Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 20 Jun 2016 (Monday) 05:52
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Why did the Sigma 35 Art lost so much credit ? AF not durable ?

1,488 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 22
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Belgium
Jun 20, 2016 05:52 |  #1

I had this one in past to replace the 35L and it was better in all cases.
Anyone has an idea why this Art (with best quality control) loses so much credit ?
Less scores on revieuw sites, sold more... could this be that the AF only works temporary or something and is not durable like the canon (with the dock Sigma released).
Strange why they couldn't make a durable AF then ? I don't understand...

Sony A7 III | Metabones V | Canon 16-35 F4 L | Sigma 85 1.4 Art | 70-200 2.8L II
Lighting : Godox AD600B TTL + Godox V860II-S + X1T-S
Modifiers: 60cm Collapsible Silver Beautydish + grid | Godox 120cm Octagon softbox + grid + Speedlite Flash bender
Tripod: Vanguard Alta 253CT carbon

sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
178 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 110
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Devon, UK
Jun 20, 2016 11:21 |  #2

I'm not quite sure as to what you are asking?

Sony A7iii, Sony A6300
Tamron 28-75mm, Sony 200-600mm
Samyang 18mm
Canon 70-300 f4-5.6 mkii, Sigma MC-11

172 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Jan 2016
Jun 20, 2016 11:35 |  #3

Because too many copies have broken AF. Its also pretty big and heavy.

My copy was great when it actually hit, but it missed MUCH more than it hit. I even spent hours trying to fix via dock, got to the point where everything was 100% perfect during tests, then the minute I take the lens out, its back to missing everything. Very frustrating.

6D, 50mm Art
G7, 14-42mm, 25mm 1.7, 42.5mm 1.7

190 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 12
Joined Apr 2013
Location: New Brunswick, Canada
Jun 20, 2016 11:53 |  #4

My copy works perfect. weight no issue for me.

A photograph is worth a thousand words, but Photoshop can produce a thousand lies. Photo editing allowed. I need all the help I can get.

I have many notable flaws
2,470 posts
Gallery: 92 photos
Likes: 1192
Joined Apr 2014
Location: Austin, Texas
Jun 20, 2016 12:17 |  #5

I've had both the 18-35 Art that I shot on a 7d for about 6 months, and the 50 Art that I shot on the 5d3 for about a year. The 18-35 needed a good bit of adjustment on the dock, but after that it was bang on. The 50 Art AF was nearly perfect right out of the box. And I used both of these for dimly lit moving subjects on a regular basis. Consider the source of the reviews you're looking at. Some are questionable. And opinions based on anecdotal accounts have a way of building up momentum. No doubt there are bad copies that get circulated, but as soon as someone utters the "lottery" jab it plants the seed in your head that only 1 in 1000s are useable, which is ridiculous. If someone says they get one bad copy after another, that signals to me the possibility of user error.

I do believe there is a statistically greater risk of getting a bad third-party lens rather than a bad OEM lens, but not even close to the epidemic scale some would have you believe. If you have any doubts, buy from a seller with a liberal return policy.

As for the weight issue, the 35L I is ~ 20 oz, the 35 Art is ~ 23 oz, and the new 35L II is ~ 26 oz.

Website (external link) | flickr (external link) | instagram (external link) | street portrait project on instagram (external link)

4,598 posts
Gallery: 38 photos
Likes: 1056
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Canada
Post edited over 4 years ago by Alveric.
Jun 20, 2016 13:55 |  #6
bannedPermanent ban

Are these thorough reviews from serious sites/reviewers like (external link) or (external link) or customer reviews on shopping sites?

If the latter, I wouldn't give much weight to them: people are more likely to post 'reviews' when they've had problems, whereas quite a number of customers for whom the gear works fine will never post a review. Thus, such reviews are not a statistically sound quality measuring stick. Personally, I can't remember ever posting a review about my purchases, even though the sellers do send me their E-mails prompting me to do so.

'The success of the second-rate is deplorable in itself; but it is more deplorable in that it very often obscures the genuine masterpiece. If the crowd runs after the false, it must neglect the true.' —Arthur Machen
Why 'The Histogram' Sux (external link)

Senior Member
848 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 389
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Montana
Jun 20, 2016 17:26 |  #7

I've got nothing but great things to say about it. Very sharp. Accurate focus. And seriously...big and heavy??? It's about the smallest lens I own besides the 50 1.8

3,231 posts
Gallery: 136 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 516
Joined Sep 2010
Location: Connecticut
Jun 20, 2016 17:53 |  #8

You really need to examine the source of every review you read. The internet is full of poorly written reviews from people who have either spent 5mins with an item or worse, haven't used the item at all. There are also plenty of reviews out there that are published by people who "do product reviews" and having something to gain from it, whether it be monetary or social media exposure. For example, I watched a review on YouTube for the 50L done by a guy who also reviewed the Playstation 4, an Accu-rite Weather Station, some ugly and very expensive watch, a Toyota Rav4, and a Gilmore lawn sprinkler. The reviews were all about 5min long...5min for a sprinkler and 5 min for an SUV doesn't convey quality to me. Obviously, he can't be an expert on all of those products. I'm not suggesting a review is worthless if it isn't from a so-called expert, but I put more value if the person has some verifiable experience with the item.

Now onto the 35 Art; your use of the word "durable" seems like you're suggesting the AF mechanism becomes worse over time, or works well and then fails. I have not read anything consistent with that idea and I have not experienced that phenomenon myself. What does seem to be an issue is inconsistent AF accuracy at varying distances. In other words, some people are getting accurate AF with a 6-10ft target distance (just using those values as an example) and inaccurate results with targets outside of that range. I've also heard some say that results are inconsistent at any distance, but for the most part, the negative reviews cite the former example.

5D4, 5D3, Sony ZV-1, Panasonic Lumix FX7, Nikon L35AF, Minolta SRT-102
35Art, 50 f1.8 STM, EF 85 f1.8, EF 16-35L f4, EF 100-400L II
My Buyer/Seller Feedback

"my bits and pieces are all hard"
15,540 posts
Gallery: 42 photos
Likes: 614
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
Jun 20, 2016 21:09 |  #9

"I ordered the wrong thing for my other thing. One star."

My personal stuff:​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

2,103 posts
Likes: 107
Joined Mar 2013
Jun 20, 2016 22:30 |  #10

I used the 50 Art, and I returned two copies. Both could not focus consistently using either static targets from a tripod or real world usage with my 70D. I was pretty disappointed as the lens when it nailed focus was unbelievably good. There is no shortage of idiots who don't understand how to use fast lenses and give lousy reviews. However, there is also a lot of evidence that suggests Sigma has had real trouble reverse engineering canon's AF on some cameras. Sigma's tend to either focus very well or very poorly on any particular lens/body combination, which is unfortunate. Because if they focused reliably I'd own pretty much every Art and fast zoom they make.

Cream of the Crop
5,001 posts
Gallery: 689 photos
Likes: 5532
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Sydney
Jun 21, 2016 04:29 |  #11

vengence wrote in post #18045435 (external link)
Sigma's tend to either focus very well or very poorly on any particular lens/body combination, which is unfortunate.

This has been my experience too. I've found my Sigma 85mm f1.4 to be as accurate as all my Canon lenses in any lighting, but I had to go through a few copies of the original 50mm EX to get one that was usable.

Canon EOS R6 - Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 - Canon RF 85mm f/2
Canon EOS M5 - Canon EF-M 32mm f/1.4 - Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 - Canon 50mm f/1.8 STM

Website (external link) / flickr (external link) | Twitter (external link)

172 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Jan 2016
Jun 21, 2016 10:53 as a reply to  @ vengence's post |  #12

I agree with if Sigmas did not have a big number of poor copies, I would probably own every Art series they made. But once you personally have a bad experience, its really bad.

6D, 50mm Art
G7, 14-42mm, 25mm 1.7, 42.5mm 1.7

70 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 49
Joined Feb 2016
Jun 21, 2016 12:50 |  #13

I've found over the course of several months that it varies at the distance to subject, and also between bodies. On my 5D3, it hit up to about 15 feet, then would miss every time. I sold the 5D3 and picked up the 1DX Mark II, and I haven't noticed that same problem. It also seems ok on my 5Ds. I'm not sure of the technical reasons why it would change body to body, other than the body's AF system, but that definitely has been the case.

Ross Thomas
RossThomasPhotography.​com (external link)​ossthomasphotography (external link)
http://thebrotographer​.com (external link)

4,426 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 346
Joined Sep 2011
Jun 21, 2016 12:56 |  #14

Sometimes I think Canon hires moles to go on line and spread Sigma AF hate and discontent to protect Canon lens sales...

Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

1,265 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 421
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Netherlands
Jun 21, 2016 13:23 |  #15

I probably have more out of focus shots with my 70-200LII than my 35/1.4 art.

35 became my favorite lens I think.

5DII + 6D | 16-35/4.0L IS | Σ35/1.4A | 40/2.8 | Σ85/1.4A | 70-200/2.8L IS II
iMac Retina 5k | i7 | 24Gb RAM | 512GB Flash | 4GB M295X

Website (external link) | flickr (external link) | Instagram (external link)

sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

11,055 views & 13 likes for this thread
Why did the Sigma 35 Art lost so much credit ? AF not durable ?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©

Latest registered member is sandywalkler
918 guests, 273 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.