[thxbb12]

Klaus' link works, yours does not. Close your dpreview tabs and try your link, it does not work.

Ah indeed, darn dpreview.

No one complained about the lens being good, no idea why you have that impression. We just complained about the optimistic Sony MTF calculations.

I've only been disagreeing about the border quality, nothing else (check my posts again). Here is what you originally wrote:

The borders are not that great (CA issues, astigmatism pulling things "apart", while you would not have guessed that looking at those OOTW MTFs.

I was responding to this specific statement by stating that borders are actually good and that lenstip photos are not representative of the lens' borders performance.
On the other hand, dpreview' samples show that borders are plenty sharp.

[Brightcolours]

I agree that the borders are very good for the type of lens. My "that great" is meant as in "that great as the MTF from Sony suggests". Sorry for the confusion, I did not realize others could take it differently.

[thxbb12]

I agree that the borders are very good for the type of lens. My "that great" is meant as in "that great as the MTF from Sony suggests". Sorry for the confusion, I did not realize others could take it differently.

No problem, looks like we just misunderstood each others, it happens (remind me of some discussions with my wife )

Thanks for apologizing :-)

[davidmanze]

Exactly, those MTFs from Sony are a bit silly.
Wide open:
https://pliki.optyczne.pl/son14GM/son14_fot01.JPG
The borders are not that great (CA issues, astigmatism pulling things "apart", while you would not have guessed that looking at those OOTW MTFs.
No doubt a very good 14mm lens, but those MTFs are meaningless.

It took forever to load ......... and judging by this linked image ......... to me the lens looks slightly de-centered ....... the left for all it's faults is sharper than the right ....... where things are worse ......
 .........  "from this image" and the strange excess astigmatism results I'm not convinced this is the best example of this lens ......

[Klaus]

When shooting an ultra-wide lens at a very large aperture the focus has to be spot on.
There is ALWAYS going to be a bit of field curvature going on with such lenses.
While the AF system does a good job these days, there's still a wide area on the Z-axis where the focus is "good". If you end up at the extremes, it may affect the corners.

That being said - other than astro - what applications require sharp corners at f/1.8? You can only get sharp corners at f/1.8 if the corners are at/near infinity anyway.
So this works for the sample image that we discussed (taken from a very high position with an abyss directly in front) but it won't work for standard ground-level shooting.
The corners will just be out of focus in this case (unless you focus on them but then why would you do so?).

The makes it always difficult to come up with a fair rating during reviews. How much value is there in having ultimate corner sharpness with ultra-large aperture lenses?

BTW, you can link the dpreview webpage but not their images. The image links are only valid for a certain amount of time (for avoiding excessive download fraud).

[Rover]

BTW I think this lens looks a lot like the first generation Sigma 12-24/4.5-5.6, only one of the rings is for aperture now, not zoom.
That was one lens I was always curious to try but never got to; I procured a 14/2.8 instead (come to think of it... it's been eleven years this past March!)