Includes corrected vs uncorrected images as well as crops showing the loss of outer-zone sharpness from distortion correction.
I’m getting tired of marketing claims about how the blah blah optical blah minimizes distortion (Nikon masters this deception with the Nikkor Z lenses). It’s about time that lens manufacturers were held to account for claims that stretch the limits of credulity. “Minimize” as compared to what, a fisheye lens or the Leica Q? And while conflating optical aberrations with distortion. Add in the fraud of publishing MTF charts that do not account for distortion correction... what a mess.
[Sigma 35/2 DG DN] In terms of the optical design, three aspherical elements and one SLD element are used to minimize a variety of aberrations and distortion...
OTOH, the target market for the Sigma 35/2 and similar lenses probably don’t care too much about outer-zone sharpness, and sometimes distortion correction can be skipped. And Tigger thinks the whole thing is much less interesting than lizards (below).