[JJ_SO]

Yes, it offers an insane max. aperture at this focal length but at least technically you won't find greatness at f/1.8. the corners are soft. Whether this matters at this aperture is a different question. Astrophotographers may have hoped for more (at least at 50mp) whereas it's a not an issue in shallow depth-of-field scenarios really.

 

Did you do a resolution test at  âˆž ? Otherwise I just ask how do you rate the lens for astrophotography? And a very sharp center very wide open is just not great enough? I don't want to talk away the soft borders, but I'd like to discuss ultra wide shots, available lights and the importance of sharp corners  ^_^

The stair house shot could not have benefitted of better corners - due to DoF the corners already are soft.

Emphasiszing something in the corners and a lot of blurred background? Don't know, so far I didn't feel my composition sucks because of weak corners.

 

However, I don't agree with the weak corners at âˆž and I know, you guys usually test at 25-50 × f which in that case would be 50 × 14mm = 700 mm distance between test chart and sensor. That's a bit bold to conclude from this distance to it's behaviour at distances suitable for astro.

 



 

Here's the full res.

 

Typically, I use the lens mostly for this kind of subjects

 



 

or that one

 



 

Soft corners? I don't care much, I'm not using this lens for reproductions of flat objects wide open 

 

Of course I understand you're using the standards of PZ or OL for your tests and for all lenses, but there's were trouble starts: Not all lenses are needed/bought for the same purposes. Sharp corners are very interesting for a couple of subjects - just not for all and if it comes to wide angle lenses tested not even close to infinity, I scratch my head about the testing method.

 

What if the field curvatures radius approaches ∞ at âˆž? You haven't tested that, otherwise you would have told us.

 

And the Laowa 15/2 is only made for Sony E mount...