>>4307758>FIZZICSWould you care to explain the physics of "3d rendering" in optics? Since most lenses are designed by computers, there is surely a chart that measures "3d rendering" and a well explained set of physical principles that lens designers follow to make something "3d". Since you know so much about who makes what lenses how, you must be familiar with some of it, but because it's just banal engineering it's probably in a textbook somewhere.
As far as I've figured out, "3d pop" is just a happy accident of field curvature and vignetting and happens on a per photo basis. Since every lens has some field curvature and even if it's totally flat there's a subject out there that can look 3d at a moderate aperture, and vignetting can be added in post (so can gaussian blur so you don't have to rely on the lens' natural blur) 3d pop is not special and is more on the photographer than the lens.
>>4307761The average leica lenses is measurably china tier because the entire point of that lifestyle brand is reselling the experience of photography circa 50s-60s. There is nothing about a lens that is immeasurable now that human understanding has progressed to its current level. There is no je ne sais quoi in optical machinery. It is just consumer goods, produced in a factory to a list of specifications. If there's something immeasurable it's the machinations of your consciousness and you've mixed them up with a piece of inert minerals and polymers.
