>>4089345this, /thread
microcontrast is not the reason for the proper rendering of depth of objects. yes it contributes to it but proper depth rendition is mostly thanks to smooth saturation fall of, tonality, LA/CA/SA control and aspherical glass elements also help a ton with proper light rendering.
>>4089519you're overdosed on cope. take a break from the internet and your PC and phone for a month or two
>A lens does not render depth, it only renders lightit renders light, exactly, you moron! and what the fuck do different light wavelengths ''carry'' through a camera lens - and make the camera sensor read? depth, color, distance, shape, saturation, tonality....etc. and that light is rendered in a certain pattern/way onto the cameras image sensor due to a number of different factors, ranging from the type and shape of the glass in a lens, all the way to various added optical properties of the glass as well as coatings and whatnot -- which every single lens renders that differently from one another. even two copies of the same fucking lens with have, although minimal, they will have differences in rendering. no two lenses render light the EXACT same way, not even copies of the same lens.
>3. Read the aforementioned statement over and over untill neurons in your brain decide to wake up and put two and two togetheri already know that, thanks
but it appears that you have absolutely no fucking idea what/how aspherical glass elements are/work, what/how apochromatic glass elements and coatings are/work, how/why different glass design and optical properties affect transmission of different wavelengths of light, etc. etc... so read about it you degen.
just like
>>4089345 said; you know damn well you see the difference very clearly, because the difference is HUGE and more than clearly visible and countless people have already proven this to you but you keep spamming for ages now, this is the third thread you are continuing to samefag in
