I keep talking about the 3D vs modern flat look.
Time to see if I can show in a more scientific form, what I feel I see in use.
It may be a hopeful delusion, but even if so, there may be something to it, because without looking for it, I did notice something in this video; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4UAqVYfWLg . In the outside head shot comparisons, especially around the glasses, I noticed something, a feeling of three dimensionality and depth, or maybe I had too much coffee.
This test, like many is flawed. I shot most at close distances, I was not super precise, I did not measure anything or set anything in stone, I just shot and ran it through C1 with a slight adjustment for a sloppy angle.
At F/T2 below and a closeup for sharpness comparison (same-same, but I back focussed a little on the Spectrum). T-stops are arguably wider than f-stops, so I should have used f1.8 on the Pana. Pana is on the left.
Now at T/F 4. There is a difference in T to F stop, because the shutter speed varied.
Ok, maybe not super ground breaking other than revealing once again that a Chinese made and designed cine lens can match a plastic-fantastic modern prime worth twice as much.
The Pana is more consistent maybe, but character lies in the unpredictable, the aberrant.
Ok, something more circular now, F/T 4 at top, F/T 2 below, Pana on the right. Colour does not seem a mile apart.
I think part of it might be cooler colour and contrast, the Spectrum lens having a tiny bit more punch in the micro contrast thanks to strong blues in the shadows. I do feel it may also be better corrected for distortion.
Ok, job not done. Lets try the Sigma 28-70 f2.8, possibly a better exponent of the modern camp.
Sigma on the right at f2.8, Spectrum on the left at T3.4. Interestingly, the Sigma is cooler again.
Same but different, maybe the Spectrum’s Bokeh is nicer, smoother.
The look I have reacted to has often shown up at medium distances, so I went outside and did some tests.
Spectrum on the left (consistently lighter images) at T4/f3.4 top focussed on the small plant and T5.6/f6.7 lower focussed forward and back.
Ok, maybe in the top pair there is a slight feeling of depth to the Spectrum image (look from the small plant to the tin behind in both), but otherwise the only thing I am seeing is nicer Bokeh and a lighter, more open image from the Spectrum, more contrast and saturation from the Sigma and the 50mm marker on the Sigma does not match the Spectrum (slightly tighter).
Sharpness is much the same (Spectrum on left) in real world situations, the Sigma’s main advantage is a tendency to underexpose slightly, something the S5’s like. Notice the slightly less flat looking rendering in the Spectrum file or I may be dreaming it?
Looks like I have a pair of cine lenses that serve no other purpose than different handling to my S-Primes and Sigma zoom, with a slightly different rendering of Bokeh, colour, contrast and at middle distances maybe a slightly more natural rendering of perspective?
Of course it goes deeper than that. A lens and camera combo have a dynamic that is harder to put into words than simple “nice” or “harmonious”, especially when talking about manual focus, throw length, heft, dampening, rotation direction etc.
They work or they don’t and I feel with the Spectrum lenses there is a benefit to how they handle, their weight and solidness, a mindset even that they impart.