[mst]

But we also cannot tell about a lens (some even without optical rating, others with rating - alone that is not very useful if you look at some Canon 5D "R" tests) which performs well at 21 MP how it will behave at around 50 MP. So, to me the MTF numbers are only telling something within a system, but fail as an absolute scale.

And that's the issue: there is no absolute scale. Lenses perform differently on different sensors. You can see it in the reviews where you can caompare 50MP and 21 MP results. You will also see it in the upcoming reviews of the Nikkor AF-S 24/1.8: it will have a fairly high rating on the D3x, but a lower one on the D7200. Knowing an "absolute" scale does not tell you anything about how a lens performs on a particular camera.

We do system tests, by design, and by choice. And we're not trying to hide it.

Telling me? Nothing of relevance. To my own decisions your ratings do not matter. Your findings and charts do matter, but the rest... And what also does matter - and I repeat myself because you two testers don't care much about USB docks and consequently the improvements these docks can give the lens in cooperation with a certain AF module - is the possible customization of DSLR lenses which no first party DSLR manufacturer has to offer.

To each his own. Personally, true, I don't care much about the USB docks. Nor the adjustment options in-camera. Maybe I'm just lucky, but with the majority of the lenses I've handled over the recent years, I haven't had AF issues. At least none I could reliably blame on either lens or camera.
 

Please don't feel offended but when I'm researching about a lens, PZ/OL is only one address and not the most important to me.

Not offended at all. In fact that's what we have been advising readers more than once in the past: there's more than one opinion out there, and procedure and priorities are different. Never rely on one review, especially if your priorities are different from the reviewer's.
 

Rubbish. At least speaking of an ultra wide angle lens, just show me a single picture where you take a picture of something with a perfectly flat focus area which needs to be sharp across the frame - test charts are an exception, no real life  :lol:

Not rubbish. If I shoot with the main subject not at the image center (not that uncommon), I'd like to be able to judge what level of sharpness I can expect off-center. Of course I don't shoot flat objects at f/1.8 (outside of the lab) 

And I cannot or will not say it matches unless I can prove it. But if I can prove it, the next beer is on you. 

Deal

Wish I had more time, because I'm actually heading to Geneva right now, but I'm on a tight schedule unfortunately. Would have been a great opportunity otherwise... because a 14-24 is traveling with me