Canon vs. Nikon colors

This one was at ISO 720 in daylight w/ my D200. Shooting @ 1/1000th and 300mm.

2646248723_7c12bf150b_o.jpg
 
ouch... how much light in that room Tom? Please tell me that's one tungsten 75W bulb at about 8ft. Thanks for posting that man.

NOISE at 800... though I am sure it looks marvelous at lower ISO and more light... as with the 1/1000th 720ISO which is quite acceptable... but not perfect in the dark tones as by the gearbox in the shadows...
 
I didn't put any light on it so you could see how it handled in low light. The only light was a couple of 75 watt bulbs about 4 feet from the bottle.

With the D200, they recommend staying under 400...
 
what you should also consider is how much latitude the camera has. If it has a lot then you can easily shoot at 800 in RAW and overexpose by +1 or +1.5. When you bring this back later your results will be cleaner than if you hadn't overexposed at 400.
 
I uploaded a Velvia curve profile to my D70s the day I bought it and never touched it again... I shoot weddings with another guy that has a 5D and he always comments that he likes my color rendition better... and has to do less CC in post with my shots then his own.

I've shot with the 5D and I like how it shoots, and I also like the ethereal high-quality lighting that I always seem to capture through the 5D, which remains elusive in my Nikon, but as for color rendition... hmm... I guess I don't care either way. The guy I shoot with has an opinion, but I don't have one in this area... although overall I'm usually happy with the color in my shots (not too much or too little).

You might want to try uploading a color curve to your camera... it's easy to cool off REDS or whatever is bugging you.
 
You can upload curves on the d70?? Why didnt I know that?? Dammit. Guess now's a good time to start! Glad you mentioned it Matt! Adding to my list of things to do...
 
It would be interesting to see a thread with unmarked photos posted to see if we can spot the different brands. I think I could nail many Canon vs. Nikon pics but not so much Sony, Olympus or the other brands. It'd probably be too difficult here though because we all already have a pretty good idea watch we all shoot with...just a thought though...
 
Mattin, I'd love to see your Velvia curves in action.

I too had no clue that you could upload curves, and separate RGB curves... that is powerful stuff.

I am not sure if I'd do so much to all my pictures in-camera but an important question comes up here:
When you shoot RAW, do you still get the much more washed out low pedestal type picture with all the information? Do your curves and other in-camera settings' effects only show up on the Jpegs?
 
Rick Meyer said:
It has often been said (which I agree with) that Nikon photos tend to look more organic, more film-like. While Canon photos look sharper with an inherent digital crispness. So, this might have to do with lenses, sensors etc. But, you are right to notice a delicate aesthetic difference between the two camps.

Personally, I love 'em both for two very different reasons.
Click to expand...

Thats SO odd....

I found the exact opposite.. i feel Nikon have a more Accurate, sharper image representation, where as the canons have a colorful softer film like mojo to them... sort of the Sony/Panasonic split.

Funny how peoples eyes see different things..
 
Then again it could be that i only shoot with a 5d... which is said to be filmic...probably why i fell in love with it to begin with...
 
The 5d is a great camera from what I've heard. I've got a friend who's a professional photographer and he swears by the Canons... When I bought my D200 he just said... "Hmmm, ok." :)
 
well its funny my friend Khalid an AMAZING young photog used to swear bty Nikon... though after shooting with him and letting him have a go with me seductive 5d he is seriously considering a MkII as a D300 replacement....

www.nextlevelpictures.com his work...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top