>>3558225Here, lucky enough I have one with some of the corners (almost) in focus. Completely fucked up the exposure here so it's a bit noisy at 1600 ISO, not really sure what I was thinking, probably had it on auto ISO.
Remember, this is shot at f/2.8. Frankly anyone here who thinks they're clever and can make negative claims about the quality of this lens or of MFT in general should just think about what an embarrassment they are to themselves on this board. Some part of me actually believes they are so absurdly ass hurt that a tiny sensor and small lenses than don't cost a fortune routinely spank the hell out of the gear the wished they owned that they convince themselves they really can see unsharpness or meaningful CA or whatever other dumbfuck thing they say.
This is *exceptional* pin sharpness in the corners with essentially no distortion. I shot real estate for 4 years on Nikon and 3 months on Sony. I know what their wide angles look like (generally, dogshit). This is a phenomenal lens and one of the main draws for moving to MFT for my business.
