Terry
New member
I'm with Jono here and still plan to order this lens. I think people have overreacted. One of the great things for me between the Panny bodies and these lenses is to be able to AF with a very small AF point (remember you can make the focus box very small) and move that point.
There is a lot of noise and negativity on DPReview as well. Here is a post from Andy Westlake the reviewer:
"OK this is getting a bit silly now. The 45/2.8 isn't mediocre optically - it may not be sharpest in class but it's far from the worst we've seen, and it has no distortion, minimal CA, insignficant vignetting and really pleasant bokeh. There's a lot more to a lens than just sharpness.
Anyway I'm willing to be refuted on this, so here's a challenge. There are 30 full res samples in the gallery, and probably another 5 linked in the review text. Please tell me which of these are limited by the lens's optical mediocrity, and how. Thanks."
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1041&message=33440226
There is a lot of noise and negativity on DPReview as well. Here is a post from Andy Westlake the reviewer:
"OK this is getting a bit silly now. The 45/2.8 isn't mediocre optically - it may not be sharpest in class but it's far from the worst we've seen, and it has no distortion, minimal CA, insignficant vignetting and really pleasant bokeh. There's a lot more to a lens than just sharpness.
Anyway I'm willing to be refuted on this, so here's a challenge. There are 30 full res samples in the gallery, and probably another 5 linked in the review text. Please tell me which of these are limited by the lens's optical mediocrity, and how. Thanks."
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1041&message=33440226