Nikon V Canon colour

R

raider2727

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,108
Edit My Images
Yes
Has anyone moved from Canon to Nikon or use both and find the standard colour of the nikon is green in comparison to Canon.

If not maybe my D700 has a problem as i have done a complete reset and everything is at default and my pics look greenish, WB is auto with no fine tuning, standard pic control at default. inside shoots are fine but step outside and everything looks to have a green tint. could be that since i have owned it the weather has been very dull
 
Having used both,I found that Canon needed more pp to bring out the colour and Nikon is better straight out of the camera.

Some people may disagree but that's how I find it.
 
Don't forget that lenses play a part in the colour of an image. I dunno how but there are differences with lenses especially if they have coated glass.
 
Never had a problem with the colours from my Nikon D40, D90 or D700. :shrug:
 
auto white balance :gag:

I don't think I've owned a camera that gets it right every time.

Would be handy to see a sample though with a description of the lighting conditions.
 
I find unprocessed shots from Canon look rather flat and washed-out compared to Nikon (since the D2x, anyway - they were all dreadful before that), which look warm with pleasant skin-tones - to my eye.
Shooting JPEG in default modes renders a very pleasant set of tones and hues...whereas canon seems to need a bit of tweaking to get similar results.

There are a few Army togs who prefer to use Canon as their personal cameras, as well as the guys at Soldier Magazine who I'm on good terms with - we never miss an opportunity to slate the other's achievements... so it may just be the way our brains are processing the information, but to me, images from Nikons always looked more natural to me than those from Canons - I used to liken the images to those shot on Fuji Reala 100 in 'ye olden days of filme'...
 
When I moved Canon to Nikon last year I wasn't happy with the colours either. I shoot jpegs only and the Canon "normal" setting on my 30D and the 1D MkIII I borrowed for testing was much more pleasing to my eye than the Nikon "normal".

Then I had a good muck around with picture controls and thanks to my mate Gribbsy now run a custom built "neutral" control that I tweak up as required in PP.

Its still pretty obvious its a Nikon shot (the grass always looks a bit mad to be fair) but its better than it was....

Have a good muck around with picture controls anyway (I think the D70 has those?)

There you go, thats a balanced Canon vs Nikon posting - having used both I can tell you there are strengths and weaknesses to them both, some can be worked around, others not!
 
Can't really see the problem - have used both systems and both, when in AWB, will vary results. Suppose raw is the option to totally alleviate it...
 
Don't think its WB to be honest, what I am talking about occurs even when you WB is bang on- its definitely a green thing.

I've never bothered to see which system renders a more accurate result mind you, but would suspect its the Canon.
 
I've always thought that nikon over saturate greens and high colours
canon's come out a bit flat.
I have a custom over charge setting on my 40D that I think of of "nikonesque" mode :)
 
Thanks Guys, I have spent the last 3 hours playing with WB fine control and different picture controls which are at last showing a more neutral color cast.
I think the grass thing is totally right it tends to be over green and after the 25 years of Canon color rendition I think I was just alarmed how different the Nikon is by default out of the box.
I suspect a Nikon user would find the canon colors a little subdued in comparison, I was going to buy a cheap canon 30D as I still have a couple of canon lenses, however I think if I did I would never get use to the Nikon color cast, so I will just be happy with such a great camera and keep tweaking until I find something I feel happy with.
I prefer to shoot Jpg rather than Raw as I still use my Canon pro software as I can’t get use to the supplied Nikon stuff.
But that is another thread for another day.
 
Do what I did - go raid your kitchen cupboards for a huge variety of brightly coloured packaging, stick it under a lamp "still life stylee" next to your computer and shoot the scene with all the picture controls. Take the output onto your colour calibrated screen and make a contact sheet with all the shots on it and compare it to the scene you can see next to the computer...

You will learn loads about how those picture controls work and probably never, ever, ever touch "vivid" again unless it is to jam it down Ken Rockwells stupid smug face :D
 
Lol yes i did read Mr Rockwells piece on turning up the vivid 3 notches, makes everything look gastly, not a great piece by the good man.
I set my camera up at first using his guide as i had no idea what most of the menu items did, now i do it myself and will take your advice with regard the tins.
Thank you.
 
I shoot a 30D using RAW, + JPEG if I mainly want "snaps", and I'm quite happy with the colour, although AWB sometimes leaves a bit to be desired. Easy enough to adjust in RAW.

I've also used a D300, briefly, and the colour was fine for me. I did prefer the camera, but I've had a fondness for Nikon since the film days. Just couldn't afford a D200/D300 and the 30D was much cheaper when I bought it in South Africa. R8,000, with the 17-85mm kit lens, compared with R23,000, body only, for the D300. The rand was approximately 13:1 against the pound then. To be fair, I bought the 30D after it was discontinued and heavily discounted. I'm not heavily invested in Canon, and I'll probably switch if I can afford it.

Most (all?) DSLRs can be adjusted to give the results you want, and personal preferences come into it.
 
I use a Canon 20D, my mate uses a Nikon (D90 I think) and I always find his pictures look warmer than mine, I am always having to up the temp on my images in lightroom.
 
Eureka, i have actually messed around with my D700 enough to find a colour temp i feel happy with. grass is still a little OTT to me but the green colour cast has finally gone.
 
What was the answer? WB or picture control?
 
I thought this was apropos:

I went to a lavender fest with a friend today. She has a Nikon.

I have a new 7D (24-105 F4L lens) and also took my old 30D with 35mm F1.4L on it. For these shots the 30D was used with the 35mm lens.

I have noticed this before and I really noticed it today - her blues/greens seem to come out a lot more than mine. Her colors seem to pop more, period. Not sure why. She uses good lenses but not as good as the "L" lenses I use.

Neither of us was using a filter.

Here are two taken with my 30D, 35mm lens: F8 1/320 ISO 100 +0 I set the aperture F8 and let the camera choose the shutter speed.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4052/4715572454_db7b97daa3_b.jpg

F8 1/250 ISO 100 +0

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4018/4714929393_1efcd7ca6f_b.jpg

Here is one taken with her Nikon, 35-70mm lens. F10 1/250 ISO 160 +.3

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4055/4714928503_b6ac1b9651_b.jpg

I noticed that my camera used pattern metering (I believe evaluative), hers used center-weight. Could that have anything to do with it? BTW, I set my aperture at F8 and let the camera pick the shutter speed. Not sure what she did, for all I know she was on program.

Do Nikons tend to adjust to the blue/green end of the spectrum?

Staff Edit : Images changed to clickable links. Pictures must not exceed current forum limits as per the rules.
Please feel free to replace this with a fresh/resized image and remove this text :)
 
Icee said:
Having used both,I found that Canon needed more pp to bring out the colour and Nikon is better straight out of the camera.

Some people may disagree but that's how I find it.
Click to expand...


:plusone: i have found since the switch to Nikon the shots straight outn of camera need very little work
 
That final pic from the Nikon looks like it's been put through Photoshop with the saturation slider turned up :gag:

In particular the colour of the trees just below the sky looks far too intense IMO.

Strange, as I don't remember seeing over-saturated colours on other Nikon-sourced pics posted here.

Another reason to shoot in raw!

A.
 
Both Canon and Nikon images can vary wildly if you shoot in jpeg and choose one of the more extreme jpg settings..

Nikon's "vivid" is only suitable for the insane...
 
We used to have this 'discussion' regarding film manufacturers (how things seem to stay the same despite 'progress' :) )
Much of it was down to personal preference, at least these days we can get a camera we like the feel of and refine the shot accordingly by PP. We used to buy film based on a number of factors, grain, lattitude, ease of processing etc but one thing we couldnt change was colour characteristics.

Matt
 
MatBin said:
We used to have this 'discussion' regarding film manufacturers (how things seem to stay the same despite 'progress' :) )
Much of it was down to personal preference, at least these days we can get a camera we like the feel of and refine the shot accordingly by PP. We used to buy film based on a number of factors, grain, lattitude, ease of processing etc but one thing we couldnt change was colour characteristics.

Matt
Click to expand...

How true . . .

I have been committed to Nikon, happily I might ad, for 20 years. The above was a factor, I seem to remember in the good old days, often the thinking was 'the more vivid the better!!! . . . Velvia?

Now we have the choice? I've been through D100, D70s, D80, D40X, D90 and currently a D5000. D100 and D70s always seem to have understated colours, D40X was about right, D80 and D90 to me, were always leaning to greens, the 90 especially:thinking:

Swapping to the D5000 was a personal thing to do with a need for the animated screen, (back problems, grey hair and advancing years, catches up with us all);) The spin off is the colour presentation on the D5000, is, to my eye, more balanced in RAW and JPG's are OK as well with a minimum of tweaking to the in camera colour menu, keeing clear of 'more vivid'!!!:lol:

The other thing I did when I swapped to the D5000, was dump the 18-200VR, a house brick of a lens . . . and revert back to basic. I brought out the old 18-70 kit lens . . . some kit lens. The colour rendition IMHO of this lens is superior to any other that I have owned, its pin sharp and capable of getting surprisingly up close and personal.

CJS
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top