Originally posted by normhead IN any case, for my two cents worth, the "look" was a product of the technology of the day. The medium was film. We now use digital media. So, I'm not clear on why a new technology should be under any obligation to emulate an older technology. Dude, you can still shoot film. I can still shoot film...if you want "the look". I still have three working FF film cameras...but, that being said, I am much happier with the new look... sharper, more DoF and so much more control of colour rendition, contrast etc. and all the bells and whistles modern post mod brings. The pictures that got me into Photo Arts at Ryerson Polytechnical 40 years ago have "the look." But I don't long to recreate it. It was the technology of the day, my APS-c bodies are the technology of today... I have no need to recreate the 60's, or the style that was popular then. SO I guess I'll join JinDesu, RioRoco and jsherman999 on the sidelines. Good luck with "the look". I bet you could create a photoshop filter that would do that...
+1
As film shooters, we talked about the Kodachrome look, or the look of Tri-X, etc.
Each film added it's own unique fingerprint to the work.
That was one of the beauties of film.
Did you like the grittines of Tri-X or the smooth, almost soft look of Panatomic (which held an incredible amount of detail for all of that. A very subtle film)
The point being, each component of the picture making process brings something to the table. The lens is just one of them.
The format is another, since it does have some influence on depth of field, which can influence the aperture being used, which will affect the shutter speed, etc.
In film, I prefer the look of large format, for example.
Now the sensor, software, electronics influence the image, and in these cameras, film doesn't.
That is a pretty big component to change and expect something to not look different.