That is an interesting comparison. i particularly appreciated the manifacturing of the “object”, i.e. the final jpeg you shared to see at 100% (I am also a fan of command line tools like imagemagick).
However, about the actual results – it would be good to have your conclusion on this test, because what I conclude is that all these lenses are more or less the same to me!
“More or less” is obviously the key here; I mean I can certainly see the differences between shooting wide open and closing down, which is what we as photographers normally do and know, but if I’d have to choose between one lens and the other… i would end up getting the cheaper or lighter one (which are my guiding principles by the way).
But maybe I havent looked closely enough!
Finally another two vaguely related thoughts:
- we should probably stop looking at walls as a way to judge the quality of lenses (even though I know this is easier to set up!)
- your analysis made me check back at the results of my latest 50mm (Canon RF 1.8, another of the many lenses that I have that are cheap and light); I can definitely see now the improvements in how good this lens is – compared to the old Nikon 50/1.4 AF where the difference between f2.8 and f8 is vast while the Canon from f2.8 onwards is always sharp.