I don’t know about you all, but those images appear extraordinarily boring. And not just because it’s a modern draw. The CV 35/2 APO and Leica 35/2 APO have some umph.
Maybe it was the light, or the processing, or the lens itself. Or some combo. I’ll be curious to see more reviews and samples.
I've read quite a few of Keith's reviews and enjoy most of them, but I think this review's pics probably suffered from a short deadline/hand's-on combined with that aligning with overcast/gray weather. If you go through some of his reviews you can see samples of brightly lit and contrasty scenes along with overcast ones in the same review showing multiple days/timeframes of weather. In these the same lens can produce image that look both soulful and somewhat flat which I think can be good to show different lens behaviors. He mentions in this review that it is the same prototype sample that both Macfilos and Bobby Tonelli have looked at so that tells me that this exact copy is the "press sample" that is getting shuffled around while LLL are making the production copies. Being that seemingly this is the only copy being passed around for reviews I'd imagine they are probably given guidance on tight turnaround times so that other reviewer's can get their chance at hand's-on and it doesn't impact their review rollout timeline.
Purely speculation based off experience in other markets, but I'd wager that is partly why this Keith Wee review has a more limited range of sample images. I'd guess these were all shot on the same 1 or 2 days and he had to make due with what light was available during his window.
