85 Art : AF issues false or not ? Many ?

CheshireCat wrote in post #18327467
Since a single offset won't work at any subject distance, focal length, aperture, et cetera, AFMA is not the right solution.

This is exactly why the tamron and sigma dock are so useful tools. you can adjust at Multiple focal lengths and different distance per focal length from MFD to infinity. You just cant seem to comprehend how useful they are because you believe all canon lenses are perfect and dont need a tool. I will bet once canon finally releases one of these docks you are the type of person who will then praise it.

My biggest issue is that Sigma reverse engineers the software that talks to the camera. Until Canon gives them their official algorithms, I personally will not use their glass on a paying job. I know PLENTY of photographers who make good money only shooting Sigma, just my personal preference.

I've mentioned in the past that I've had a job where my Nikkor 85/1.8G had less reliable AF than my 35 Art - both on a D4. Was a pretty frustrating evening of a lot of extra photos to compensate for the good likelihood of random misses. The Art hit accurately first time every time. If Sigma had gotten the 85Art into Oz on time...

05Xrunner wrote in post #18327603
I will bet once canon finally releases one of these docks you are the type of person who will then praise it.

Canon already has a dock, and it is called camera

I don't know why you think I'd like a dock just because it's from Canon. I just fail to understand why one would need AFMA in a well-calibrated body with a closed-loop AF-system, if the lens has a precise motor.

For sure, the only lens that gives me precision problems is my only Sigma lens, the 24 Art (which is great otherwise), but precision is not accuracy and AFMA is meant to fix accuracy.

Again, I am not here to bash Sigma, and I understand they have a hard time to compete with Canon on Canon's own ground. I just have no AF problems at all with my Canon lenses, and when I had problems (happened a couple times), I sent the lens to Canon and it came back perfectly fine.
Also note that I have a 1Dx, and this might help. My 5D2 is now a manual focus only camera, because its AF-system is crap and frequently misfocused with all lenses. Both my cameras have been calibrated to very strict tolerances by Canon.

Currently my 85A is having a higher hit rate than my 200L...

I think I need to send the 200L in for checking or something... that thing should never miss

Talley wrote in post #18329094
I think I need to send the 200L in for checking or something... that thing should never miss

Never misses for me on 1Dx.
Don't know how good the 5D4 is with AF (have to try one).

FEChariot wrote in post #18326593
These comments make no sense. You are trying to make a degrading funny yet it was Canon and Nikon putting the same kind of features in the camera body to have AFMA and fix focus issues long before Sigma or Tamron ever did. How else do you suggest third party manufacturers give you the features here? Maybe Canon will let them write code in their Camera OS?

The thing is, it came with the camera for free And until they do what you proposed, I wouldn't trust sigmas for paying jobs ever again. What good is a sharp lens with nothing is in focus

panicatnabisco wrote in post #18329971
The thing is, it came with the camera for free And until they do what you proposed, I wouldn't trust sigmas for paying jobs ever again. What good is a sharp lens with nothing is in focus

Right AFMA in Canon Camera's is free. That's why it comes with even Rebel series cameras because its 'free' and doesn't cost Canon anything to add it to the body and it doesn't cost consumers anything to get it. Oh wait, what's that you say, Rebels don't get it?

There really are two different things at play here: Accuracy and precision. AFMA and the docks will help with accuracy but neither will help with the precision part. My problem with my Sigma glass and even my 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 from Canon is the precision part. I can get a few shots in a sequence tack sharp and then the next 1 or 2 are completely OOF and then the next is sharp again. I just don't see that with my L glass unless for the most part I was to blame. So yes if I were shooting professionally I would probably not use third part unless there was an option I needed that Canon didn't make.

So dogging on the docks for precision issues is just silly. The fact is that it is a better implementation of Canon's AFMA that helps with accuracy issues and Canon and Nikon need that help as much as the third party glass.

CheshireCat wrote in post #18327690
I just fail to understand why one would need AFMA in a well-calibrated body with a closed-loop AF-system, if the lens has a precise motor.

I'm pretty sure you are failing to understand the understand the AF sensor is not located on the imaging sensor. This is the reason for differing AFMA values needed at different focal lengths. It's also the reason that DPAF which is on the image sensor, does not need AFMA correction.

.

Ilovetheleafs wrote in post #18326698
have you even LOOKED at the Dock? It's very different. It lets you MFA at multiple points of distance... not just one like Canon. Maybe do some research next time before giving advice.

I'm not sure why you mentioned "advice". . I didn't see any advice given in the post that you had replied to (quoted below for easy reference):

CheshireCat wrote in post #18326685
Canon lets Sigma lenses use the same AFMA feature in-body, therefore the dock is just a smart way to make users pay more for a lens that should have worked out of the box but did not.

.

vengence wrote in post #18330164
I'm pretty sure you are failing to understand the understand the AF sensor is not located on the imaging sensor.

Come on, really ?
I'm pretty sure you didn't read any of my posts, as it's been forever I am saying that this is the reason why AFMA was invented.
Do your homeworks and read my posts before replying again.

vengence wrote in post #18330164
I'm pretty sure you are failing to understand the understand the AF sensor is not located on the imaging sensor.

Going back and reading posts #26 and #31, it is rather clear that C-Cat has a solid understanding of this reality. . I wonder why you thought he didn't.?

.

I just ordered the 85Art. I am going to sell the 85L soon. It was a serious tough decision but hopefully I won't regret it.

Bonbridge wrote in post #18341633
I just ordered the 85Art. I am going to sell the 85L soon. It was a serious tough decision but hopefully I won't regret it.

You wont

Best 85 on the market

straight off camera capture...NOTHING DONE BUT IMPORT TO LR