>>4060500>i don't understand the difference between a company making a rectifiable mistake to a companys whole product line being blocked out by the product it's designed foryou thicko.
>but the lens worked fine on other mountsHuh, that's odd, i googled "sigma 135 art sony autofocus issue" and the only relevant link was someone complaining about the autofocus with that lens on his nikon. couldn't even find anyone having issues with sony, except for someone that was using the canon version on an adapter and was upset that he lost some functionality with continual autofocus with his a7ii, which is exactly as expected.
>EvErYoNe KnEw SiGmA CoUlD ReChIp ThEm FoR FrEeYet the only example you could come up with is someone that had to drive himself to their official repair centre? lmao.
>learn to read, I never said there weren't any factory seconds>"There are no "factory seconds""Which one is it buddy.
>No, I cannot show any photos i took with moireOh what a surprise.
>A7iii is still for saleAnd that's great for people that do want an AA filter.
>Why do some manufacturers include AA filtersNikon do it so they can upsell people to their models without an AA filter, like the d860 and Z9
Canon are forced into it due to DP AF causing bigger issues with moire
Panasonic don't use one on the S1R, their flagship camera, again as an upsale tool.
Why would manufacturers remove the AA filter from their best cameras unless moire wasn't really an issue?
>>4060508That's changed in the last few years, they probably get away with it on 20mp and above as diffraction will do the job of an aa filter for it.
>>4060529Look, Sony gets more moire on this test image designed to trigger moire on a bayer CFA, and fuji doesn't, xtrans isn't susceptible to moire
wrong, pic related is from an x100t, what are those rainbow stripes if not moire?
