Even my 'cheap' Smc-M 50mm f1.7 or f1.4 are very sharp at f/2... and apparently many decent prime lenses are.
And just two personal concerns (what do you think?):
1) Could it be that
sharpness is extremely overrated?
As long as a lens is decently sharp, the minor differences between the lens' sharpness should play no role for 99.9% of your shots!
(Except test-images
)
2) Numbers are not engraved in stone!
One reason why sharpness is so important to most of us might be the simple fact that you can produce these nice scientific-looking bar graphs out of it...
But in 'real science' you need to know how to interpret the numbers in order to learn something, and here the problem starts.
The numbers will strongly vary form copy to copy and they will even vary a little from measurement to measurement.
So saying that a lens with LW/PH 2300 is sharper (or even better) than LW/PH 2250 risks to be absurd.
This is like saying a guy with IQ 127 is smarter than one with IQ 123
btw: I am not arguing that the test measurements make no sens, but I just want to remind that we should look at them a bit more laid back.
The only thing you will see from two lens measurement, one with 2300, one with 2250 is that both are playing in the same league and that both are perfectly fine.