>>3890341Reviews say that on all new lenses even the ones tested in charts as above.
And because I couldn’t find 1.4, that’s the closer thing, it doesn’t matter if it’s 16mp vs 24mp, it’s a small difference, and that only affects peak resolution, if the center is approaching max at 16 you’ll see some improvement there, but for figures that are a fraction of the sensor res, it’ll be fuck all difference and irrelevant.
And that is also another point, if you’re caring about sharpness, then you should be matching a high res sensor to a sharp lens. You’re wasting your time if you’re concerned with or want the sharpest thing available on APSC. Your subject will be center to mid frame 98% of the time and that’s what you will see sharpness in. The corners only need to be sharp when they’re actually inside the depth of field (ie landscape which will be stopped down) and they need to be sharp enough where they don’t look out of focus and stand out from viewing the image as a whole.
These figures are also at the same focus. I have an FD 28mm 2.8 that’s shit in the corners wide open when testing on a flat surface like a brick wall, but refocus for the corners and they Improve while the center becomes poor.
The most important figures are only center and mid frame, the rest is irrelevant, since of youre shooting landscapes you shouldn’t be stopping down if you care about corner sharpness. Corners will be outside the depth of field in other situations anyway.
And if you care about landscapes, well don’t get a 28mm. At least start with a 24mm equivalent it’ll be much better. 28mm is kinda in that in between point and it’s very eh, just slightly too tight for most landscapes and slightly too wide for other applications.
Consider something else if you’re looking at a prime.
