Ah, what a treat, Shaul. I learned much and was taking copious notes during parts of this video. One idea you mentioned at the end describes my recent explorations: spending relatively little money to learn and enjoy the fullness and immersive liveliness of photography ~15-40 years ago. Your talk's organization by time periods, with their aesthetic priorities and technology developments gives me a more coherent framing and criteria regarding older cameras and classically rendering lenses I've purchased ... and am trying to understand. The last 2-3 minutes of your talk is a warm and rousing call to enjoyment. About the values and value of "rendering reality" and personally growing with zest in our photography. You resonate. -Gary
For years I tried to keep up with the so-called state of the art of photography gear. Often at great expense. But it is clear to me that something has been lost along the way. Now my “focus” has changed. For me, photography was more fun in years past, using more “primitive” gear, and often getting more pleasing results. The great thing is that the old gear is still out there, and works as well as it ever did.
@chuckhatcher5073 ... It's something like people starting appreciating vinyl and 1/4 tape for music and beautiful valve for amplification. Something of that sort. Some people realise clinically perfect is not always pleasingly engaging. Just musings ...
Hi! I read on forums that people enjoy leica sl lenses for its rendering and 3d pop, but judging for its design and being modern lenses I dont think its true, though would be awesome. What are your thoughts about leica apo summicron sl 50mm f2 and summilux sl 50mm f1.4?
In designing a lens there is always a balance to be achieved between sharpness and contrast. It's a not known who is pushing whom, the reviewers or manufacturers. Still camera are becoming hybrid camera as they are expected to do double duty as stills and video cameras. Too many conflicts of interest.
Hi, I don't think video poses higher demands on the lens than stills. The requirement for extreme resolving power is indeed detrimental to the overall rendering, I believe. Unfortunately sharpness is easy to measure while depth is more challenging, so sharpness wins. As to who is pushing whom, I think that reviewers are the culprits in most cases. It varies a little bit between manufacturers, though.
Also although we’re talking about video and not necessarily cinematic video, I wonder if classic cine primes (Cooke etc) have pop? I do recall some comparison with a high quality still lens where the Cooke had optical distortion, but it just rendered in a lovely way.
