Best COLOR SCIENCE: Canon vs Nikon vs Sony vs Fujifilm
Vložit
- čas přidán 4. 11. 2018
- I gave 1,500 photographers a blind poll and had them pick the image with the best color in several different scenes, including portraits in different lighting and outdoor photos. Which camera was the best: Canon, Nikon, Sony, or Fuji?
Check out our #1 PHOTOGRAPHY BOOK on Amazon: help.tc/s
OUR STORE: sdp.io/sdpbook
Use our 10% off coupon 'CZcams'
RECOMMENDED PHOTOGRAPHY GEAR:
STARTER CAMERAS:
Basic Starter Camera ($280 used at Amazon): Canon T3 help.tc/t3
Better Starter Camera ($500 at Amazon): Nikon D5300 help.tc/d5300
Better Travel Camera ($500 at Amazon): Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II help.tc/em10ii
LANDSCAPE CAMERAS:
Good ($550 at Amazon): Sony a6000 help.tc/a6000
Better ($1,400) at Amazon: Nikon D5500 help.tc/D5500 & Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 help.tc/s35
Best ($3,150) at Amazon: Pentax K-1 help.tc/K1 & Pentax 24-70 f/2.8 help.tc/p24
PORTRAIT CAMERAS:
Beginner ($950 at Amazon): Canon T6i help.tc/t6i & Canon 50mm f/1.8 help.tc/c50
Better ($3,000 at Amazon): Nikon D610 help.tc/d610 & Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 help.tc/t200
Best ($5,300) at Amazon: Nikon D810 help.tc/d810 & Nikon 70-200 f/2.8E help.tc/n200e
WILDLIFE CAMERAS:
Starter ($1,100 at Amazon): Canon 7D help.tc/7D & Canon 400mm f/5.6 help.tc/c400
Great ($3,200 at Amazon): Nikon D500 help.tc/d500 & Nikon 200-500 f/5.6 help.tc/n500
VIDEO CAMERAS:
Beginner ($500 at Amazon): Panasonic G7 help.tc/g7 & Panasonic 14-42mm help.tc/p42
Better ($1,400 at Amazon): Panasonic GH4 amzn.to/2p5dAmD & Panasonic 14-140 f/3.5-5.6 help.tc/p140
Best ($4,300 at Amazon): Panasonic GH5 help.tc/gh5 & Metabones Speed Booster XL help.tc/mbxl & Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 help.tc/s35 & Sigma 50-100 f/1.8 help.tc/s100
DRONES:
Beginner ($400 at Amazon): DJI Phantom 3 help.tc/p3
Travel ($1,000 at Amazon): DJI Mavic Pro help.tc/Mavic
Better Image Quality ($1,500 at Amazon): DJI Phantom 4 Pro help.tc/p4p
My Canon has colors grounded in deep blackberry tones with shades of lemon, anise and cherry ... with a back pallet of oakiness. It is low in tannin producing a smooth silky quality to the final image reminiscent of under-exposed Kodachrome ...
your a fucking genius
I sold my Sony gear and bought a t3i after reading this. I'm in.
God tier level comment.
You should write bibles
I need some of your skills in writing my assignment...
I dont consider myself a photographer, i consider myself a gear acquirer
Lol. I am more like cheap photo/video accessory hoarder. I keep buying stuff that I never use. But I WANT IT SO BAD until I get it. Dunno. I bought a full budget strobist setup and never really used it. Strobist would be so disappointed if he heard that. :D
@Joey Mantka Well, at least he's funny. No one asked for your opinion, AND you're not funny. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Nothing wrong with being a gear whore, as long as you know it
Lmao
at least you're honest about it :)
The experts are the intermediates, and the intermediates are experts. The dunning kruger effect!
Agreed
I would even dare to say some begginers picked expert 🤣
My takeaway from this video: If you put the Peak Design red/black thingy on top of a Sony, it looks like a Nikon if you squint!
So true!
Cannot unsee. Will put my peak design thingy (what are they called anyway) on my A7 now. Mainly because I regret buying one instead of a Nikon.
LOL! Good one!
just tried this and yes i can confirm for everyone too lazy to check for themselves.
I told my Nikon he didn't win. He's really upset about it. Now I need to remove Dramatic Abberation also.
Dramatic Chromatic Abberatic Abberation!
LOL
LMFAO, dramatic aberration. I'm officially altering my photography jargon.
This is a great video, really shows that people are loyal to the brand, not the colour!
Exactly.
Is it brand loyalty or the narcissist in everyone coming out?
well said
What I fail to understand is that how can people judge on the "colour science" without being present at the scene of the shot. A photograph can be manipulated to any extent to tone down or tone up colours. I have seen seriously vivid sunsets that no camera can capture, (though I tried my best) yet most of my friends think whatever the camera captured is fake because of the colours. The picture looks like an HDR shot without actual HDR.
Colour science should depend upon time of day, weather, indoor-outdoor, sunlight and its angle.. etc etc. And only the photographer will be able to bring colours closest to the actual place/person/skintone etc.
Brand fidelity first, colour fidelity; not even close!
As a Fuji user i dont hate other camera brands. Heck , i love to use other brands too, learning their system and using them is a great learning curve for me. Also you should add the fact that many camera users can't buy many cameras because of this reason like me stick to one camera and fell in love with our only camera.
The design of your study is brilliant. My field-epidemiology-is all about structuring studies to ascertain risk factors and causes of diseases. You think like an epidemiologist! This is really, really good science. Congratulations on a superb, first class scientific study.
Thanks!
You must be busy right now :D
I was about to say this is a brilliant idea for an experiment. It never even crossed my mind. Credit to this guy for coming up with it.
Terrible poll, totally unscientific, garbage in - garbage out.
A blind test is correct. People are blinded by brand loyalty.
The color science argument can finally be put to rest, or maybe not. Fanboys will find some way to justify their brand loyalty... 🤨
I am not blinded by brand loyalty, I just know Fujifilm is the best and Sony colour is similar to bogeys. :P
while your statement is correct I have always thought that Fuji colour was better than Sony (jpeg) and I have Sony as a Minolta legacy and can not justify the cost to change mount or brand so I'm stuck on A-Mount but looking at a new film body to go with the lenses
Joking aside, it really doesn't matter a huge amount in the end
Yes we are. (Loyal Canon user)
You should get an award for this research.
Indeed!!! awesome work!! Thumbs up!!
Yeah, I thought I was listening to a PhD viva presentation
This is one of the best videos you have ever made. It's an older one and just by accident came back to rewatch it but independent of the topic and result of this video I just love the overall approach you take on gear in general. You just test, observe, throw the unfiltered information out there and always provide feedback on what you believe should be improved upon/changed. Very few youtube channels handle topics in this way.
I hadn't watched Tony in a while and my gawd his rational mind is refreshing.
This experiment/poll is absolute GOLD!
I would say it was BLUE
@@krazyfrog 🤣🙏🏼
@@krazyfrog lol
Agree
Kodak Kodacolor Gold 400!
16:23
100% of participants believe they are in the 8%.
Or maybe 92% of them do!
You mean 8% of participants believe they are in the 8%....
😂
Haha!
@Farhad
100% thought they were in the 8%
92% believed they were in the 8%
But the point has been taken so we all understand what is the meaning of all this :)
Tony, thank you so much for the scientific test! However, I would be very interested to know which color science (brand) was chosen as best by the 8% of people that were consistent in choosing the best photo. Because those are the experts that I would love to know their opinion!! Please share that piece of information!!
But the best color is usually the most beloved color for everyone, it doesn’t matter how experts think
You nailed it. I’ve always wondered how accurate “color science” is. Even, what it is really. Now I know we talk about it from a perceived point of view. We are not even really talking about accuracy. Accuracy would be how the close the camera reproduces the color compared to the actual color. But it looks like people are rating how the manufacturers interpret color. And, by the way, it doesn’t even matter because most photographers adjust colors anyway. Love it.
Mental note: Don't go round for dinner at Tony's. "Would you like a glass of wine?" … "Thanks, that would be lovely … Come on, Tony, put the blindfold away."
🤣 I was thinking that too.
😂
Tony bad boy ?
😆
Wow! So good Tony! I was shocked by the results just like you. I’ll be doing a video recording version of this. 👍👊
Wow that will be awesome!!! Thank you in advance, Max!
Maybe you want to make video like this. I waiting for you video about a7iii vs eos r
Is it really interesting to know the outcome of your Jpegs? With your video test and the Nikon super green version, it surprised me a lot as I have seen beautiful videos from that camera and they don't look green at all, is that with the Nikon in-camera setting or how come? Isn't the actual image quality more important and how it manages the color grading? Check out Jared Polins test of the Z7 for example.
Max, I'm not convinced by this photo testing. I saw a video earlier today comparing the Nikon Z7 with the Sony A7III in an AF/eye-detect test.
Nikon footage of a model was up first, then the Sony of the same model under the same conditions. The model looked very good in the Nikon footage (I've never owned one). But as soon as the Sony came up the difference in skin
tone /texture was undeniable. The model's face was made very unattractive by the Sony footage--it wasn't skin color alone. It was something about tone and texture.
I've done the same test with Fuji X-H1 and XT3 and the Sony. Same results. The Fuji skin tone/texture makes people's faces look much better.
I have a Sony a7III, but, at least in video, it can't hold a candle to my Fujis.
Maybe I could get it there with 1000 hours torturing those profiles--but why?!? Why should I spend all those hours when I've got it right out of the camera with my X-H1 and X-T3---and better bit rates?
woould watch it definitly !
Amazing video! Thanks for making this!
This is so interesting. My first camera was a Nikon. I loved the images it produced. Moved to Olympus this year and I love it more. I'm not sure why. I hate over saturated images and go for a more natural edit. Olympus makes it so easy. So does Nikon.
As a scientist I have one thing to say: I love you Tony! Lol well done!
I'm a scientist too and I approve this message.
Really well done.
Not a scientist, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
Would a scientist look at the Jpegs and the processing of those in camera first??
ottawamountainman - is that a subjective love balanced by the available evidence and no preconceived conclusions?
Most photographers are humble.
-Moose Peterson “hold my beer”
Manny Ortiz 😂🍺
That's bs, Manny.
Lmao! That was a cringey ass podcast
Awe cmon Steve just having a little fun 🤙
😂🤣😂
“Color is like wine” - so true, individual taste is the ultimate decider.
Hey, just wanted to say how much I appreciate the time and thought you put into this experiment. I'm not sure if I'm in the minority but I love finding data like this out. Please keep doing it!
I will be thinking about this and coming up with another test to add data. Thank you Tony
Thanks, Michael!
love your chanel Michael. wonderfull job.
Come on Michael i waiting your video
Michael and Tony some of the better ones out there!
Michael, love your channel. Your technical testing and reviews are the best photography science out there. You and Tony should do a video together.
Perhaps another valuable test would be to survey 1,500 NON-photographers to see which pictures they liked. No camera brands would be mentioned, because it wouldn't matter to consumers.
I did pull out the same of non-photographers, but so few participated that I didn't feel confident it was statistically significant. I tried really hard to get non-photographers to participate, but you can see who follows me...
@@TonyAndChelsea Understood. Of course, thank you for the significant amount of work you put in.
Everybody is a photographer today with their smartphones, but I understand your point.
I'm pretty sure non photographers would even more heavily be Canon biased to be honest.
@@Eihei true. Canon does the warm trick with the Reds. And as Tony alluded to, that's what people like
Great Tony, thanks. As a full time commercial photographer and Nikon shooter I have no choice but to carry a colour checker grey card for a test shot. Maybe old school but I would do that with all model cameras. Clients pay a lot of money for their branding and the colour must be perfect.
I had a run with the Fuji X T3 with a 50-140 and loved it. Merry Christmas from OZ.
"Fujifilm has the best color science"
"Let me tell you about Acros" ;)
Yes. Love Acros.
Plot twist: Yashica Y35 is the best.
I laughed so hard
LOL
It must have the best "color science" :) Who cares if everything is else is crap.
lol!
Ahh but depends on which film cartridge you use...... lmao!
I use Fuji just because the camera looks good🤷🏻♂️ and the dials bring me fun during shooting
It has that retro look and feel.
Fuji does have the best color science though in my opinion. Skin tones are super accurate and White and Reds are perfect.
Like most including me haha. Thats why most Fuji FB groups are just pics of peoples cameras instead of actual images taken with them.
You pretty much ridicule your own reason for choosing a particular camera, however, having fun during shooting is probably one of the most important aspects about a camera. Because it influences what you actually do with it, which is something color science, sharpness etc really don't have the same impact on.
Having fun with Photography can actually be way more important then anything scientific about cameras. It'll reflect in your photos. Doesn't matter about what you are shooting with. It's about the actual photoshooting :) have fun out there!
Awesome. Thanks, Tony! What might be worth mentioning too is that with custom camera profiles made with ColorChecker and just about any camera the results will be more or less equal (however, I don’t get quite the same results in LR with Fujifilm than with others even profiled, maybe because of the different demosaicing of the X-Trans RAWs).
Tbh I actually really loved my Pentax K20D’s colour ; it can record RGBY for every single pixel (Y being luminosity ☺️) I moved to Canon 5D3 / then 5D4 ... I often get complements on colour and the Pentax photos still stand up well on my website!
Plot twist. These were all iphone pics with diffrent filters
Ahahahahahahahaha.
even bigger plot twist, they were all shot with a galaxy s3
Biggest plot twist: It was a Nokia 3310 (the original, not remake)
This is an award winning review. Thanks alot Tony.
Why, because of the results. Because of the scientific value? Statistically significant? The target audience? The study population. Showing a few images out of billions produced each year? Never saw such a bad research.
@@aklaasvandalen207
@@aklaasvandalen207 I think you don't understand the whole thing behind this poll... Colour is just subjective that's it. Buying a camera (of a specific brand) only on that point is not a good way of choosing it. Just test the camera you want to buy, test another one, and another one and just keep the one you love the most. Argumenting on colour is like arguments on the taste of a wine, everyone perception is different. So when reviewers or youtubers tell you about colour science, just take it with a grain of salt. All cameras today are REALLY REALLY good :-)
@@jmiscischia I agree that all cameras nowadays are really good and that color is matter of taste. But it's not like different tastes are equally distributed. It's like with everything that is matter of taste, f.e. fashion etc.. There is always a majority which finds something appealing. And it can shift over decades but if you want to "please" the majority it's not that much matter of taste anymore.
Alex, I agree with your basic point. It is sometimes useful to remember that color toning had become a highly-developed part of the art world well before the camera was invented. During Picasso's blue period was he using better color science than during the rest of his career? Was, overall, the color treatment of Van Gogh scientifically better or worse than Picasso's? I think the reasonable answer is no. However, I think most art lovers would agree that all of those color tonings were better than what you often see in the decorative art department of Walmart or Bed, Bath, and Beyond.
When you're trying to do a poll about color science and you accidentally make a psychology study
This is by far one of my favorite vids this week. DATA. Freakin DATA. Lol! Nice work with this one, Mr Northrup 👍🏽
Actual 'LOL' when Sony was on top and Canon on the bottom. As a Sony shooter, I often see people say they'd switch to Sony but hate the Sony colour science and love the Canon.
I'm looking forward to reading the rage in the comments over the next few days.
Stinky Floata No rage. You’re absolutely right. Sony colors blow!! Especially for video. Bleh!
@@JeremyGalloway well it must be so if you say so, because after all, you are the globally respected pro on color.
@@JeremyGalloway lmao ok, I'd rather have 15 stop of dynamic range in video than marginally better photos. When CZcamsrs compared the A7iii colors to the eos r, they weren't as far off as you'd think. Pre a9, a7riii, and A7iii they were awful sure, but everyone says the three new cameras are about 80% as good now.
@@leecason9468 So Sony has made strides in color reproduction with their latest cameras? From what I've seen and read over the years is that most of Sony's cameras produced cooler colors in JPEG which was a turnoff for me when looking at which mirrorless camera to get in 2013.
Sibir Lupus no, Andrew and Denae did a similar blind test and nobody could tell the difference. It’s all BS. My A7ii color was nice. My autofocus for fast moving subjects was not fine
You have done some great videos before but this one is an amazing work! Great insights, almost like a scientific dissertation! Congrats!
He just did an M.Sc. In color science.
Thank you for the work you put in to this video. I haven't really considered this in photos but more videos, when trying for that cinematic look and feel. Would you do another video similar to this one but for video?
This is awesome !! Thank you for such an informative video. Subscribed !
Some people just like to watch the world burn. And Tony is just sitting back and laughing by showing the end results. Great video!
Summary: Color Science is an intensely personal, psychologically driven preference.
But the interesting result is: Brand loyality (as well as hate of competition) is the driving force in this psychology. We always may have suspected some influence, but the sheer power of this force is striking.
@@tubularificationed Well said!
True
We've seen consistent bias towards Sony, the conclusion is Sony has best color science.
PS: also I'm not saying that because I have a Sony.
Fantastic! A good reminder that we need to keep going back to first principles: For non-scientific photography the only thing that matters is how the target audience likes the final result.
Loved the video, I'm not a photographer, but wanted to add something. Depending on the screen that the viewer is looking at those pictures (Quality, OLED, LCD, etc) as well as the platform it's been shared (insta, twitter, .. ) the colors are different. Keep this up please
and on whether one is controlling compression! I admittedly learned that the hard way with DA and Instagram, and it took me longer than I'm proud of
Tony & Chelsea - social psychology Professor here - nice litttle study you did there ! Color has been studied by psychologists for some time and it can have effects on us without us ever realising it. Research shows, for example, that the colors used around the border of a web page can influence the way we perceive goods advertised on that web page. You label your video "color science" but really you are looking at "color perception". Perhaps what DXO measure when they look at sensors is closer to what we might call "color science". The brand effects are interesting but not surprising to me - we are tribal beings and will get tribal about all manner of things - brands, politics, foods, video games - things that to some seem trivial, can create tribalism amongst those heavily psychologically invested in them. Why the hate for Fuji? Perhaps Fuji represents some kind of psychological threat to traditiional DSLR users, who I imagine, are represented by your Canon and Nikon participants. Fuji represents non-traditional, it represents mirrorless. We tend to react to threats to our belief systems negatively. This is one of the things that drives prejudice.
Out of the 4 pictures with faked brand names, Fuji was the one with the way off overly warm tone. I've not been part of this test, so I don't know if there were any other images where the fuji label got to be on a more neutral (more similar to the other 2 non rose-yellow ones), but from those 4 examples, I would have picked "fujifilm" labeled image as my least favourite as well. This might explain why everyone hated on the fuji, it just drew the shittiest pic in that particular comparison.
AM CZcams. But the picture labelled "Fujifilm" was ranked number one, when the label was not there ...
And some of us are able to view hues correctly for one.(do a hue test and have a calibrated IPS display or dont bother talking at all!!) Be actually scientific instead of emotional.(which is much harder than it seems). There are sites that have calculated the delta errors of over 100 cameras. The Canons have by far the closest to actually hue.
It is insane that 99.9% or more of people that make claims have never tested 2 cameras h2h scientifically. Yet have such strong(wrong) conclusions.
I dont submit that Canon has the most pleasing colours, but most accurate, yes. That is what I prefer also.
There is also no way with these youtube videos to show the quality of tonality either.
Most people are as you say, tribal idiots.
@@jonastullock9220 I thought Tony summed up by saying that the people who care about accurate(color science) or whatever do what they want anyway, they all shot raw and would never use the in camera processed image at all as their final finished work. The discussion becomes a tail chasing gimic of some kind.
@@AConnect06 Hi Asili2tv, There are people who care about color and shoot RAW to create the colors they want. These people dont care about sensor accuracy as you are talking about.
It is much harder to create accurate colors from memory(nearly impossible). Having a camera that has the lowest delta error ie: most accurate colors makes things much easier for people that want accurate color. Which is most Canon models.
Again this is objective, not whichever brand gives the most pleasing colors = subjective.
Also, every RAW program is using its own color science. But there is the Color Filter Array in every camera that dictates how strongly or weakly hues are picked up.
Color quality is a huge deal and very real. This video was not getting into that.
As far as the loony fanboys, they arnt worth replying to.
What’s funny is I already had a canon Eos r and Nikon Z7 on the way to my house to do something similar (not this good) about “color science” and if anyone could tell the difference
Try not to use your beautiful model wife for all the photos as all or no colors still look good on her. Cheers.
@@kinachahue Jesus, that was cringy..
Please still do it, love your work btw keep it up!
Just do it, Manny!
Manny Ortiz must be bored 😐
Hats off to you for taking time to design a survey that screens out emotion (e.g., brand loyalty), validates responses during, and yields objective results. I often don't finish surveys because they're so obviously poorly thought out (even if not slanted blatantly toward the desired results). Enjoyed the refreshing, concise presentation style. I usually skip videos of this length because they're so often padded with small talk, repetition and other poor use of time. Well done!
Superb video. Thanks. Learned a lot.
It doesn't really matter because we adjust the color and change it anyway. It's not like we're color scientists in a lab, lol. It wouldn't matter which camera I used, I would still adjust it to what pleases my eye, with little regard to what is perfectly accurate color. Idk, maybe I'm doing it wrong, haha.
And if it really bothers you you can create a preset/color profile with color adjustments that you like!
@fishhunter626 Exactly! Great point.
adamaj well said..but 99% of photographers or amateurs out there are just wankers and they love to wank over things a client and even them wouldnt notice in real life
Adamaj, I certainly agree. All I would like to add is that internally your camera generates an image with a color depth of roughly 12-15 bits. When you publish an image or give it to a customer, it is usually 8 bit JPEG or something else with a similar bit depth. To go from, say, 14 bits to 8 bits involves throwing away 63/64ths (98%) of the original color data. If you don't want unpleasant artifacts and other nasty surprises then you want to defer this as long as possible in your workflow. This is computer science, not color science.
big round of applause to Lightroom
Composition is everything. Color science is overrated.
pretty much when you have raw
+Roman
No, brand of SD card! Card science! Only newbs shoot with Leximax! Pros only use SmartSD cards! Let me link to a forum post from imrightdotcom
@Red black Not many people shoot Raw video
Few canon shooters talking here
Subject matter is king in my opinion. Then composition.
Thanks for the debunking, when people ask me about which cameras are the "best" I have always said what camera fits "your" ergonomics- can you reach the switches when holding the camera because you are more likely to enjoy using it. As for your images you can fix those in post.
Was such a fun to watch, amazing!
color science is only for people who shoot jpeg. everyone who edits their raw always manipulate's the skintone to their liking, in this case it doesn't really matter. Hell, some people even use presets that turn the person in the photo and background into a sandstorm tan color and brag about color science after. Look at video, the pros use flat color profiles then color grade after.
Ain't nobody got time for that. The only time I want to dink with RAW is if I need to recover shadows in a high contrast situation. Beyond that, I save a bunch of time if I can get things right in-camera.
@@RyanRuark wow yeah because all pros shoot jpeg everyone knows. Dude you just make any image better by shooting raw and editing
when you post process 1500 pics from an event you prefer the camera that you need 5 minutes process per pic than the one you need 7 minutes per pic.
@@Ranblv why take 1500?? Shoot smarter, not spray and pray. Jared polin ,Tony, and literally almost every big photography CZcamsr all say to not take so many photos.
Lee Cason I agree to not spray and pray ..if I did I'd be worried about the buffer causing me to miss a great moment
Man, my shouts into the void saying this exact thin have finally been answered by a concrete test. thank you.
The concrete test would of been different if he used an a6000.
Very impressive undertaking! Thanks for the work you did to get these results.
What interests me most is the ability of the sensor to gather the greatest EV range without bracketing or HDR. I was a Zone VI guy, and we used to shoot for a particular value (zone 8 on zone 8, for example), then adjust development for the anticipated contrast. Something I used to do was to take two exact same exposures on each si< de of a 4x5 film holder. I would then develop one, see the results, and fine tune development on the other one. Doing this, I found I rarely had to burn or dodge when printing.
Sean Tucker did a really interesting portrait colour science experiment a couple of weeks ago; Canon vs Sony - do check it out.
That's the same Petapixel trash article that I mentioned! Notice how the colour corrected image looks almost identical to the Sony image! The Canon colour is ridiculously pimped out to be too warm! Like I said, its colour ACCURACY that matters. Sony has it in spades.
That was an excellent video. That's where I learned about his method for actually calculating the CMY colors for skintones.
@@leticiali Sean Tucker was pissed at petapixel for using his video in their agenda
The results are not surprising. 75% of people believe they are higher than average!
Only 25% of them would be wrong :-)) Not bad odds :-))
@@dimitristsagdis7340 26% to be exact; and 26% is pretty bad odds for not winning anything at all! ;)
I said 25% being wrong not right. And even if I accept your 26% it is still very good odds for winning. Do you know of any lottery, or casino game that gives better or at least the same odds?
@@dimitristsagdis7340 You're probably right; but, outside table roulette odds, if I recall, are about 46% (Red vs. Black).
@Alex Gowers It's true; but only if a percentage of the sample responded. The statement makes it implicit that everyone responded. And even if 25% didn't respond and only 75% of the sample responded then at least the 25% of the respondents in the sample would be wrong since mathematically the sample can not have more than 49% above above average in a binary test. It's not graded on a curve.
Let's all keep in mind the "most accurate" color is not always the most PLEASING color. I happen to prefer the FUJI colors above all others, which kind of makes sense because Fuji has always been a film manufacturer, and understands something beyond just the "textbook" color science. But most dissatisfaction can be corrected anyhow with Photoshop and other utilities - - and using RAW.
But if you're satisfied with just the average JPEG for your very own casual encounter personal photography, (rather than professional sales of your work), then I can't say no to FUJI.
I have a Fuji, a Canon, and a Nikon. I rate my color preferences in the same order in which I listed my cameras - Meaning that Fuji reigns supreme, and Nikon is somewhat disappointing.
Oh yes, and Canon is in the middle, duh? Fuji seriously knows color science! Great colors if you're a portrait photographer, whereas Nikon tends to make the skin of Caucasians look too red.
But in the very final analysis, it's far more about personal opinion than it is about anything else, unless your specific purpose is to make it "scientific."
Remember- I own cameras from all of the manufactures which I mentioned.
Great topic! I have done similar test with amplifiers and speakers. People in general seems to have strong Idea of what is good according to the present talkabout rate. But when you do preform a blindtest people can't tell the differens.
Color Science = Canon's only imaginary feature they still have that is competitive.
For 35mm digital, Canon has the most accurate color capture of what's being photographed, which is what the "color science" is supposed to refer to, not what users prefer. No 35mm digital camera beats medium format in this area, but this test just proves people's bias to what they know, and that includes most camera reviewers who up until about a year ago, had little no no experience with medium format at all!
@@mrg6424 Canon is known to have over-saturated reds. Which is what people prefer in skintones.
It's not at all the most accurate. Sony is in that regard simply more accurate then Canon.
@@mrg6424 Do you have any articles comparing their cinema line vs Red or any other brand to back that claim up?
Not sure if this is the article Tony was speaking about, but it backs up his results. www.pdnonline.com/gear/cameras/the-best-cameras-for-color-reproduction-ranked/
@@1barnet1 You're correct regarding Canon's reds, but over saturation is an easy fix, overall, they are the most accurate at the moment. Sony may have improved with the A7III, I haven't used it yet, but outside of sunlight, the A7RIII is pretty terrible determining color on it's own. I give Canon the nod because it requires the least amount of tweaking.
"You picked Sony!!!"
The honesty shock and disgust from Tony is just funny.
This is a very good, well-researched video. Well done!
Awesome! Awesome vid, analysis and science!
Color science arguments only started to appear when Sony stepped up their game with the A7 series, funny thing is that I only hear mostly people who use canon rave about this. I never liked how canon over saturates and "over reds" everything, I remember a student of mine (who uses canon) editing a picture of a beautiful african girl taken on the studio with a black background, the background was completely yellow and the girl instead of having a beautiful brown color was yellow as well...
I've edited photos from all "major" brands and each one has their tweaks, Canon over saturates and reds up everything, Nikon kicks in the yellows way to much sometimes, Fuji is quite unique more creative colors than "accurate ones", Sony seems more neutral of the bunch although sometimes I find a strange yellow cast on the skin tones when the person is in shade. In the end I have to edit all of them because designers and creative directors want certain types of tones (color grading) or want those perfect tones to clearly demonstrate the color of their clothes (grey card anyone?)
Indeed, Sony seems to really decided to improve its 'color science' - both my A6300 and RX100 mkIII reproduce deep blue skies irretrievably pale and green-tinted (and yes, they are pretty similar), whereas the new A7R3 nearly matches my Canon 1DX mk II - certainly close enough to match in LR. I say irretrievable because trying to fix the sky skin tone goes to crap. I'd be happy if someone has ideas on why sky particularly goes wrong.
Yes, when I do street photography with my canon, the red color is so distracting eventhough its only a little part of my frame.
Surely you would just use the RAW files?
Love it... Best perceived color was Sony. That data point alone speaks volumes about our entire industry and how full of fan boys (myself included) it is.
Yeah and all you see people say online is that Canon color is the best and Sony color science sucks, or that it's "getting better" but still not as good as others.
Loved this thank you. Shot Canon for years, then Fuji, now Sony. To be honest, I loved the colors of the Fuji, but could not explain why. Years ago I learned the trick of warming the highlights in Lightroom and all bets were off. After I switched to Sony in 2015 my Canon friends queried the lack of lenses, being a toy, battery life, etc. Not any more.
Tony, that was awesome!!!
You are absolutely a branch mark in such comparisons!
I liked the methodology and analysis you made out of the statistics!
Good job
i'm pretty surprised by the results. From what I have looked at Sony does tend to more realistic colours, but people do not usually like to see in their pictures realistic colour reproducibility. As you said earlier most people do like warmer pictures, especially of people. Much like you, it doesn't matter much to me since I change the colour balance of most pictures to match the "feeling" of the picture I want to convey. Since I use both Canon and Sony most of the time I do find that to get the same colour balance in shots from the same shoot I need to adjust both in different ways but it is just part of the RAW processing that I need to do. I liked you tests, and I think the biggest thing you did show was the bias towards what people wanted to see. Difficult thing is that everyone's monitor is likely not colour calibrated and what each of them saw on their computers was not consistent either. Almost impossible to get a test that reduces the variables to make an actual "scientific" conclusion.
The test was four images of the same scene from different cameras viewed on a single, constant monitor. The variables and constants were well controlled in this experiment. Except for the participant judges whose bias was well measured and more likely to have a better quality monitor than average.
Sony user here, honestly sony default profiles (not Sony color capability, Sony default profiles) are terrible for video until you tweak the settings and the colors aren’t flattering because they are too realistic. The reason canon people love their colors is because they’re lazy when it comes to color correction. I’ll be honest myself, I don’t have time to color correct for hours like photographers; I need that time for everything else in the editing. So I get the need for in-camera color, I’m lazy too haha. But it’s funny, I feel after using Sony for the last year and a half my eyes have gotten use to Sony colors and I really don’t like the new generation of canon cameras that are boosting so much red. Canon’s colors have been getting worse over time because of moving the default color temp position to more magenta tint.
You’re a great teacher! Thanks!! This topic is big for me lol
Love your work Tony, very satisfying to see you debunk myths!
LOL this was a brilliant test. Bait everyone with a Color Test, then it was actually a Fanboyism test xD
just so we're clear the odds of randomly choosing right are 6.25%. so colour science is somewhere in that 2% discrepancy
LOL this is brilliant. Good point that I should have brought up.
@@TonyAndChelsea You could add it as an annotation at that point in the video.
Great comment!🤣🤣🤣
I agree WB is more important than CS. Wrong WB can skew all of the colors. I only recently began to bring along an 18% grey card to set the WB. It works great.
I loved the wine part. That was funny and true.
Colorphile, audiophile, oenophile.
Taking everyone to school! I love this video so much!! The Northrups are Savage 🙌🏼🙌🏼🔥🔥
now, i will make a t-shirt "I SHOT JPEG WITH SONY!"
envy...
Work in APSC and you have a hit!
While I just SHOT RPG WITH CANNON
Love your video and setting as well!
Thank you so much for this video (even though I’m getting to it very late). I have been letting the “canon colors” comments get in my head WAY too much because I started out with Sony. It’s the brand my husband uses so it’s what we had. BUT I will say this. I started out on the original A7 and had been going crazy trying to figure out why the colors were so hard to nail in editing. The skin was hard to work with, even with hours of trying to fix it. It was inconsistent, some parts of the face would be so yellow. Decided to try the A7iii after all this color science research I had been doing, and let me tell you, WORLD of difference. I really didn’t want to have to drop even more money to switch to canon and buy more lenses. With the newer generations from Sony, there really isn’t an argument now other than brand loyalty, like you said.
thanks
Even with the earlier ones: No issue at all. If Adobe doesn’t provide a suitable camera profile, create your own with ColorChecker. I have no color issues whatsoever with the 1st gen A7r.
That's a really revealing investigation, Tony. Very interesting the results you got and the analysis you made. They show the whole nonsense of so many discussions and advertising slogans.
Quite interesting results honestly. Sadly, I switched to Fujifilm because I liked the colors better lol. The thing is though, the Fujifilm camera allowed me to get the color I wanted a lot faster than the Nikon I had which saved me a lot of time in post, so for me it was worth it because I focus more on taking pictures instead of editing now.
why are you so sad?
Nicholas Erwin
@Nicholas Erwin
Switched to Fujifilm - Good choice ! I went step further and bought Fuji body keeping old Nikon D5000 with Nikkor lenses. So I have 2 systems to choose from. Adapter Nikon F -> Fuji X works OK. It is possible to achieve similar colors on Nikon with the cost of long hours of post processing with LightRoom. Fuji X has a lot more green shades inside than Nikon, son not all green tones you can recover from Nikon. Fuji [and probably Sony too] kills Nikon here. Doing wildlife and forests in mountains there is no comparisons for me - Fuji wins !
Same happen to me when i switch from Canon to Fuji. In fact, working with raws and Adobe neutral profile curve, I can achieve the same own colors from canon or Fuji, but the fuji simulations allows me to get a what I want a waaay faster. Lastly, I've found myself using more and more the camera jpegs and editing simply the exposure a little than editing raws.
thoroughly enjoyed this. science intersecting with art. Blinded tests so totally expose bias. Never thought I would hear the term meta-analysis with photography but so perfectly on point. Great work...Id like to see more.
Truly excellent video, and fantastic presentation!
I think it's best to have an accurate camera and then apply whatever color processing I want. Sometimes my goal is accuracy and only accuracy. Imaging Resource tests color accuracy but they use an inaccurate formula instead of Lab2000 so... I don't think those numbers mean much. Having watched people get defensive over a company they don't own is pretty funny. Brand loyalty was never really something I intuitively got behind.
Tony, have you done a video describing the advantages or lack thereof for full frame when trying to achieve large depth of field like what is often achieved on smaller crop sensors?
Amazing work. Why I continue to love this channel. Keep up the great work!
This has explained a lot! Thank you!
This is really an eye opener for many for sure. This was totally a different insight of what people perceive about "color".
Love your findings and what others comment but it seemed everyone is forgetting something important. The same brand camera may produce a different colour output when match with a different brand lenses. The coating on the lens will vary the colour. A more ideal test would be to use the same exact lenses, same controlled lighting conditions, same settings to get a more accurate results.
I like the point where you mentioned CS is not relevant for RAW shooter, spot on.
Thank you Tony. You just confirmed what I`ve suspected for long time. Now I can focus 100% on what is really important.
Thanks for doing this. Spot on. I'd be curious how many people can really spot the "full frame look" or the "medium format" look.
Very enlightening. Thank you.
Tony, great seeing you leverage the viewership like this. Keep it up!
Thanks Tony! Great video and the only one I’ve seen on colour science which is credible. I don’t get peoples attitudes towards colour science. It seems to imply one doesn’t edit their work.
Feeling no need to edit would be great. - I'd like to have perfect SOOC JPEGs.
Exactly, so a JPG vs RAW Video again?😂
@@jochenschrey2909 there is almost never such a thing as perfect SOOC, in my experience. Every photo or video I've released has been edited in some way and raw files give me the most latitude to do realise what I want to achieve. The difference between raw and jpeg is massive.
B Kinkel my point is everyone who buys a camera of this level edits. They do.
Thank you, and this is an awesome video. Coming from a video standpoint the and the original FS5, the largest challenge for the camera is its mixed lighting White balance and color reproduction which is a grading nightmare.
Shooting large form architectural work with large windows and warm lighting/ early LEDs haunts my dreams. Now looking at buying the New Sony FX9 vs the Cannon C500 II does anyone have any feedback on the White balance technology on newer Sony vs Cannon especially in mixed lighting situations?
Thank you all.
Awesome!
Great video. I always thought the "color science" hype was worthless for the exact reasons you mention: most people alter the RAW colouring anyway.
To me color science is what is the most pleasing. There is a youtuber, (gerald undone), who does an excellent job explaining the technical breakdown of color science. That with this video may get some to realize not to get hung up with who has the best color science incorporated into the camera and that you can pretty much tweak colors to your liking no matter what manufacturer you use.
This is so good, nice job!
Nice video. Is there a link to the comparison photos and results? I'd be curious what subject matter is featured. In particular, for outdoor scenes with shadow and sun, a camera/photographer could choose to neutralize shadows or keep them naturally bluer than sunlit areas. I'd be curious what people prefer on average.