I have three lenses I use with me E-M1 -- Zuiko 12-40 f/2.8 Pro, Panny Leica Summilux 25mm f/1.4, and Zuiko 45mm f/1.8. Of the three lenses, the 45 has been a real disappointment. I read so many rave reviews about how it's really sharp wide-open, but it seems for me, the only way it ever is sharp wide open is if I'm shooting a tight head-only portrait under bright sunlight. If I'm shooting half-portrait to full-body and in the shade (or indoors), I rarely ever get sharp results wide-open. And none of this is related to shutter speed or ISO settings, because even when the shutter speed is well above safe for the 90mm equivalent length and the ISO is down to 200, I still don't get sharp wide-open photos. In comparison, the 12-40 f/2.8 and the 25 f/1.4 get plenty of sharp results wide-open. I've done the "slanted ruler test" and the 45 is definitely noticeably hazy wide-open, and while the 25 f/1.4 is too, it's to a lesser degree. I see on DxO site that the 45's sharpness is pretty abysmal compared to most of the other lenses I have (especially the excellent Sony FE lenses like the 55 f/1.8, 85 f/1.4 G Master, 28 f/2, Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L II): Olympus M. Zuiko Digital ED 45mm f1.8 | DxOMark So are those rave reviews of the 45's sharpness just people who have never actually used a truly sharp lens before? Is this just variations among copies? Should I sell it off and get an alternative? But it seems like whatever alternatives out there are roughly around the same level of sharpness wide-open as the 45 f/1.8?