12-02-2017, 10:09 AM
Sigma might have addressed the issues (if there are some) with firmware update 1.03 (for the 35/1.4 on Nikon, released Mid 2016). My guess (!) is that a lot of users complaining about focus inaccuracies haven't the dock or the latest firmware on their lens.
Of course, a lens should be doing alright out of the box - but what to do with newer camera models? With different behavior regarding AF? Third party manufacturers have to develop the firmware of their lenses by reverse engineering - that can't be as good as the original firmware of camera manufacturers. Doesn't alter the fact that few genuine lenses are optically better than the Art or Sports series - I'm not so sure about contemporary, I don't have one.
But what good is "being better optically" for, if one sees that only sometimes, when the AF hits the spot? To be fair, I can't tell much about comparisons between genuine and 3rd party lenses. I exchanged 24/1.4, 50/1.4 and 24-85 (that's simply a no good for anything lens for me, distortions are at the unpleasant side of things) with Sigma Art. I'm hesitating to replace the 85/1.4 as the weight difference of the Sigma pendant is massive. But optically it's no question, the Sigma doesn't let the older Nikkor look good.
Anyway, to me the Nikkors were not that much more reliable in focusing wide open at certain distances to stay in a negative opinion about 3rd party glass. And once I was very much convinced, it's best to use genuine lenses.
I wanted a 35/1.4, the Sigma had AF and was half the price of the Nikkor. It got very good reviews so there was only a little risk - in case things would have gone bad, I'd had to replace it, but it's very often in my bag, sometimes with no partner lens.
Of course, a lens should be doing alright out of the box - but what to do with newer camera models? With different behavior regarding AF? Third party manufacturers have to develop the firmware of their lenses by reverse engineering - that can't be as good as the original firmware of camera manufacturers. Doesn't alter the fact that few genuine lenses are optically better than the Art or Sports series - I'm not so sure about contemporary, I don't have one.
But what good is "being better optically" for, if one sees that only sometimes, when the AF hits the spot? To be fair, I can't tell much about comparisons between genuine and 3rd party lenses. I exchanged 24/1.4, 50/1.4 and 24-85 (that's simply a no good for anything lens for me, distortions are at the unpleasant side of things) with Sigma Art. I'm hesitating to replace the 85/1.4 as the weight difference of the Sigma pendant is massive. But optically it's no question, the Sigma doesn't let the older Nikkor look good.
Anyway, to me the Nikkors were not that much more reliable in focusing wide open at certain distances to stay in a negative opinion about 3rd party glass. And once I was very much convinced, it's best to use genuine lenses.
I wanted a 35/1.4, the Sigma had AF and was half the price of the Nikkor. It got very good reviews so there was only a little risk - in case things would have gone bad, I'd had to replace it, but it's very often in my bag, sometimes with no partner lens.