07-01-2014, 01:18 AM
That's true, but "pre GV" sigma was much much worse than that (a 10-20 varied 28% (!!!) across the five copies my uni has for the school paper). Of course those have seen use, but the variation among them is ridiculous.
I feel that the 35L's age works for and against it. Its construction tech/engineering is 'outdated' which works against it for holding elements in alignment, but its age works for it in that workers have built a gazillion of them, if the 35A is done on canon's human lines. In ~2011 they moved 70% of their MFG back to Japan in a new robotic factory due to changes in yen value. I know they have that plant, but nothing about what it does.
One of the big goals of the 16-35/4L IS was improving repeatability/equalness across produced copies. Hopefully it was met. It's a lens I'm keenly interested in, and of all the full-res images I've found from various copies (maybe a dozen) only one was a dud, though the the decentering was pretty bad. Left side was pretty godawful. I'm sure I can find a link to that specific sample, if you want.
I feel that the 35L's age works for and against it. Its construction tech/engineering is 'outdated' which works against it for holding elements in alignment, but its age works for it in that workers have built a gazillion of them, if the 35A is done on canon's human lines. In ~2011 they moved 70% of their MFG back to Japan in a new robotic factory due to changes in yen value. I know they have that plant, but nothing about what it does.
One of the big goals of the 16-35/4L IS was improving repeatability/equalness across produced copies. Hopefully it was met. It's a lens I'm keenly interested in, and of all the full-res images I've found from various copies (maybe a dozen) only one was a dud, though the the decentering was pretty bad. Left side was pretty godawful. I'm sure I can find a link to that specific sample, if you want.