Which colour science do you like the most?

[Robert Collins]

Seems to me you have to work quite hard with that Sony image in post to make it look that bad.

[thephoenix]

is she single ?

[Avenger 2.0]

Aliens will certainly vote for Sony ?
Both are protecting their higher end cinema camera's, but in a different way.

Canon -> Good color, crappy specs

Sony -> Good specs, crappy color

Making sure you will not use these 'cheap' body's to replace your cinema camera's.

[stephen]

Here is my grade. Took me 3-4 min more for than my regular workflow.

Have no preference in terms of color / color science between Canon and Sony.
 

[Avenger 2.0]

 

7 minutes ago, stephen said:

Here is my grade. Took me 3-4 min more for than my regular workflow.

Have no preference in terms of color / color science between Canon and Sony.
 

But if you count 3-4 min more for processing 1000 pictures (typical wedding day) that would be almost a week of extra work...

[Adam Kuźniar]

I dONT kNow I JuST SHoOT raw aNd mAkE ANY colors i WAnT

[Mattias Burling]

The camera has one job, process an image. If it needs 3-4 minutes work per image just to make people look normal.. that's not exactly awesome imo.

It's like whith the white balance in Slog2. Defenders always claimed that setting the right WB needed extra time and effort and that is perfectly normal.. yeah no.. in every other camera on earth it's a basic setting that takes two seconds and always has.

I love Sony cameras.

I've bought many, way more than Canons. And I can get really nice looking images and colors out of them, no problem. But doing it fast, efficient and consistent compared to CaNikon, PanaOly, or even Pentax and Leica.. not so much.

[Mako Sports]

Here's about the best I could do, took around 5 mins. most of which was opening it up in camera raw, then Photoshop, then exporting as a jpeg and bringing it into resolve. 

However this test was clearly botched af

my cousin shoots fashion on an old A7ii and he can make skin look pretty good imo https://www.anthonyjudge.com/cream-collection This was around 175 shots but only 6 made it into the magazine. I plan to film his next big shoot, so atleast then I can see how the a7ii's color will compare to my FS5's.

I'm no photographer but 700 shots from a portrait session with a single model is asinine, unless its your girlfriend/wife. 

 

 

 

17 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

It's like whith the white balance in Slog2. Defenders always claimed that setting the right WB needed extra time and effort and that is perfectly normal.. yeah no.. in every other camera on earth it's a basic setting that takes two seconds and always has.

I'm getting more into Slog 2 now, unlike the Sony alpha cameras WB in slog2/3 is locked to 3 presets, 3200, 4400, and 5500K I believe. Alister C said its bc " The main reason is to ensure you get the cameras full dynamic range in each colour." I wonder why Alpha bodies don't lock the WB.

[Django]

I just bought an FS7 and as I mentioned in the thread I started about it, the skin tones SOOC are vastly inferior to what I effortlessly get out of my Canons.

Thankfully though the beefy 600mbps 10-bit 422 XAVC-I codec makes up for it and grading has never been easier.

Slight temperature/tint adjustment. Throw down the Venice LUT and I'm in the zone. Still that's an extra node or two (times as many clips as you have).

The FS5 mk II sole and unique "upgrade" (more like a fix) was the Venice CS. That kinda says a lot about Sony CS!

To be fair though, a lot has been improved since A7S2. We're still nowhere near CaNikon/Fuji CS but things are more neutral now.

Canon does have some kind of magic sauce when it comes to skin tones & red signal. It just really pops. Seem to remember it has to do with how the RGB is processed..

The original 5D for stills and 1DC / C100 / 5D3ML for video are still my favourite Canons when it comes to CS.

Leica CS (pre-M10) is yet in another league imho.

[Mako Sports]

20 minutes ago, Django said:

I just bought an FS7 and as I mentioned in the thread I started about it, the skin tones SOOC are vastly inferior to what I effortlessly get out of my Canons.

Thankfully though the beefy 600mbps 10-bit 422 XAVC-I codec makes up for it and grading has never been easier.

Slight temperature/tint adjustment. Throw down the Venice LUT and I'm in the zone. Still that's an extra node or two (times as many clips as you have).

ngl your really tempting me with that FS7, once I get some money together i'll sell my FS5 and probably upgrade to it. ?

[Castorp]

Canon sometimes isn’t the best for landscapes. There’s a focus on skin tones that sometimes take the oomph out of greens and blues.

I find Fujifilm and Nikon to have a great balance overall, all subject matters considered. 

The Panasonic S1 looks fantastic.

Every time I look at jpegs from Olympus OMD camera’s I come away impressed. Olympus colour is underrated. 

[Andrew Reid]

6 hours ago, Robert Collins said:

Seems to me you have to work quite hard with that Sony image in post to make it look that bad.

Opposite way round my friend.

3 hours ago, Mako Sports said:

Here's about the best I could do, took around 5 mins. most of which was opening it up in camera raw, then Photoshop, then exporting as a jpeg and bringing it into resolve. 

However this test was clearly botched af

my cousin shoots fashion on an old A7ii and he can make skin look pretty good imo https://www.anthonyjudge.com/cream-collection This was around 175 shots but only 6 made it into the magazine. I plan to film his next big shoot, so atleast then I can see how the a7ii's color will compare to my FS5's.

I'm no photographer but 700 shots from a portrait session with a single model is asinine, unless its your girlfriend/wife. 

 

 

 

I'm getting more into Slog 2 now, unlike the Sony alpha cameras WB in slog2/3 is locked to 3 presets, 3200, 4400, and 5500K I believe. Alister C said its bc " The main reason is to ensure you get the cameras full dynamic range in each colour." I wonder why Alpha bodies don't lock the WB.

Took around 5 minutes? Now multiply that by 1000.

You fix my photos.

I'll pay you $1 for the lot.

Still short of the Canon anyway.

3 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

The camera has one job, process an image. If it needs 3-4 minutes work per image just to make people look normal.. that's not exactly awesome imo.

Exactly.

3 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

It's like whith the white balance in Slog2. Defenders always claimed that setting the right WB needed extra time and effort and that is perfectly normal.. yeah no.. in every other camera on earth it's a basic setting that takes two seconds and always has.

White balance is baked into S-LOG 2.

Then people put a totally different colour temperature on it with a LUT.

No wonder it looks a bit weird.

I remember that Sony recognised this was a problem and on the FS cameras you get to choose S-Gamut White Balance Color Modes like 5300K!

Problem was, then you lost your usual AWB system and had to dive into the shitty Sony menus to select a preset.

3 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

I love Sony cameras.

I've bought many, way more than Canons. And I can get really nice looking images and colors out of them, no problem. But doing it fast, efficient and consistent compared to CaNikon, PanaOly, or even Pentax and Leica.. not so much.

The Leica M9 is a perfect example of what I'm talking about.

You open the RAW in Adobe, and then 2 seconds later, it's done. No fiddling or 5 minutes to fix problems.

Do the same thing with a Sony and no matter what, people look like they have big red bags under their eyes, yellow shadow under their chin, magenta rashes and zombie-dead flesh where a nice healthy glow should be.

It's much easier to fix greens and blues in landscapes if needed, than it is to fix skin. Skin is very complicated and you rely on the camera to get it right.

[stephen]

Presets could be used to speed processing time. Don't shoot weddings but had similar discussion on a local forum. A pro photographer using Sony for weddings said that he uses presets for all images.  20-30 of the best photos he process individually. That's exactly what I would do too. He has clients in Switzerland and Germany and shoots with Sony exclusively. 

If you like Canon colors out of the box and/or save time is post then of course use Canon.  

Have both Canon and Sony cameras. 3 months ago got EOS M and it's my 2nd Canon camera RAW ML video is very good - Canon colors, setting white balance in post, etc.  But still have to process, color correct and grade each clip individually in order to get the best image out of it. In the process learned quite a lot how to shoot with this camera and how to process the footage. And it is like this with every other camera.  Recently did a small project with Sony A7 III.

Search on youtube for EOS M RAW. There are plenty videos shot in RAW. Some are crap, some are OK and some stand out. Same camera, same color science (RAW) but quite different results. Zeek really makes this camera shine.

But yes in general getting good colors with Sony is more challenging and requires some research tests and fiddling with the settings, profiles, etc. A7S uses a different sensor and because of it or because of different CS is the worst when shooting 8bit 4:2:0 x264 video. With RAW format for photo don't have a problem. 

 

[Robert Collins]

42 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Opposite way round my friend.

 

Mine was an 'auto adjustment' in Lightroom and 'white balance'. You can do a 1000 photos in less than 5 minutes....

[Emanuel]

For the most part, I figure out it was shot on Sony. No hard to guess. When not, good post working, other than that, more than a guess : -)

[heart0less]

 

[Papiskokuji]

Andrew, your test isn't fair. As the other forumer said, there's one photo shot with soft light in the shade and the other one with direct sunlight and green reflection from the grass. I totally agree with you about Canon (and Nikon, and even fuji) having better colors straight out of the camera than Sony, but the gap isn't as wide as those photos want it to be.

And now with presets in lightroom, you can easily turn any camera into anything. And applying it to series of photos takes one clic. I wasn't liking my RX100 V photos because of the colors. I purchased VSCO presets to try them out, and I was stunned at the results. With just a bit of fiddling, and a few clicks, my RX100 turned into a fuji camera ! With a classic chrome esthetic. And the latest sony cameras have tremendously improved their color science. But again, I prefer Canon jpegs. No actually I prefer Fuji jpegs :P

[Mokara]

13 hours ago, Avenger 2.0 said:

 

But if you count 3-4 min more for processing 1000 pictures (typical wedding day) that would be almost a week of extra work...

Not really. The changes to your regular workflow would be consistent, meaning that it would be automated, just as it would be done with sets shot by any other camera.

If someone normally shot on a Sony, and then had to adjust a raw image from Canon, it would entail the same amount of work. It would add "almost a week of extra work" by your logic, meaning that no one should be buying Canon cameras.

[Andrew Reid]

10 hours ago, Robert Collins said:

Mine was an 'auto adjustment' in Lightroom and 'white balance'. You can do a 1000 photos in less than 5 minutes....

Not without RSI.

To avoid that, picking up another camera instead that doesn't have broken colour would be as easy as 5 seconds.

So it's all unnecessary ball aches.

[Castorp]

Lee Varis shows at 06:18 why good colour, in this case good jpegs, can be important.

The raw doesn’t necessarily give you any clues to what is possible. How can you edit for what you don’t know is there?

Same goes for good colour camera vs a bad one. Sure you can edit for anything, but without reference it’s difficult. It’s not only about the time it takes to move a slider but also which slider and what to do with it.

I keep coming back to this video.