Hey Vivek, yeah, DOF control -in Spades- at 0.95
You could just about tell where that guy missed shaving...
re the b/w coverage illus shot sequence, I don't know if you shot that? but judging by your posted real-world® shots, it's coverage on m4/3 sure looks better/larger (unless in the turnarounds of resizing/posting/etc some of your full image area was lost).
Here's what I vaguely recall being told once about the Angenieux 0.95 versions: The first chrome barrel one was developed for c-mt, for all the 16mm cameras that were starting to sell in numbers in the US at the time (B&H, Kodak). Small size mattered for those fairly small 3-lens turrets. This thing is small but Solid, btw. Feels like a solid slug of nickel that could have been loaded into a howitzer in a pinch...
Later they improved adapted/remade it in Arri mt, w/part chrome and part black barrel, for the beefier Arri's (16S, 16M, probably the 16BL was intro'd by then, which was used more often on tripod), so increasing size (also) had the advantage of giving a camera operator or focus puller a larger ring to grab and read. -The orig version is set up more as a trad rf lens/ordnance.
Then, the all-black 3rd and Penultimate version (... just trying to keep up w/that evocative "Sybaritic" rendering description earlier ...) which you now sleep w/under the pillow, no doubt. Improved further coatings, and whatever other Parisian flavor they managed to charm it with.
I'm not sure about it being intended for S16 though, as that wasn't really catching on until some years later, just beginning at the end of the 70's.
Most all of the big-gun cine lensmakers' primes were consistently good to exc by the 60's-70's, esp for 35mm -remember what the end use of the glass was typically for (not 8x10 prints). Ang, Cooke, Schneider, Zeiss, oh my.
Anyway, yes, your nice shots got me revved up for what I've had sitting in a shoebox, but I did expect my Oldie O.95 would be something of a dog wide-open for stills; but still hoping for some "character" nevertheless. --Not to mention being able to "see something" half-way "clearly" in low light on this G1! -f/3.5 and up just don't cut it in that finder for me in what I call available light...
(So when is that Raynox c-adptr selling already? And when are the really cheapo versions going to make this a less risky experiment? C-mt should be about the easiest adptr to make.)
And for those thinking it's a cheap way in, I doubt that most 16 lenses -let alone in c-mt, will cover as generously as Vivek's magic 0.95, although some were known to cover more than 16.