@William said:
Yes, that is true about Barry Lyndon and the lens they made for Kubrick. It allowed shooting under every lighting condition that actually existed at the time including all the indoors scenes which were candlelit. It is truly astounding cinematography. That film is the most insanely perfect duplication of a historical period ever done. Also, I remember hearing it takes as long to read the story as to watch the film.
Yes it is very good and what you notice most on a technical point when watching stuff that could either be for film or television (particularly television) - is when you get to interiors you get a lot of noise and vignetting when it's low quality equipment and lighting (not necessarily low quality anything else btw) due mostly to budget constraints.
But on lighting (and light and lighting with composition of the subject is just about everything) there are many many examples of superb cinematography. Film Noir immediately comes to mind. The cinematography of that example I posted the other day The Girl with the Pearl Earring by pure definition is fantastic cinematography and is shot like a Vermeer painting, apart from anything else because of the use of awesome lighting techniques. David Lean's films were known for great photography and so were Frank Capras. Tons of examples out there. The Third Man for instance and it's superb low light techniques and Psycho shot very flat and cold juxtaposed against the superb glossiness of North by North West. etc etc etc etc.
If you think about moving pictures - it is basically a collection of still photographs and when it's good, every still in isolation is good.