Carsten - Not deliberately at all.
Hassy DOESN'T design flaws in (Canon, I'm not so sure.. ;>), what they do is not go the the Nth degree to design 'perfect glass' when the differences can be tweaked in firmware/software. Logical.
Same as Leica is doing (again logical). Does perfect glass, by definition, included lenses with focus shift? For 5K Euros, I would bloody well hope not. Given this is the first we've heard of these in-camera S2 lens-specific tweaks, I suspect there is also more going along the same vein than Leica would like to admit. Again, I see NOTHING WRONG AT ALL with what Solms is doing technically. Makes perfect sense.
They, LIKE HASSY, are correcting for a less than perfect lens-specific performance under certain conditions (aperture, focus distance, etc) by doing it in-camera corrections. Correcting for shift in firmware is NO different than correcting for vignetting, or any other less than perfect short-coming of a lens.
However since you're already reading the lens ROM for aperture, distance, etc to correct for shift, what about CA, vignetting, distortion....? I have no issue with what Leica or Hassy are doing, but:
------------------
1) I wish Leica would get off their high horse - they (on paper for now) like, Hassy have a strong system, but call a spade a spade. The "we don't need that" comments, in hindsight, just make them look childish and make me ask (as it will others) what else is going on when you trip the shutter that isn't talked about? How will the S2 react IF you ever get to chance to bolt dumb-old V glass to it (like that will happen)?
2) I'd be VERY surprised if they were not correcting for more than just shift. Once you have the existing ROM data (lens, aperture selected, distance, etc) and the right-sized lookup table, correction factors and processing speed, there is a LOT you can start to play with -- and a GREAT temptation to play with it. That said, if you do it right and have the processing HP - you can work wonders.
3) It means out-of camera comparison testing will have to ensure that you are comparing like-like.
4) Assuming the tweaking goes beyond shift (or will later go beyond shift), what does that means for the fact that they have no tailored PP software?
5) If they had put the childish BS aside and had advertised what they were doing ; "Our Lenses, are, after all, Leica's, (hint., hint) but the laws of physics are the laws of physics (even in Solms) and since max shooter image quality is always our end goal....", etc it would sell well. After all, no one but Leica seems to object to the Hassy (now Solms) method. That said, they now look foolish - and beg the question of if they are doing more than just correcting for shift - even if they aren't/won't. Not a way to instill potential fence-sitter confidence.
Time to get the system in some impartial user hands - and see if the wallets open like Leica needs them to in fiscal 2010.