Leon Noel
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
Richard probably would associate lens design with 3d look. While I agree to a certain extent, I still strongly believe micro contrast will play the biggest role.
What's 1 thing that all zeiss lenses have in common? Not the design, some are Planar some are Sonnar some are Tessar, some are primes and some are zooms. But all of them to a certain degree are successful at introducing 'pop' into the scene (nothing music related here  ). Which leads me to deduct the secret must be what all those Zeiss have in common, T* coating.
T* coating is extremely adept at retaining micro contrast, even under unfavorable lighting conditions, of course it can still flare or ghost if the lens design is too complicated (e.g, C/Y Contax Distagon 21mm), but for the most part subtle tonal details are conserved. This helps produce a 'live' and vivid look which our eyes are accustomed too.
If you think about it, for a subject's form to 'pop', 2 conditions should be met:
1./ it's surface texture should be there
2./ edge contrast should be there
A lens that fails to render subtle texture on the surface of an object will make the subject itself appear flat and lifeless; on the other hand a lens with good micro contrast will retain all those subtle details. And edge contrast is pretty self explanatory, it determines whether the subject blends into the background or gets lifted off it, here micro contrast will help render those tiny details at the edges of the subject, before the DOF falls off completely and transits into the blur background. Lens design would help tremendously here, smooth or abrupt transition also contributes to whether things pop or blend with background.
End of analysis.
|
