>>3996237That's not true at all, lens design basically comes down to picking 2 of the following 3, low vignette, sharp across the frame, compact.
Every camera lens has to pick compact, the size difference we're talking isn't like an extra 20%, but more like 500%.
In the film era this was a very easy choice, fixing vignette was almost impossible and 35mm film didn't have the resolution to worry about falloff towards the edges. In digital vignette is fixed in one click and we have more than enough resolution from sensors to show off resolution falloff.
The fact most modern lenses have a lot of vignette compared to older lenses is because that's what modern lens design calls for. It makes no sense to compromise parts of the image that can't be fixed for better vignette or even barrel\pincushion distortion.
However for wide angle lenses, no retrofocal wins every time, in every respect.
Look at the canon 24mm f1.4 L ii, at the time in 2008 it was a very highly regarded lens. And compare it to the sony 24mm f1.4.
Sony has less than 2 stops of vignette wide open, canon has more than 4.
Canon is borderline unusably soft wide open, especially on the edges, the Sony is tack sharp at every aperture. Sony has 50-100% greater resolution at the edges depending on mtf.
The canon is 680g, the Sony 450g.
Canon 83x95mm
Sony 75x92mm
Canon price at launch with inflation - $2200
Sony RRP today - $1400
DSLR users are actually idiots.
