Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Unique color rendition
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Dec 21, 2015 8:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Rick1779 wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
This is the digital age, colour rendition is infinitely tweakable in software so lens selection for colour rendtion is rather redundant.


+1000

Like 1 Laugh 1

-10000 Laugh 1

I can really understand that people are rhapsodizing about "Leica colors" - Modern Leica lenses have even better colors than modern T* for my taste (though of course I would never pay that much for that difference, the pop-song-like T* colors are good enough for me Very Happy)
I think you can't reproduce them easily with PP

Here's a sample for different color rendition
--->Same place, same time, same light, same camera, same camera settings ("vivid mode" which of course highly increases color differences due higher saturation), very similar PP (sharpening, some minor tweakings etc.)<---

Rodenstock Rodagon 105mm F5.6
_DSC4979

Carl Zeiss Sonnar 55/1.8 T*
Carl Zeiss Sonnar 55 1.8

Check out colors of the fur or the grass ^^
The Rodagon is good sample for rather bad colors (I love that lens anyway, but only for macro/closeup work or technical/reproduction stuff)

Both lenses are very sharp, high contrast, virtually no CAs, no glow,... basically both are optically flawless, but for my eyes they highly differ in their color rendition and the modern T* gives much more beautiful colors than the Rodagon which was unlike the Zeiss never optimized for colors. Despite oversaturation the T* looks imho much more natural and pleasing
[b]Feel free to try to reproduce colors of the modern T* coating by post processing Wink
I can not do that, not even close to that! (Though of course I know many people are very much better than me in PP Wink but I think even for them it wouldn't be easy)

I think colors of a lens are at least as important as it's bokeh and it sharpness etc., unnatural colors can make a good picture look bad for me.
Luckily not many lenses have seriously bad or weird colors but there can be huge differences.

Last edited by ForenSeil on Mon Dec 21, 2015 1:40 pm; edited 5 times in total


PostPosted: Mon Dec 21, 2015 9:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
ForenSeil: It will be interesting if you can make the Sonnar behave like a manual lens (like taping the electronic contacts) - just to be sure that this is not a software tweak to the colors which Sony is making in camera for native e-mount lenses.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 21, 2015 9:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
std wrote:
ForenSeil: It will be interesting if you can make the Sonnar behave like a manual lens (like taping the electronic contacts) - just to be sure that this is not a software tweak to the colors which Sony is making in camera for native e-mount lenses.

The aperture will stay at the smallest setting(F22) if the lens is not powered. Exclamation


PostPosted: Mon Dec 21, 2015 10:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
std wrote:
ForenSeil: It will be interesting if you can make the Sonnar behave like a manual lens (like taping the electronic contacts) - just to be sure that this is not a software tweak to the colors which Sony is making in camera for native e-mount lenses.

Taping is not possible like calvin said (or F22 only).
Distortion and maybe vignetting are corrected by the camera automatically when shooting in JPEG (but not when shooting in RAW), but camera does nothing with the colors it doesn't also do to the Rodagon.
As said camera was set to "Vivid"-mode, which gives that slightly oversaturated colorful look, but that's applied on both pics
When shooting RAW and increasing saturation in Lightroom the difference it similar.

Last edited by ForenSeil on Mon Dec 21, 2015 1:42 pm; edited 5 times in total


PostPosted: Mon Dec 21, 2015 11:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
ForenSeil wrote:
...
I think colors of a lens are at least as important as it's bokeh and it sharpness etc., unnatural colors can make a good picture look bad for me...


my thinking too Like 1


PostPosted: Tue Dec 22, 2015 6:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
ForenSeil wrote:
I can really understand that people are rhapsodizing about "Leica colors" - Modern Leica lenses have even better colors than modern T* for my taste (though of course I would never pay that much for that difference, the pop-song-like T* colors are good enough for me Very Happy)
I think you can't reproduce them easily with PP

[...]

Feel free to try to reproduce colors of the modern T* coating by post processing Wink
I can not do that, not even close to that! (Though of course I know many people are very much better than me in PP Wink but I think even for them it wouldn't be easy)

It is possible to correct a lens color cast, or to mimic the color rendition of a particular lens by using a color profile created with the help of a Colorchecker target.

Cheers!

Abbazz


PostPosted: Tue Dec 22, 2015 1:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Colorchecker thing is good for the workhorses or those lens with yellowed element.

To enjoy the characters of the lens, I will not correct the colors but pay attention to the WB. It is important for us to understand the characters of the lenses so that we can pick the right lens at the right time for the right scene.


PostPosted: Wed Dec 23, 2015 6:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Abbazz wrote:
ForenSeil wrote:
I can really understand that people are rhapsodizing about "Leica colors" - Modern Leica lenses have even better colors than modern T* for my taste (though of course I would never pay that much for that difference, the pop-song-like T* colors are good enough for me Very Happy)
I think you can't reproduce them easily with PP

[...]

Feel free to try to reproduce colors of the modern T* coating by post processing Wink
I can not do that, not even close to that! (Though of course I know many people are very much better than me in PP Wink but I think even for them it wouldn't be easy)

It is possible to correct a lens color cast, or to mimic the color rendition of a particular lens by using a color profile created with the help of a Colorchecker target.

Cheers!

Abbazz


Like 1 small Like 1 small Like 1 small


PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2015 2:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I like to see the old lens used for video. Smile You can really see how the colors go crazy with the lighting. i can see why using this lens with film might be a problem. Smile

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIok6uYvOx8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqKtSCISW84


PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Minolta used to have an advertising theme of "Minolta colors". I very much like my Rokkor lenses. I think Topcor captures colors well, especially blue. I have a Jupiter-9 with yellowed glass that takes very warm pictures, but that probably isn't what is being asked. Aside from those, the only other in my collection that comes to mind is Komura, and in particular, the 3.5/200.


PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2015 10:43 pm    Post subject: Lens colour rendering - really ? Reply with quote
There is no question that different lenses render colours differently and there is also no question that every camera can produce different colour renderings with the same lens. I have seen pictures claiming Leica colours or Minolta colours or whatever, but the claims amount to nothing because of all of the in camera variables such as white balance, saturation etc. are uncontrolled. Even in film days when these claims originated, processing and printing were rarely consistent enough for the claims to be taken seriously. Nearly everybody now applies a tweak to colour, contrast or whatever which makes claims about the unique colour rendering of some particular lens to be even more redundant.

I now take these claims to be nostalgic whimsy........nothing wrong with that mind you.


PostPosted: Fri Dec 25, 2015 12:34 am    Post subject: Re: Lens colour rendering - really ? Reply with quote
hemeterfilms wrote:
There is no question that different lenses render colours differently and there is also no question that every camera can produce different colour renderings with the same lens. I have seen pictures claiming Leica colours or Minolta colours or whatever, but the claims amount to nothing because of all of the in camera variables such as white balance, saturation etc. are uncontrolled. Even in film days when these claims originated, processing and printing were rarely consistent enough for the claims to be taken seriously. Nearly everybody now applies a tweak to colour, contrast or whatever which makes claims about the unique colour rendering of some particular lens to be even more redundant.

I now take these claims to be nostalgic whimsy........nothing wrong with that mind you.


I think you are quite right. Back in the old days having pictures printed required a good service for best results, but colors were balanced. Of course, slides offered a more consistent and accurate representation. Today I see a dramatic different between exposures; wide open shots are consistently warmer than those where the metering and color balance is done through a stopped down lens. However, I do see what I perceive to be a noticeable difference in certain colors with certain lenses. I've thought that Topcor gave especially brilliant blues. I have found also that some lenses do a better job of not blowing out the whites.


PostPosted: Fri Dec 25, 2015 7:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
You can play with software and try to make a silk purse from a sow's ear, or you can just find a good lens, good sensor and shoot it. You save all that time for less tedious endeavors Smile


Florist by unoh7, on Flickr


Studs by unoh7, on Flickr


Blue Dew by unoh7, on Flickr

And if you do enhance color with software, the more you have to start with, the better you will do Smile

If you have alot of lenses and really shoot them you will probably notice how different they really are, but since light is such a huge factor, you really need many shots in varied conditions to understand a lens colorwise. I shoot the CV 35/1.2 quite a bit. It has a very particular palette. Generally I like it fine, but you can play all you want, it won't look like a ZM 35/2. Of course you can change both of those lenses. But they always look different. Play as you might. Smile

MS Optical Sonnetar is another lens with it's own ideas about color.

L1032624 by unoh7, on Flickr

Some get the idea that because you can alter something, that means you can change it into whatever you want. The are few things more attractive to humans than the fantasy of control Wink


PostPosted: Wed Jan 06, 2016 4:45 pm    Post subject: Re: Lens colour rendering - really ? Reply with quote
Unique color renditions? Hmmm...

The pictures below were taken with a Hasselblad HV (not mine, unfortunately Sad) in exactly the same conditions, that is, using the same camera settings and the same illumination. Photos are out of the camera without any manipulation in PP. One picture was taken with the awesome Zeiss Vario-Sonnar 24-70mm F2.8 lens. Can you guess which is that picture?

Photo #1:


Photo #2:


Photo #3:


PostPosted: Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
It's like someone buying a Ferrari then thinking it makes them Michael Schumacher.


It often does. In the sad sense.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:43 pm    Post subject: Re: Lens colour rendering - really ? Reply with quote
hemeterfilms wrote:
Even in film days when these claims originated, processing and printing were rarely consistent enough for the claims to be taken seriously. Nearly everybody now applies a tweak to colour, contrast or whatever which makes claims about the unique colour rendering of some particular lens to be even more redundant.


It's just that in the film days such tweaks were a domain of professionals, and now everyone can do it, and do it well, if he/she is willing to spend the time.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 06, 2016 11:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Nikon 35-70mm D lens is an example of unique colour rendition with its bluish and cool tones.
Here an example:



With the Takumar lenses too I have the impression to have to do with unique colours, maybe a bit on the warm side:



PostPosted: Thu Jan 07, 2016 12:35 am    Post subject: Re: Lens colour rendering - really ? Reply with quote
Gerald wrote:
Unique color renditions? Hmmm...

The pictures below were taken with a Hasselblad HV (not mine, unfortunately Sad) in exactly the same conditions, that is, using the same camera settings and the same illumination. Photos are out of the camera without any manipulation in PP. One picture was taken with the awesome Zeiss Vario-Sonnar 24-70mm F2.8 lens. Can you guess which is that picture?

Photo #1:


Photo #2:


Photo #3:



The photo #2 was taken with the Zeiss Vario-Sonnar 24-70mm F2.8 lens! Laugh 1


PostPosted: Thu Jan 07, 2016 4:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
#2 & #3 seem to be the same lens, as they are exactly the same down to the pixel. So if only one is the Zeiss, then #1.

If more than one is the Zeiss, then you cheated in your description. Smile


PostPosted: Thu Jan 07, 2016 1:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
meanwhile wrote:
#2 & #3 seem to be the same lens, as they are exactly the same down to the pixel. So if only one is the Zeiss, then #1.

If more than one is the Zeiss, then you cheated in your description. Smile


In fact, all the three photos were taken with the Zeiss. To be more exact, the three pictures are JPEG conversions of the SAME RAW file! The first picture is the result of converting RAW -> JPEG by Adobe CameraRaw, the second by a generic online converter and the third by DCRAW. The three converters used their default settings and the pictures suffered no post-processing except downsizing.

Clearly, only the first image is visually acceptable; the other two are simply awful. It seems that ACR made a "smart" conversion, probably using the metadata embedded in the RAW file, such as color temperature, gains of the RGB channels, lens profile, etc. In contrast the other two converters seem to have made "dumb" conversions.

Visually, the three images are totally different, but the JPEG images are equivalent in principle, in the sense that it would be possible to transform an image into another by post-processing. To prove this point, I took the Photo # 3 and by manipulating by trial-and-error the curves, levels, contrast, intensity and saturation in Photoshop, I tried to get the same rendering of the Photo # 1. I came to Photo # 3 corrected, which is quite close to Photo # 1.

Photo #1:


Photo #3:
[/quote]


Photo #3 corrected:



The lesson I draw here is that speaking of unique color rendering of a lens is somewhat misleading. Perhaps this discussion made more sense in the era of film. In the digital age, the data generated by the sensor suffer so many processing that it is perfectly possible an average quality lens produces photos with color as good or better than very expensive lenses. After all, a good lens, as well as a perfectly clean glass window, should produces no color by itself.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 07, 2016 2:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
As above. Colour is not too hard to adjust with the right software, a good sensor helps but not as much as a good lens design ,glass and coatings. You don't need to pay the earth to take an acceptably good shot, you just need 'the eye' and the digital darkroom skills. Only those who were present during the taking of any of these shots would know how much difference there was between the natural light and that which appeared on the screen post session. For instance the takumar shot of horse and rider, that could have been late afternoon one summer, shades of the golden hour in there. This is all just my thoughts, not facts. Smile
I think if you up the ante on your PP skills colours are whatever you want them to be. Like Dog


PostPosted: Thu Jan 07, 2016 3:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I was quite certain that all 3 versions had been the same photo ( better had said that earlier ..) It shows how important conversion and PPing are, not surprisingly so.
The other way around would prove the point, if it was taken with 3 different lenses known for their particular colour rendering and you had made all 3 look indistinguishable the same.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 07, 2016 3:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
What I object to is people who spout nonsense in order to justify their expensive purchase.

Attributing mystical qualities that are quite laughable in reality.

It's like someone buying a Ferrari then thinking it makes them Michael Schumacher.


Like 1 and then repeatedly crashes it every time they take it for a drive. Oh well, just buy another one with a different colour, that should do it...oh...wait... Laugh 1


PostPosted: Thu Jan 07, 2016 9:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
The lesson I draw here is that speaking of unique color rendering of a lens is somewhat misleading


No. Your post was misleading, that's all.

Quote:
The other way around would prove the point, if it was taken with 3 different lenses known for their particular colour rendering and you had made all 3 look indistinguishable the same


Bingo.

As someone else said earlier - Yes, it is possible to infinitely manipulate the colour of your images now in PP, but that doesn't automatically mean you can achieve the same result as a particular lens.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3