>>3304513>>3304514>>3304527You aren't getting it. I would guess it's because you have no real experience with photography and only buy gear to take pictures of test charts, or perhaps all you do is masturbate over OTHER PEOPLE'S test charts, as you're doing right now.
Corner softness at the widest aperture means exactly jack shit to 99% of photos. Pic related was taken with the EF 17-40mm f/4L, which is infamous for having "corners so soft, the lens is NOT usable; no, seriously, DON'T use this lens! It's an underperformer," to use language like you have used in this thread. Yet somehow I was able to easily produce many photos with this "horrible" lens that I quite like. What a strange aberration of reality, huh? It's almost like photos that require a flat plane of focus don't tend to overlap with photos that require a shallow depth of field. Weird!!!! I wish someone who knew more about photography than me could explain this to me in simple language that I might have some hope of understanding.
