacturer's service facility to sort it out.
There are many entries in the LR blog, but most of the entries that relate to AF performance are located deep in the older archives.
Can make for interesting reading for those that are interested.
The main point of this info being that no matter what the individual believes, LensRental's testing many samples of a specific product will have a greater level of accuracy with respect to the amount of variance/tolerances than will one individuals singular experiences with their own gear.
Personally, I don't really care is one manufacturer is better at QA than another. Just give me the tools to fix any issues that I have in my own time.
I doubt that Nikon would ever do this willingly as a service/feature to their customers(except under extreme pressure from loss of market presence!).
When I inquired about having my 80-200/2.8 adjusted, even tho getting it into a nearby suburb was easy as could be, the problem arose of them needing my lens and camera(!!!!) for up to two weeks, plus the minimum service fee, even if nothing could be done about it .. really didn't appeal to me. The comes the fright of the cost of what is in effect a simple fix.
TBH, this Sigma Dock + software is what attracts me more towards Sigma as an alternative product to genuine gear!
A hope I also have, is that one day Sigma will offer a retro fit service that will allow their recent older lenses to be compatible with the USB dock too.
I can't imagine that this would be difficult either, as it's simply a matter of fitting compatible electronics in the lenses where possible.
I (personally) can't see the value of Sigma offering a lens mount conversion service .. and I can't see them making a lot of money on such a venture. But I have 3 Sigma lenses, and if they offered a service to make all three lenses compatible with the Dock and software, I'd have them all converted immediately!
Not that they NEED it .. I just want it
Actually, one thing I'd do to my current(old model) 50/1.4, would be to slow down the focus speed a touch .. it's just a bit jittery for my taste in AF-C mode.
ps. Tony! .. when have you ever know me to .. errr ... 'make sense'?
I thinks it's also important to note that comparing AF issues in the budget end of the Sigma Spectrum is complete different to that in the premium end. I guarantee the quality control for Nikon in the kit lens area is far different to the high end ED glass, much the same as Canon in the L glass.
So yes, I'd expect more quality issues on a $1000 sigma compared to a $2000 nikon but what we are talking about is a slightly different side of the market. The build quality of this eclipses the Nikon 50mm and at twice the price, I'm guessing the quality control does as well.
Last edited by MissionMan; 19-05-2014 at 12:56pm.
there is rumour going around they plan to add compatibility to some of their newer non-global vision lenses for the dock so...here is hoping :P
and i agree about reading Roger Cicala's blog, he is awesome
I hate rumours!(wishing most would be announcements by manufacturers than simply rumours!
And Roger is great value .. more so than awesome(I reckon), he puts a lighthearted spin on most things mundane about gear.
Makes his writing more interesting than most reviewers seem to manage
Even tho in many instances he clearly states his tests aren't reviews, they all seem to have a less boring attribute about them.
His access to multiple samples of a particular piece(where possible) also has strong relevance to the topic he writes about too.
i know what you mean about rumours, it's like the manufacturer just likes to troll us for the sake trollingI hate rumours!(wishing most would be announcements by manufacturers than simply rumours!
And Roger is great value .. more so than awesome(I reckon), he puts a lighthearted spin on most things mundane about gear.
Makes his writing more interesting than most reviewers seem to manage
Even tho in many instances he clearly states his tests aren't reviews, they all seem to have a less boring attribute about them.
His access to multiple samples of a particular piece(where possible) also has strong relevance to the topic he writes about too.
and yea Roger's pieces are great, you actually want to read the articles instead of just scrolling to the end of the page just to see if it gets a "recommended"
and yea i love the fact that he has so many copies that he tests on that it would actually give us more of a real world (as close to anyway) "review"
So I've been out messing with the 50A after setting some adjustments on the weekend & so I could check some parameters used Cannon DPP for viewing. What came up was a +8 AF micro adjust from the camera body. This is the setting from I had on the old Sigma 50 so the camera (5DII) hasn't recognised the new lens only the 50mm focal length. Back to square one....
you using the dock to make adjustments?
i rang cr kennedy today about my concerns that one of my settings is +20 and they agreed that it's worth looking at as that's a huge variance...won't send it in until after i am back from Melbourne in June tho, Jacob from cr kennedy was really helpful on the phone
i had a chuckle when he said i am one of the very few owners of this lens in australia lol
anyway another sample shot
David by basketballfreak6, on Flickr
Last edited by basketballfreak6; 20-05-2014 at 6:36pm.
Yep...went through all that & was pleased with the outcome BUT the camera just sees another 50 lens & applies the setting of +8. I am surprised the body doesn't register another electronic signature. So zero the body & start again....hey it isn't that hard. Nice shot
Last edited by Fruengalli; 20-05-2014 at 6:55pm.
that's a bit annoying
worth the effort though, at least it focuses a lot more consistently than the old sigma 50 that i had lol
one thing i am really appreciating about the ART is the lack of distortion, feel comfortable taking a tightly cropped shot because distortion is practically nonexistent
really can't praise the lens enough
I remember reading an article on how Sigma lenses are reported to Canon cameras.
it goes along some strange line that (as an example, but just a wild guesstimate!) a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 may be reported to the Canon body as a Canon 28-70mm f/2.8 or something weird like that.
Looking that the table that LensRental had posted was a bit of a laugh actually.
The article had something to do with some of the in camera auto processing(CA, vignetting and stuff like that) ability and how it reacted badly with some Sigma lenses.
Again, this is where the ability to update firmware could come in handy if an issue ever cropped up.
I'm not sure that Nikon or Pentax cameras are afflicted with the same lens reporting issues as were the Canons. Don't know tho .. I didn't really remember reading anything about them.
So, your Sigma 50/1.4(old) and Sigma 50/1.4 Art probably aren't being reported to the camera as Sigma 50mm so and so, and so and so .. ie. as individual lenses.
They're most likely being reported as Canon XXmm f/x.x lenses.
ps. I vaguely remember the Canon 85/1.2 seemed to be a popular lens for Sigma to mimick.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
