[Klaus]

A good lens but not quite as desirable as the 45mm f/1.2 PRO

https://www.opticallimits.com/m43/1082-olympus17f12

[Rover]

It's hard to top the 45/1.2, so it's no surprise this lens didn't, and it looks very good as well (including the boken quality). A colleague of mine has the 17 and swears by it.

Is the 25/1.2 going to be tested anytime soon?

[Klaus]

Never say never but not in the next weeks.

[x_holger]

A good lens but not quite as desirable as the 45mm f/1.2 PRO

https://www.opticallimits.com/m43/1082-olympus17f12

I have the 1.2/45, the 1.2/25 and the 1.2/17 PRO.

Does the tilted focus plane of the tested sample have a big impact on the resolution figures?

I wonder if the tested sample was sub par. The tested sample on imaging-resource https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/...ed/review/
was extremly sharp, even in the outer field at F2 ....

With my sample of the 1.2/17 I didn't find any reason to complain about the sharpness in the outer field or even near the edges, of course it's my subjective impression, no quantifiable resolution figures but still....

I had three samples of the 1.2/25 and kept the third one, there was a lot sample variation, rather disappointing sharpness in the outer field with two samples, but the third one is fine, even at F1.2

[Klaus]

The (slightly) tilted focus plane has no relevant impact on the MTFs.

The results aren't bad anyway - in fact it's great at f/1.2 considering the aperture.
The improvement at f/2 and f/2.8 are just a bit meh ...

Please note that - unlike on the 45 - there is significant distortion auto-correction going on here. And this has negative impacts on the MTFs.
Distortion auto-correction is lossy.

Also - good to very good at the borders/corners still quite sharp (at 16mp). Once MFT moves to 24mp (if that ever happens), it'll get more obvious visually.

[x_holger]

.... Please note that - unlike on the 45 - there is significant distortion auto-correction going on here. And this has negative impacts on the MTFs.
Distortion auto-correction is lossy.

Also - good to very good at the borders/corners still quite sharp (at 16mp). Once MFT moves to 24mp (if that ever happens), it'll get more obvious visually.

Hello Klaus, thank you for your reply. 
Ah yes, I didn't realize that the distortion auto-correction might have such an impact .... 3.4% barrel distortion (uncorrected) don't look so bad on first glance, compared to many MFT zoom lenses.

I use 20mp MFT cameras and usually check the lenses in HiRes mode (80mp RAW, 50mp jpeg) as well.
My impression is that the HiRes mode puts more stress on the resolution abilities of the lenses than the step from 16 or 20mp to 24mp sensor resolution.

As there is a prototype of a Sharp 8K mFT video camera, there is a 32 mp sensor for mFT out there but maybe it's not good enough for stills up to now ;-)