kidzrevil

I don't  really buy into the sterile VS clinical thing and to me it is just a different look from lens to lens (I love some older ones and some newer ones equally).       If you put some of the latest lenses on older cameras you might find they have even more distortion for instance than some older ones as some manufacturers seem to be cutting costs or making the lenses better in other ways by correcting in camera and either make cheaper or make it better in some other area.
I have a lovely old Canon EF 20-35 2.8 L (hard to imagine some EF lenses are now around 30 years old) and it probably has a bit less distortion than most newer similar lenses (Canon has updated it four times since via 17-35 and 16-35 lenses) but it doesn't get corrected like the more recent ones do on the latest cameras.
I also think the laws regarding use of glass with lead in it (now outlawed) might have a difference on the look of some lenses.

Part of the reason newer Digital cameras look so Clinical is what Kidzrevil said. All the new cameras have lots of corrections going on so you don't see any distortions for crap any more. You could have Never used lenses as wide as we have now. They were Fisheye lens if they were that wide back in the day.
I just yesterday was showing my son those 4 lenses I bought from a Thrift Store for 16 Dollars. There were two 28mm f2.8's in the bunch. A 55mm f2.8, also Pentax M42..
Both 28mm, one a Canon FD,, one a Pentax M42. They are day and night different from each other color wise. The Canon has way more punchy colors than the Pentax on my A7s.. The 135mm Pentax M42 is super sharp but sort of sterile. We put on my Sony FE 16-35mm Zeiss and it was even sharper than both 28's but a lot more sterile looking than the other three mentioned. It was better in a clinical sense. More Modern for sure.
So long story short old lenses do look more Classic, mellow whoever you want to name them. Of the 5 lenses we did test shots of all of them looked different, in a good or bad way depending on your mood or need.
 

You may find the greatest DoP in the world Roger Deakins won't agree with you. Those who are against the "clinical look" tend to look for excuse of not able to light their scenes properly and pick a soft or vintage lens to diffuse the image. Some people are fooled by the look of some LUTs into believing that the image is too clinical when paired with a sharp problem free lens when the problem is the LUT itself. A good sharp clean lens is as good as it get in what is being captured through the glass. How it looks after it is saved in your memory card and loaded onto your computer are interpreted by design.

My problem with looking for things to adapt to M mount was that I started looking at real M mount lenses and well one thing led to another....
In my defence it was a bargain.
In Leica terms at least 

A few test shots from a recent location scout. I've been using my Canon 28mm f/1.8 lens a lot lately. It is just so versatile. I originally thought it would be too wide for my tastes as I usually prefer the 35mm-60mm focal lengths, but the ability to get a shallow depth, close up or a fairly, wide establishing shot has been great.

So I finally updated my nightly build to the July 4th build and so far everything seems good... once I remembered all of my settings.
I also tested the 4K crop module and in all modes it seemed unuasable. 2/3rds of the screen was whited out. And I really couldn’t get any higher resolutions/lower bit modes to work cleanly in LiveView. I don’t know if it was the build I was using or if I just didn’t have the correct settings configured... either way... I just reinstalled the latest nightly build.

Trusty Voigtlander 40mm f2

I would think a lot of the cheap as heck FF, MF lenses on ebay, Amazon, Craigslist have more character than new Cine lenses. And MF lenses have Big dials on them to change focus, aperture.
I know that new to me, this old m42 Pentax 135mm, f 2.8 is about as sharp as you can get, and I paid like 4 dollars for it in reality. And I am like 20 feet away easy when I shot it. If there was a piece of micro film on the license plate you would have been able to read it! I can Always put a filter on it to soften it, sure can't make a lens sharper.

It is not that it is Just Raw so much, it is that most cameras that Do shot Raw do it in a 10-16 bit environment. No the typical 8bit, 10 bit in low Codecs that are common to them., like they do in say the 5D. So there is in reality usually a 1 to 1 1/2 stop boost using Raw efficiently. That means editing it right also.  You can screw it up as easy as you an help it if you are clueless LoL.
The main advantage to Raw is that in reality you can't under, or overexpose the output unless you REALLY screw up. So you have all the DR you can possibly get out off the sensor, bypassing a lot of the added processing in that Raw file. So you get what you see thing more than what the camera Normally wants you to see with it's onboard processing engine.

People talk about only "8 stops of dynamic range" as if it's unusable.  I love following Andrew's and everyone else's analysis of how to maximize various camera's potential, but we sometimes let things get out of perspective.  The order of important in my experience is 1. Lighting 2. Focus/stabilization 3. Lens 4. Sensor 5. Ergonomics 6. CODEC.   Yes, we can't control the lighting all the time, but we also have to compare cameras in how they do in properly lit scenes; that is, scenes at/under 8 stops of DR.  Here's my take on why we must never forget that shooting scene with more than 8 stops of dynamic range is something we really want to avoid.  No camera can truly save it.  It becomes a calculus of atrocities.  
 

Raw indeed doesn't suddenly boost the DR. The main reason people shoot RAW is for the post workflow. 

Fuck you, the depth is impressive, love it. The 5D is a beast, I wouldn't call this filmic, to me it looks hyper-realistic.

Careful. I've been hurt before.

very good news
more competitions are always better
cant wait to see 4k 120fps/240fps 10bit from Samsung 

Those Taks look great! Are you using filtration?

I decided to test some 48fps with the regular 14bit ML build. I processed it as Alexa LogC 24fps through the MLV App.
As suspected... since it’s less than HD... it’s soft, but for short close ups... it could work in a pinch.
Any updates on the slow motion capabilities with the experimental 10/12 bit modes?

Here's the review:
The shot at 6:57 of him in slow-mo with the light of a single match is just incredible!!
Footage reminds me of the Canon 5DIII ML RAW 14 bit from @kidzrevil in places.  Just lovely.
Are people anticipating the Pocket 2 to have IQ like the T4K?
and to all the people who think you don't need good IQ for home videos - see the lovely shot at 8:12

Satin, BPM and Smoque are my favourites.

I'm just editing a little highlight reel from the Berlin Fashion Week last year, and I deeply regret selling my Canon FD 24mm 2.8 lens now. Some of the rendering is really nice, to my eyes at least. I replaced it with the Sony 28mm lens, and that's great, but it is just lacking something. Also used a Tiffen Black Pro Mist 1/4, GFILM settings and Deluts Downtown Alt as a base LUT if you were curious.

 

Little add to Voigt 17.5 case...
 

Here are my first screengrabs shooting on event with gx80+ vintage minolta set up. 
Lenses I used were 24mm 2.8 Tokina RMC and the 50mm 1.4 Minolta with lens turbo. Happy to say that they blended in quite well with each other, only for some shots I still remember which was which. 

The picture of the glasses was shot with the minolta, the other two were shot with the tokina which I got for 24 bucks ? 

Wow, now my lens related parts of comment disappeared by commenting on something else. Guess, this is an edit now. So, again:
@kidzrevil Awesome shots and magnificient colors. Really standing out. Makes me want to chase some natural light more!
Findings about the Fujinon 12.5mm c-mount super16 lens. Awesome! No crop on GX85 in UHD mode plus electronic IBIS. Put focal length on the smallest number, think it was 6mm, to avoid wobbliing vignette.
Great image, colors. Really usuable at F2. My new favorite lens on the GX85. I guess I will keep the GX. Perfect combo. Crop (compared to 135 photofilm) in 4K plus electronic IBIS  should be around 2.4, making it an equivalent of 15mm on m43 full sensor.

The left have become a bunch of whiny, pearl-clutching Victorians. They've gone completely off the deep end with the offense culture and all the divisive race-baiting and reverse sexism/racism. Hillary was the last time I vote with them. Glad we still have a few brave people like Kanye and von Trier who truly don't give a fuck, but they are few and far between. 

Well I think the main reason for ML Raw on the 5D mk III is how sharp it can be. Other than the 1DC most all Canon video footage to me is Way too soft. Now I am not against soft video footage at times at all. I just want to be able to Control how soft it is, not be stuck with it for Everything.
I guess the next be thing about Raw is that if you goof up WB you can change it at your will. And I don't know about you but that is one of my hardest areas to really pull of even close let alone perfect. To make it consistent.
And there is no noise reduction, no baked in stuff like every manufacturer has. So a clean slate as they say. But if wanted you have killer Canon Color Science, and the AF is not shabby at all. Not DPAF, but..
And there is the 12 bit date rate. Hell that alone is worth the price of admission. Sure it is kind of a data hog but wow what you have the ability to be able to push, and push hard.
And I think it is the satisfaction that with Raw the finial output is what you created, your signature, your fingerprints are on all over it if you want to take it that far. You are not trying to Undo what someone else likes, it is what You like if you desire. And with a LuT you can just click on it and grade fast if needed. But it can be totally Your LuT if you want. You can stand out, not just be part of the same crowd as everyone else.
And I know I can go on but you are able to buy a camera for not a lot that can look as good or better than a 1DC, Canon C500. No you are not going to get full 4K, even the 1DC is not, not yet, probably Never with the C Fast card data rate, but it can do a easy 2K and more. That is impressive for the money. What the heck FF Cine looking camera can we afford. Eh none. Well the 5D ML can make that happen.
 

Yep, 5D RAW might still be my favourite looking footage out there, period.