# Why no firmware update for Sig 50mm Art?



## YuengLinger (Mar 5, 2015)

One of the key points on even Sigma's site promoting the Art series is how the lenses can be updated with the dock.

The 35mm Art had the firmware updated within six months of release, and I was lucky to get one of these that continues to amaze me with its IQ and AF.

I returned a 50mm Art with erratic AF, believing that a firmware update was soon to come. That was about a year ago...

So, please speculate, why has Sigma not addressed Canon (and even some Nikon) mount AF issues on the 50mm Art?

Could it be that the only people in the world having troubles are those posting here? I know I've read several otherwise great reviews that, as a footnote, mention "slow" AF or "not always accurate" AF.

What's going on???


----------



## drmikeinpdx (Mar 5, 2015)

Excellent question! I'm sure a lot of people would like to know including me.


----------



## Maiaibing (Mar 5, 2015)

YuengLinger said:


> So, please speculate, why has Sigma not addressed Canon (and even some Nikon) mount AF issues on the 50mm Art?
> 
> Could it be that the only people in the world having troubles are those posting here?



Could be. Mine is excellent. No erratic AF. Seems people have very different experiences. Sigma probably take note of the number of returns and requests for recalibration.

Could also be Sigma has no better firmware to offer.


----------



## YuengLinger (Mar 6, 2015)

Without firmware updates, the USB dock seems useless for owners of cameras that have an AFMA function. I have several Canon and Sigma primes that work great with AFMA, so the idea of needing four points of correction seems way too complicated for even ONE camera body.


----------



## Rudeofus (Mar 6, 2015)

IIRC, the Sigma 50A was release more than a year after the 6D, so your camera should be supported out of the box. If your 50A didn't work right, it most likely had a mechanical defect, not some software error that could be mitigated with the USB dock.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Mar 6, 2015)

YuengLinger said:


> Without firmware updates, the USB dock seems useless for owners of cameras that have an AFMA function.



You can use the dock without needing a new firmware update as long as your camera is part of the existing firmware. Second, you don't have to use the four AFMA points if you don't want to. In some cases, one or two may be sufficient.


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 6, 2015)

YuengLinger said:


> So, please speculate, why has Sigma not addressed Canon (and even some Nikon) mount AF issues on the 50mm Art?



Simple: You've already bought it.

Unless issues seriously damage a manufacturer's reputation, they'll do a r&d-cost and sales-increase calculation. Supporting an entire new camera model is certainly "wort it", but fixing issues some people might never encounter?

It's the same with Yongnuo and their dodgy st-e3 unit, just because you're able to update the fw doesn't mean they'll try to fix all issues. Last not least, there's always the possibility the respective behavior is a hardware issue and cannot be fixed with a fw update at all.


----------



## lintoni (Mar 6, 2015)

The last firmware update for the 35,, Art was in September 2013, which predates the arrival of the 50mm Art. The update- 



> Version 1.02 for Canon refines the AF algorithm to reduce the operating noise, and improves the smoothness of AF as it starts up and stops.



Presumably, these improvements in the AF smoothness were incorporated in the firmware of the 50 Art in its release firmware.


----------



## Viggo (Mar 6, 2015)

I wonder how many experience erratic AF on which types of bodies. It seems like a huge amount of the cases are with the 1dx. I have had 4(!) Art lenses displaying the same exact behavior on the 1dx, but most people praising it seems to have a different body.


----------



## YuengLinger (Mar 6, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> YuengLinger said:
> 
> 
> > So, please speculate, why has Sigma not addressed Canon (and even some Nikon) mount AF issues on the 50mm Art?
> ...



I bought it, but returned it for a full refund. Just did not work reliably on my 5DIII.

I was hoping that a fw update would be effected, reviews would say it fixed everything, and I'd buy again. I'm really glad I've gone this route rather than sit on my thumbs waiting for the fw fix after spending more on a silly extra gadget. 

Just seems Sigma put so much hype out about the USB dock that they are missing an opportunity by not releasing a fw update.


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 6, 2015)

YuengLinger said:


> I bought it, but returned it for a full refund. Just did not work reliably on my 5DIII.



Well, in that case make sure Sigma knows about the reason why you returned it...



YuengLinger said:


> Just seems Sigma put so much hype out about the USB dock that they are missing an opportunity by not releasing a fw update.



I doubt it's an easy task to reverse-engineer Canon's protocol and the enhanced af system of their newest lenses. And Canon has tuned the 1dx/5d3 af system to work with *their* lenses, and Sigma cannot change that. Probably they simply cannot do better on the Canon mount but concentrate more on Sonikon for improvements...

... and most likely Canon knows all that, and that's the reason why they don't feel that much pressure to update the 50L or their ancient 50/1.4.


----------



## Viggo (Mar 6, 2015)

I have some of my nicest shots, to me at least, with the 50 Art, and except the AF that lens is my all time favorite. Could I choose any lens on the planet, it would be the 50 Art. So a great shame I just can't get Art lenses that focuses properly .


----------



## davidcarlyon (Mar 7, 2015)

I sold my old Canon 50mm f/1.4 to get the Sigma ART, and don't regret it a bit. I use it with my 5D Mark III.

I find the OOF rate to be better than the Canon f/1.4. Sure, I get a lot of OOF shots with it, but I chalk that up to the challenges of shooting at such a wide aperture - you need to figure that there might be a significant variance in distance just within the selected focus point, particularly at f/1.4. (I shoot a lot of dogs, and it can be difficult to get the focus on the eye rather than the nose, if they're looking right at you, but that's not the lens' fault.)

AI Servo results are mixed, but the same was the case with the Canon.

I did have mostly poor results at first, until I took the time to calibrate it, then fine-tuned it over several sessions of real world tests. (I just used the camera's calibration, I haven't purchased the dock.)

I LOVE this lens. I don't mind the heft at all, because I'm used to lugging the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II all day at rodeos, and it's still quite compact and light compared to that (even if it's twice as big as the Canon 50mm f/1.4). The colors seem richer to me, and the bokeh more pleasing. The sharpness is better, and there's just an overall je ne sais quoi... well, not really je ne sais quoi, because I just listed it all! Color, sharpness, bokeh. And the lens itself ain't bad to look at.


----------



## YuengLinger (Mar 7, 2015)

davidcarlyon said:


> I sold my old Canon 50mm f/1.4 to get the Sigma ART, and don't regret it a bit. I use it with my 5D Mark III.
> 
> I find the OOF rate to be better than the Canon f/1.4. Sure, I get a lot of OOF shots with it, but I chalk that up to the challenges of shooting at such a wide aperture - you need to figure that there might be a significant variance in distance just within the selected focus point, particularly at f/1.4. (I shoot a lot of dogs, and it can be difficult to get the focus on the eye rather than the nose, if they're looking right at you, but that's not the lens' fault.)
> 
> ...



Glad you were lucky and got a good copy.

The erratic AF problems have nothing to do with lack of awareness about shallow DoF. Please don't assume you are lecturing beginners.

Eventually Sigma will adress the issue, or not. I agree with those who have speculated that cracking the 5D III and 1DX AF algorithms is very hard with this lens.


----------



## Bill (Mar 7, 2015)

For myself, I've had no issues with mine. I dialed in the micro adj. on my canon 5D Marklll. Then I took some photos(100) of some very small print about 10 foot away. I thought if there was any problems with the AF it would show up here once I magnified the photo on my Mac. ....bottom line.......It was right on 90% of the time and only very slightly out 10%. I call that dam good! ...No dock needed. 8)


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Mar 7, 2015)

I doubt that there is anything readily fixed by firmware.

Third party manufacturers must try and reverse engineer the Canon autofocus system. Sigma has tried and failed several times over the years, its not a easy thing to do.

A third party lens must send a code to the attached camera identifying it as a Canon lens, and Sigma tries to pick out the best lens to emulate. Each Canon camera model reads the lens code and turns on or off various features, and may even change the AF routine slightly, certainly, the AF point selection is affected.

This puts all third party lenses at a disadvantage when it comes to autofocus. Canon knows the things they can do with autofocus, but may not implement some features on all lenses or all camera bodies. This makes it nearly impossible to do a perfect reverse engineering.

This is where the new DPAF on the 70D and 7D seem to excel. Lenses that are difficult to focus seem to suddenly work well and focus is accurate.

If I were to purchase a Sigma 50 art (I won't), I'd want a body with DPAF and would use it if a lens was being difficult.


----------



## docsmith (Mar 7, 2015)

I suspect it will take Canon or Nikon doing something significant to warrant Sigma reprioritizing their people to punch out a firmware update. 

And my 50A on the 5DIII has been great. It is a little noisy, but great.


----------



## YuengLinger (Mar 7, 2015)

I'm seeing quite a few people who are having no problems, so maybe it really isn't an algorithm problem, but, as has also been suggested in other threads, a quality control issue, some inconsistency of the motor assembly or circuits. 

There are enough complaints about the AF on the 35mm Art for me to know that I'm lucky with mine, as it has been as reliable as my other lenses, and often wide open within a meter of the subject.

In any event, those of us craving a great 50mm with reliable AF have to either gamble or grumble.


----------



## Viggo (Mar 7, 2015)

Are there any 015 -production series of the 50 here? Both of mine were 014 and the same for both 35 Art's.


----------



## lintoni (Mar 7, 2015)

Viggo said:


> Are there any 015 -production series of the 50 here? Both of mine were 014 and the same for both 35 Art's.


I've received mine within the last week from Amazon UK and it's 014.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Mar 7, 2015)

YuengLinger said:


> I'm seeing quite a few people who are having no problems, so maybe it really isn't an algorithm problem, but, as has also been suggested in other threads, a quality control issue, some inconsistency of the motor assembly or circuits.
> 
> There are enough complaints about the AF on the 35mm Art for me to know that I'm lucky with mine, as it has been as reliable as my other lenses, and often wide open within a meter of the subject.
> 
> In any event, those of us craving a great 50mm with reliable AF have to either gamble or grumble.



This is entirely possible. The camera sends a coded signal to a lens to focus at say 27 ft. The lens then is supposed to do that. In order to accomplish this, there is a resistor with a wiper or wipers that move as the lens moves (This is analogous to the volume control in a old radio). There is a table in the rom of the lens electronics that correlates the resistor reading to distance, so the lens moves very quickly to where the correct resistance value is found. The lens calibration dock basically gives corrections to the value.

However, a dirty resistor (like a dirty volume control in a old radio) can cause a lens to hunt. If the quality of the wipers is poor, they may make poor contact with similar results.

Here is the zoom locator brush from a 100-400mm L. The focus indicator is similar, but wraps around the circumference rather than front to back. Its the same principle. If one of those fingers bends, breaks, or gets dirty, strange info is sent back to the camera.


----------



## YuengLinger (Mar 9, 2015)

Thanks, Mt Spokane. This is a great explanation of how AF works and what might go wrong. Much appreciated.


----------

