The Great JPEG Shootout! (Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fuji, iPhone, Pentax, Olympus, Panasonic)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 25 ноя 2024
- Everyone loves to talk about the quality of different camera manufacturer's color and straight out of camera JPEGs. We decided to do a blind(ish) test, to see which images photographer's really preferred in a variety of situations. Which camera's SOOC images are really the ones to beat? Watch as Chris Niccolls investigates!
Shop online at: www.thecameras...
Special thanks to Resolve Photo (www.resolvephoto.ca) and everyone who participated in our tests!
Shot and edited by Jordan Drake
Shot on the Sony FS5 
Наука
That must've taken a long time to create this video. It was interesting thanks for doing this.
Dave Dugdale hey dave!
Dave Dugdale Yeah, me too!
O hai dave - you were a big factor in getting me into cameras. Thanks for that.
the best video,,I really want you to do a 2019 version of this
actually we need 2020 )
@@cdriper unfortunately Chris and Jordan now do videos for DPreview, maybe you can put your comments on that channel instead!
Finally someone who relize that we do not all have the time, experience and the patience or the money to buy a good software to post procces our photos and for all of us jpegs are our choice, great review!! Do the same for point and shoot cameras please!
Enthusiasts post process in RAW. They make time. Hobbyists use jpeg. But usually they dont print often, or if they do, its small sizes for memory photos. These cameras are more for pros or enthusiasts so really jpeg quality is not really important at all. I do agree that this is a better test for point and shoot.
They should use a Pentax Limited lens and do this competition over again. Pentax has some of the best color and punch period. Pentax is right up there with Canon and Nikon.
No they've lied in the test and set the test up in such a way for certain brands to win and others to fail. Are Cris Nicols baby daughters eyes really that blue? I doubt it. Some eyes were bluer than others and some were greyer. Is the babies hair really that red? And thats the question, which camera took the most accurate depiction of the scene as opposed to the one which bumped up the saturation to make a more pleasing image.
Then they set the white balance using 3000 Kelvin which no out of the box noob user would do as they would set it to Auto white balance or set the white balance in the quick menus to tungsten light.
They claim they set the camera to X,Y,Z and which camera won........why its Cris Nicols brand Nikon that wins. Which cameras does he hate, well that Sony and Pentax because he fudged the settings. I've owned a Nikon and the colors are crap. They're probably really good on the professional D500 which he put against consumer level cameras.
Chris is a total you know what.
You own a Pentax, don't you?
"brand new daughter"😂😂😂
I thought the same :D lol
he is used to say it for cameras
Straight out of box daughter running default diapers.
MrChomiq lol....
only good for DiaPerREVIEW, lol.
Such a great idea for a video. Camera reviews don't spend much time on comparing the quality of the JPEGs generated by the camera. I know that pros shoot RAW most of the time, but for the rest of us amateurs without the time to do much editing who shoot in JPEG this is an underappreciated factor in choosing a camera. Thanks for this!
Wow! I've always wished for such a review! Thank you!
Agreed, cool review/test. Why AdobeRGB?
sRGB is limiting the amount of degrees of saturation and the peak saturation available.
Yeah, if you're shooting specifically for print, AdobeRGB is definitely better than sRGB.
'Average Joe' would choose SOOC JPEGs over RAW (default settings + sRGB color space for web).
fstoppers.com/pictures/adobergb-vs-srgb-3167
***** I spend a lot of time on buses. I have not really much else to do other than trolling the comment sections.
Sorry to show up so late, but as somebody who prints photos for a job, just stick with sRGB. The lab you're working with has to have equipment that supports Adobe RGB and the majority don't, unless you're going with top top professional labs. Without the right equipment to interpret it, Adobe RGB is useless and worse than sRGB.
As a Pentax user since the MX I'm not too surprised that Pentax came last. I'm not sure what's wrong with their software rendition of images but I'm gratified that I always shoot RAW. The Pentax camera range is still amazing value and backwards compatible to some great glass so I have no complaints. Great review/video by the way.
Very interesting test. I enjoyed it!
i think you should do something similar with 5dsr and 5d iv ^_^
Henni Ibrahim I want to see a street survey (no professionals like this one, but "customers") of cameras shot on auto and printed. See if anything from the 645z to a CSC is something that a "client" would notice. 5dsr & 5d4 included :)
omg the tomato on canon seems to come from chernobyl. supersaturated colors XD
I retained a tealed tomato shape on my retina from that picture. :))
Fuji jpeg is about choice, choosing the film simulation which you like and that gets in your jpeg and that will always look better out of camera, keep that in mind while watching this
assuming you are using a top of the line PnS's the results should roughly apply to them too
yeah !! i own an xpro 1 and i agree w/ you.Even tho fuji is not the first, i have to admit that the video is just........Wow
yep
Yeah they seemed to gloss over that part completely, when people are talking about fuji's color it's not the base jpegs, it's the film simulation. Really odd they just glossed over that since it's something that should be pretty obvious.
Well the base on a Fuji is a film simulation - Provia
This provided some excellent information and I found it very interesting. I can imagine that this was a pretty big undertaking. So I wanted to pass along my gratitude to everyone involved for taking the time to do a video like this.
Cheers,
Greg
Excellent work guys - I appreciate the amount of effort that must have gone into this. Super interesting results.
I'd like to add while loads of people on the internet are saying "shoot RAW" this is extra helpful for people who shoot video. To an extent, we are at the mercy of the baked-in assumptions that our camera makes and getting to see samples across manufacturers is still valuable, whether it's "scientific" or not.
Can't stop applauding for you guys coming up with such a video review about a subject that isn't spoken that much yet discussed at lengths. And the prints comparison idea used was genius in my opinion. Very well done.
Glad somebody finally realize people buy a top dollar camera for its jpeg engine too
SOME people. I couldn't care less, personally.
Ildskalli like it or not,it's included in your purchase price,might as well be a good one.
Rich kids in my area, they will pawn off cameras their parents got them. Its wonderful. I've got my 70-200 and 7Dm2 for 2k all together and it was set to jpeg still.
Allah Turbo But that's the point. In a camera that's destined for casual users I think it'd be important to have a strong JPEG engine (i.e. iPhone, 1" compact), but in most serious ILCs it's kind of a waste - especially in a contracting market where money is very tight. I say stop developing them, it's pointless by now.
Ildskalli no,unless you only live in your own raw nazi world,many people still get good ILC camera for its superior speed,control,and great jpeg in all lighting situation.
Me for example,shoot thousands of picture in my holiday travel,raw eat too much spaces so it's impractical for me,all i need from ILC is their good low light performance,great AF,and good colors,that's all.
Many RUclips vlogger couldn't care less about raw or f-log,they need a good ooc video or jpeg.
there's also a video where Chris interview a professional user who only shot jpeg with high end canon dslr.
This channel has so many great vids, but this has got to be Top 5. Great work!
IMO, this is one of the best videos you've ever made.
I always crave for these kind of reviews. I see you involved broad set of photo professionals in the process and I genuinely appreciate the efforts put behind making this video possible. Thank you! :)
I like the originality that guides more and more often your videos. Greetings from Belgium.
Late autumn seems pretty warm this year ...^^
Wouldn't the lenses also affect color?
Interesting question, i don't think so other than chromatic aberration but i can't say for sure.
This is a good point. Theoretically auto white balance should account for that (if it's done through the lens and not via external sensor), but in general yes, each lens will have different coatings and it will affect color balance and tint.
Surprising result, I never thought Panasonic could came on the third place! Good to know, thanks for the shoot-out!
bajigurwedangronde I was surprised too! I've loved shooting Panasonic for the past few years (moved from Canon T2i and 5D to Panasonic GH4 and G7), but that's always been because of the platform performance and features (especially video), not the default colours which I've always found to be very olive in tone with poor skin rendition. Happy to see it actually compares more favourably than expected!
Good to hear! I was switching from T4i and EOS M to GX7, GX8, and LX100. I mainly do stills but occasionally I record RUclips videos too. It's good to know that the JPEG color on these cameras are not as bad as I thought. Though I don't shoot JPEG, I shoot video and I could probably start to trust the standard color profile more to maybe get away with color grading the Cine-D profile if I'm not shooting critical high dynamic range scene.
I've discovered the same shooting GH4 video. Cine-D helps when I need shadow detail that would otherwise be completely lost, but have found that the Standard profile seems to work better when lighting is already controlled. I only use Premiere Pro for color grading, btw, so this might be part of it, but correction and grading on the Cine-D profile seems to put a lot of stress on the image quality when compared to matching back to the Standard output. This is more in regards to clean color saturation than sharpness and contrast.
Good to hear Larry, I agree on your comments about Cine-D. The reason why I started shooting Cine-D back then was because this whole argument about trying to make the footage looks as "cinematic" as possible using graded flat profile. While it is true that the flat look of the Cine-D helps to achieve "cinematic" result, the effort needed to get that "look" sometimes was no-less than trying to match and mimic the standard color profile as the end result, especially on specific lighting conditions just as you said. Now I shoot in a slightly flatted standard profile unless I encounter some scenes that need high dynamic range.
I may be an Olympus fanboy but I like the warmth that is evident in their jpg files. As you say it appeals to the individual. Interesting test
Awesome job guys. I'm working on something similar except less about image quality because the lens on the camera also adds to how a camera perceives colour and micro contrast. In my opinion (I feel I can make it because I own the a6300, d500 and the xt2.) The thing that makes Fuji's jpgs more unique to me is that it has a different type of sensor. When you really analyze a photo closely look at shadows, highlights, and detail and see the way it handles it. You really see something special imo. You also get the added bonus of using their awesome film simulations. I never shoot in auto maybe that's why I love the Fuji colour. I usually leave my wb around 5000-5500k so my pictures usually have that warmer canon look. Anyway, great job. Making this kind of video is tough because there are so many variables.
im going to get the xt2 because of your review! cheers!
Mike cky just sold my sony a6300 so yea im excited! :)
Nah.... At 9:27 he said .... "We're not looking to do any scientific test here" *coughs....
They should have used a Xrite color checker passport in front of the baby and balanced the WB...THEN made the print.....THEN judged the output............that would have been a valid test. However there are other variables they left in the wind also, including many diff lenses and their output, and they didnt normalize the exposure on the baby *coughs, light meter and incidence reading taken wasnt done
Ken: Per your videos, wouldn't this be a true sensor/processor test only if the same lens is used? This is only showing the results of lens+sensor+proceesor combo, and we don't know which lenses were used.
I recently got XT2 after i had X100T.. there is no going back once you get a Fuji.. the shooting experience is magically .. i dont care about auto mode as i never used it on this camera and i shoot 100% jpegs...
This is wonderful! Someone finally took the time to do something like this! I kept wondering if someone would ever do a test like this and you guys did! Yes, color preferences from JPG rending is subjective but at least now we get to see what natural profiles from OOC look look (expect for iPhone like you said). I am currently torn between buying a Nikon (D750), Fuji (X-T2) and Olympus (EM1 II) although I am also looking at Panasonic (G85). I mostly shoot landscapes. I occasionally do portraits and indoor events for personal stuff. I am currently using Sony 3N (old version now) so all of this is relevant and very useful. Awesome work. Loved this video and great job creating and sharing your hard work.
Fascinating. I'm very curious to know: what if any women vs. men differences were seen in rankings of 3 photos?
Yes, I'd also like to know about this.
Please report on this. You mentioned men and women see color differently then didn't provide the results.
This is nice comparison, never seen it done before like this. I like the fact that you based the ordering on prints, because the look of an image is very different printed than on screen (and often nicer in my opinion).
Interesting result, but I feel the strength of a Fuji camera comes from the film simulation profiles and a jpeg shooter will very likely use them. What they are less likely to do is a custom white balance, so this test was a little unfair on the Fuji cameras not using this feature! I shoot both Fuji and Canon, and although I love both, those film simulations are great!
What camera system you use now?
@@guardianobserver6593 I still shoot Fujifilm, but I also have a lumix S5
Thanks for this! The only camera I own is an X-T1, but I realised a long time ago I really can't tell the difference consistently between "Fuji colors" and anyone elses. Fuji appears to be the Mac of the camera world with regard to die hard fans.
most interesting video I've watched on photography in months. thanks guys for the effort. must have been exhausting
The accumulation of dead fall is almost reclaiming the park bench. Beautiful.
Fuji looked best to me and Nikon too (except in the portrait). I thought the iPhone looked bad in every image due to the aggressive processing and deep DOF. Interestingly, I thought the Canon looked really poor during the 'test scene'. Felt like it had a magenta tint that was distracting and clearly unnatural amongst the others.
100% agree, the Canon shot had a very pronounced magenta cast. I thought Nikon and Olympus did best for the studio shot.
drivecancel
You are sure it wasn't because of your uncalibrated monitor? You calibrated it recently? Don't forget that there were a lot of calibrated equipment...
Even if my monitor wasn't calibrated (which it is) the weird colour tint on the Canon would still have stood out from the others.
I think Canon almost reproduces the Kodak film palette...
Re: Fuji - their in camera JPG's are amazing, but basically Classic Chrome and Arcos are what people are talking about :P
I actually did like the colors from the Fuji in this comparison, but you can also see that Fuji's JPEGs tended to have a slightly darker exposure overall. Perhaps the darker exposure is what people were responding to in their judgments.
as a fuji shooter, I felt i always had to bump up the exposure. I feel like I should just set my exposure compensation dial to +1/3 by default
Albert Villaroman it's easy enough to bump up the exposure. I'd consider moving from Fuji, but I'm so invested in glass, I may as well stick it out for now. I've been considering Canon or Olympus, but now that Adobe is getting the wormy sharpening sorted, no real reason to change.
I have to agree with this. I have no real experience with them, but the darker files were less pleasing despite color.
Shooting with fuji without using film simulations is like driving the speed limit with a new motorcycle.
but Fuji's other film profiles are amazing!!!! Personal favourite is Classic Chrome!
Seven years later. Glad to find this. I have a Canon 6D, 80D, Nikon D300, and a variety of lenses. Oh, and recently picked up an old 20D. I'm not shooting for heavy uses anymore. I thought about going back to film (have a few film cameras) as I got my start long ago in the film days. I find that I don't want to spend a lot of time in post-processing, wet or digital anymore. I do want to use some older digital (like the 20D) cameras like a film camera. Get it right in the camera and find out if you did when you get home. All I hear is Fuji recipes. I'd really like to find a few Canon recipes, or Nikon, that let me simulate the look of a few of my favorite old films. Especially since I do love the Canon color science for raw and JPEG overall. Nice to see how well the Canon 80D did. I have found that I the past when I've shot Raw+JPEG, I often ended up using the JPEGs for prints and for an online local magazine I was producing at one time. As many here have mentioned, not everyone wants to spend hours in Lightroom or Photoshop, but they would like to get some clean, solid images. I know this is coming years later, but thanks for doing the video.
Maybe try rawtherapee and the haldCLUT film pack. Fuji 200 is my favorite in there for look.
"What is it that everybody shoots when they first get a camera" - cats, surely it must be cats? :)
mellowmarkable don’t have a cat
That was one of the most interesting tests I saw in a while. Awesome job guys!
enjoyed. a lot of work went into this, like the human factor grading method.
So interesting! Glad you printed the photos.....everyone should print their favourite shots!
Conclusion; Nikon and Canon still the best over the years.
Great review.
Well, best is subjective in this one and also it entirely depends on what you're trying to achieve. If you're shooting architecture and need a neutral look then the Sony may be the best option. Alternatively, if you're doing portraits then maybe it's Canon or Nikon and so on.
Far too many factors to take into account to ever consider one as better over another.
I hope that if you are shooting something like architecture you are no longer putting the camera on auto
jeffry de meyer Or shooting JPEG or even using smaller sensor cameras called full frame :P.
Miniature frame or 35mm frame, to be precise ;D
Well yes anything below 5x4 is so plebeian, I don't understand why anyone would bother with smaller for photography.
Get a serf to carry everything if you are one of those 'but it is so cumbersome' people.
Chris, Jordan, I LOVE this! Of course, viewing this on an iPhone (which in 2016 along with all other smartphones and tablets became the primary media through which view imagery), it's angels dancing on the head of a pin: they ALL look good (to me). Seems like other considerations weigh more heavily for the vast majority of folks. Well done!
should do a fuji film simulation shootout. just test all the modes. bam another video idea.
Jim Socks maybe also a Fuji sensor test? Compare the old sensor to the new one because of all the opinions about how the old sensor renders better color
Yes it would have been interesting to see the results with the older 16mp sensor.
Their shots with the Fuji were underexposed, that's partially Fuji's fault for not reporting an ISO value consistent with other brands, though, they needed to use about a 1/3 higher ISO on the Fuji to achieve the same exposure. Brightness affects how we perceive color, therefore the images that tended to be better exposed tended to do better.
about a month ago we made usual print test between most popular argumentative formats and bodies, FF vs APS-C vs 4/3" (btw the "m4/3" means mount and not sensor, there isn't anything micro in sensor) and 1".
It was as well a blind test but done in 30" prints. Similar way to yours but few things differently like all were cut to same ratio.
Then we asked around some people about "quality" (using that word) and #1 in colors became Olympus, Sony was picked for the contrast/white balance and almost every one picked 1" to be the worst!
All were shot at same shutter speed and aperture and finally ISO 6400.
The point was to really see how many picked a noise or resolution as key factor. This from over 50 reviewers couldn't see difference between other formats than 1" to rest at high ISO and low light situation, Sony getting picked mainly for contrast.
There weren't phones and I count 1" was that in our test and it just didn't keep up as it was already way pass its capabilities at 30".
To me it was just interesting as I expected Sony to win with 42 Mpix but it was colors and contrast that divided opinions and not resolution and noise! The 1" got just dropped because noise but interesting is people didn't like those models colors either as they were Canon and interestedly Sony too!
But we were testing extreme samples as said, ISO 6400 on all (not that equivalent crap) and exact same exposure values and then prints as well at premium service to 30" size without any alterations.
Very likely different paper (glossy here for details and contrast) and totally different audience than Canadian... ;)
So question is... Why do we keep addressing megapixels and noise when those don't matter on ILC cameras?
Or why to prefer manufacturer colors if one does raw or alter colors and doesn't anyways look photos comparing to others so no reference point?
Sensors matter least these days, bodies features and lens offering as system matter most and that you have camera with you and it does what you want. Yet most buzz is when people argue most about least mattering factor! :D
Very late to the party here, I know, but this is probably one of the most meaningful photography comparisons I've seen in a long while. Great stuff! B.t.w, is it time for a rematch yet? It would be great to see this comparison done again using 2019 spec cameras. :)
Truly appreciate this kind of tests. Love the practical method used in this review! We would like to see more such videos in the future!
Try Pentax color profile “Bright” with limited lens! Perfect for my taste.
I have watched this episode at least 8 times and I don't think I have commented! This is one of the most extensive jpeg test ever. Interesting results and very helpful for me. Thank you.
Thank you Chris. And thank you for not putting the "iPhone 7S" on top, like some "professional photographers" on the internet, putting the iPhone against some $6,000, or even $9,000 usd cameras, and the iPhone wins at the end. You did not suck up on Apple, thumps up!
Olympus color profile is just Beautiful
It's interesting. To me, Pentax jpegs are the best. The Pentax uniqueness is in the reds. Portraits shot on Pentax are incredible! People look like they are shining, no other camera can do it. Look at the lips of the baby. All cameras, except Pentax, depicted them with dirty colours. As for artificial light, the Pentax result was one of the worst in the test, I agree.
P.S. I wonder how could anyone give Nikon good marks for portrait colours. They are absolutely disgusting!
I would have to agree, but I also think Pentax, glass matters. I have an old Sears 135mm F/2.8 portrait lens on my K1, and it takes great portrait shots. But I also shoot in RAW, so in JPEG, yeah, it wouldn't be the most ideal option. I was on Canon for a long time and switched to Pentax because the lens ecosystem is so much better.
Two things ! Even the JPEGs shown for pentax in video looked right up there with canon and Nikon to me Second there was no mention of lenses. Pentax has got some of the amazing lenses that can simply beat canon and Nikon not only at DNG but in JPEGs as well.
This test is one of a kind. Some people will argue , however it shows how subjective photography can be , but also the philosophy behind each brand . good job !
Pentax user here.... it's OK, you can come out from under that table. I don't know much about JPEGs, as I always use Raw files, but it doesn't really surprise me that Pentax didn't do well in these tests. However, I do know that that Pentax cameras offer a great amount of customisation, so I guess that if one put in the effort, one could get far better results than we see here. I imagine this is true for all the brands and most people spending $2,000 on a camera (like the XT2) who want to rely on JPEGs will spend a bit of time tweaking the settings to get them to their liking. That being said.... ( :) ) I know this wasn't the point of this test, but if it was to assess the SOOC JPEGs, I'm left wondering why you set the exposure manually for tungsten light? Overall, it was a very useful and informative video. Keep up the good work: I get withdrawal symptoms if I have to wait too long for a CSTV video.
Brian Davies - absolutely agree. you've just saved me from writing an almost identical comment.
I think they set the tungsten light exposure manually because not all the manufacturers necessarily use the same kelvin setting for their tungsten WB default, so they tried to normalise that across the board as much as possible. Interesting that there were still differences.
The overall score baffled me, how did Pentax end up tied for last when they were 3rd-5th in the individual tests? Doesn't make a lot of sense, I thought all of the MFT cameras were absolutely horrible.
does this mean that you always edit all your photos?
In my last weekend getaway I took almost 1000 photos. I can't imaging going through all of them, selecting and editing.
What's your workflow with RAW files?
I use Pentax, and I would never end up with a 1000 pictures in one weekend (mostly because I don't do a lot of candid stuff). When I get home I would typically cut it back to 40 pictures max. in that case manually editing makes a lot of sense.
By far one of the most interesting and important test in terms of color photography
Fuji's jpegs are legendary because of the film settings you can select. If you chose, say, Astia for the portrait, Velvia for the landscape and Provia for the still life (you may have as it's the default), then it may have placed further ahead. That's kinda the point.
c0ldc0ne do you own a Fuji camera? it even says when you select Velvia, for example, "Vibrant reproduction, ideal for landscape or colour".
c0ldc0ne Oh. I'm reading back your comments and I'm unsure whether you agree or disagree with me 😉
lol they're just literally filters. no different than instagram
Vikas Sandhu it's just a filter. It isn't changing how the camera takes the photo, the sequence is exactly the same, with added post Photoshopping'esque editing in camera to hit those film looks.
+ngomusicgroup
They're not filters, like in Instagram. Filters work on the already baked jpeg, while Fuji's film simulations (and the equivalents from other manufacturers) work on the raw data and build the jpeg accordingly. Completely different processes.
I have recently started shooting more Jpeg, just around the house and of my kids because I was literally tired of editing my personal photos. I owned an olympus EPL-7 (recently sold) and a couple of Nikons. One thing I really liked about the Oly, was that it had that live preview feature, what you see is what you get kind of thing and that really upped my JPEG game. Getting all those things including exposure and white balance right in camera makes a huge difference.
I sold the Oly to upgrade some of my Nikon stuff and am having to go through a new learning curve looking through the VF again and having to meter properly again. My jpeg quality has suffered to some degree, but i'll get the hang of it again.
Good review though. I imaging most of the cameras sold are not to the working pro's, but to the consumers and prosumers. So nice to see this!
The great jpeg output and you missed on Sigma DP Quattro, which outputs amazing JPegs
That one heck of a camera orgy. Canon and Nikon prove they are camera manufactures and know what they are doing vs the others.
Hopefully people aren't going to use this video to support dubious overreaching statements, such as "Nikon cameras have the best colors."
Looking back at this old video, I think you guys should do a 2024 edition! this hands down was one of the most useful videos for me from your channel. Enjoyed it!
It is interesting. The criteria was it the most accurate or the most pleasing? Almost always people will pick the bit oversaturated and warmer images as the best over the most accurate. For instance several times the words colour pop are used. What is it ? How is it defined ? Clarity ? Brightness? Tones ?
That's what I found most interesting. Not the cameras themselves but the comments as everyone's criteria varies.
It would have been easy to give everyone a sheet with the criteria to judge the image on such as tone, colour, sharpness etc... I can promise after years doing decision analysis consulting the results would not be the same
But , you did it the correct way for the most part. At a glance , rate them. After all the goal is the most pleasing image to the viewer is it not ?
Exactly. We were definitely going for most general pleasing image and I think the majority of people will skew toward, bright, contrasty, saturated, and warm. At the same time though its interesting to see how people differed and rationalized there choices on a topic whos very nature is subjective.
CHRIS@TCSTV
As I remember Kodak for example was doing such tests long time ago specially for lens and film development.
Right now there also is shit ton of such development.
Generally people prefer very contrasty, a bit oversaturated, overexposed photos. But not some crazy sharpness(It must be mentioned that people generaly perceive sharpness as difference in contrast not as something that actually could be called sharpness. There it's about real sharpness) nor they care about correct colors representation(they expect something what they see or even better not what is scientifically accurate).
In film age example of such way may be Kodak Ektar and Fuji Velvia both "very contrasty, a bit oversaturated, overexposed". None of those 2 were accurate in representation but were "powerfull" and "dreamy" People still love them.
static1.squarespace.com/static/56bf55504c2f85a60a9b9fe5/t/56cc5220f04e93260ed183bb/1456284308999/buttescanyons.jpg
carmencitafilmlab.com/wp-content/uploads/KodakEktar-Contax645-Mosbacher-CarmcencitaFilmLab-1.jpg
danharperphotography.com/photos/articles/reviews/velvia_vs_ektar/velvia_ektar1.jpg
danharperphotography.com/photos/articles/reviews/velvia_vs_ektar/velvia_ektar3.jpg
danharperphotography.com/photos/articles/reviews/velvia_vs_ektar/velvia_ektar4.jpg
danharperphotography.com/photos/articles/reviews/velvia_vs_ektar/velvia_ektar2.jpg
And I'm rly surprised that none of those manufacturers set they default to be more like old film. While non default modes are usually more vibrant
Not everyone has the time to edit their raw pictures. I only use the Nikon P950 camera and I have it set to JPEGS only. The camera does a great job for me. As long as the photo is near perfect then that works for me. Top notch video. I’m glad to see this video. ❤❤❤
Interesting!!
Please, make a video response, but about RAW.
Michael The Maven can you make a video same as this (JPEG)?
You could try something like this
Shout out to Resolve Photo. Those guys make THE BEST prints at reasonable prices.
One question: doesn't the Glass ahead of the sensor influence the final result at least as much as the software itself? I can definitely see the difference between i.e a Panasonic Lens and an Olympus one switching between them, and even between lenses form the same brand. Another thing is: what kind of lenses did you used? the more complex the lens (i.e an zoom vs a prime), the more it could affect the final image rendition.
There's certainly some impact from lens coatings and dispersion, but it tends to be much smaller than the color science in front of the sensor and at the processing stage. Lens tint only shows up noticeably when shooting raw, in my experience.
glass has very little impact on colors
manufacturers like to claim it does, but it rarely makes any difference
Aurelie Nani have to politely disagree. As a bit of a retro glass geek I can take my Fuji xe-1 and using various adaptors shoot the same image with say, Jupiter 8, Helios 44, nikkor 50 and Fuji 60mm and get very very different levels of saturation in each shot. Same settings, same light. Try it. :)
Martin Gillman That does happen more often with older glass and coatings - modern treatments and materials are far more neutral.
Yes lenses do affect, but ppl buy those lenses. You can't ignore them, so they're included in the test. It would be unrealistic to test all cameras with one lenses using adapters, because that's not the lens ppl will be buying.
If certain cameras are performing poorly due to lenses.. well time to make better lenses then!
Great video and content! I own Nikon, Canon, Panasonic, Olympus, and Sony bodies. I can't agree more that Nikon does produce the most pleasing JPEG most of the time. But I think Sony should come the 3rd, with which I use only Zeiss branded lenses. And Panasonic the 5th.
The only pos there is iPhorn!
great review perhaps you als can do the same test with some high end compact camera's ( Sony RX100 . Nikon DL 24-85. Panasonic lx10/15 Canon G7X mk2 / Olympus traveller SH-2
Look forward to see such a test
Thuis up greetings from Holland
aa-arie aatje you right
This is one of the most helpful camera videos out here in RUclips. Subscribed!
I've shot Fuji, Nikon, Canon and Pentax. For my eye, and I mean my eye, I prefer the Nikon color rendition, I always have. It's warmer than Canon, to my eye. Funny how the smaller sensors fell to the bottom of the heap.
I shoot jpeg mainly to drive the "real" photogs crazy
All the commenters here sure have color calibrated displays, I suppose :)
Much thanks that was alot of work. Also, side note this channel is becoming my favorite review source for cameras.
Differences in lenses would make a difference. Do you think it could have made enough of a difference? Did you use the standard Kit lenses from each of these?
Good question.
Yes, they will make difference, sometimes it will be great. But to be fair that's up to the lens manufacturers to combat, so if a lens is showing poor results on an otherwise good body, then it's something the manufacturer should worry.
They should have used the same lens on different bodies . ONLY that way one can judge differences between the cameras , though that would mean narrow it down to those bodies which can use that perticular lens . So why not f.i. a lens that fits some bodies at least . Comes to mind Zeiss, Voightlander and there are some others. This current test-video is pointless just for reason that every lens has a different outcome. I can put 5 Nikkors on my Nikon had have everytime a difference , same for all the others.
It doesn't work. It's up to system manufacturers to have good lenses on the system to showcase how good their body's sensors are. If they don't have lenses to showcase how good the bodys or sensors are, the bodies don't deserve any praise either. It should be that simple.
Nikon has it good with 18-55 , that kit lens is actually pretty good for APS-C . The 35mm prime for APS-C is also decent and cheap.
Color of lens don't mean it's bad or good. It's different.
With sensors well it's not about sensors rly(Sony made sensors for Nikon and Pentax) It's about in-camera post-processing
Disclaimer: Well people generally hate deep blue, pink/violet, green, deep red cast but other than that nah it's just different
About whole package well it's photo world nobody even bother to much with coating lenses in such way that each lens have same colors and contrast. So if they wanted to check post-processing then Yes they should use same lens on all bodies that is as close to being telecentric as possible.
This was probably the most informative photography video that I have, heretofore, seen. Thank you for the time/effort to test, accumulate and rate the data(shots), great job!
LOL, you do know one of these days you guys will be getting lynched by a Pentax crowd :D
You make a very good point about how we see colour differently. I have always maintained that one person's red is another person's orange. I shoot a Nikon D500 + Nikkor lenses side by side with an Olympus EM1 mark II + Olympus lenses. Though you have Nikon at number 1 and Olympus at number 5, I actually prefer the colour staturation of Olympus to that of Nikon. I used Canon cameras for a long time and was very happy with the colour. Years ago, I was an advocate of Fuji 400 35 mm film, which I believed provided beautiful, rich colour, so I was a little surprised that Fuji didn't do better.
As a Pentaxain,....
"Ahhhh, yer mutha wears combat boots"
(No, I don't expect anyone under 35 to know which cartoon character this is referencing)
PiDsPagePrototypes I'm still perplexed why Pentax doesn't make their "Natural" preset the default. It's the one that comes closest to Canikon style rendition (Albeit their base preset still delivers when I think is the most true-to-life images, perhaps why folks don't like them.)
Pentax vivid sucks. It's wildly over the place with magenta and green :(
Ildskalli Vivid isn't the default still i thought.
It was in my K-30, and still is in all the low and mid range models, AFAIK.
For my k-3ii, natural was preset as the default one...
Good job. This is the best and meaningful real world comparison video i have ever seen.
A Fujifilm rep told me the most accurate simulation mode was "Pro Neg Hi" even if sometimes it can look flat. If they had used Velvia for landscape shot and Astia for the Portrait I am sure Fuji would have scored higher.
Anyways as they said,it a "strait out of the box " test. (So here for Fuji it should be Provia)
What bothers me is that they say it is a unscientific test, ok fair enough, but in the end they judge the cameras!!! And these youtubers are influencers and most of people will take the conclusions seriously even if it not accurate...
Hey Chris. Great video thanks.
Time to do a similar video updated for 2020/21.
You didn't use film simulations on the Fuji did you?
They didn't. And it won't be fair. Only Olympus Pen F would be close to Fuji on in-camera processing.
peasant vasea Olympus would win in colors as what you can do, you own film profiles that you can't even replicate in post process. Many had tried to emulate the b/w look without success.
But Fuji has the preset for Fuji films so it wins for offering easy and quick way to get them.
Fuji's default mode is Provia emulation, which we used.
Jordan @ TCSTV
There is no "standard" setting on a fuji x that does not use a film simulation. Fuji uses the "Provia" simulation as standard, which is Definitly a specific simulation and look. So you guys just compared all the other manufacturers to one setting on the Fuji X. I realize that they are testing "out of camera" settings and that's fine, but you could have mentioned it. Just because Fuji themselves consider Provia to be their standard look, doesn't mean it is. For Landscape there was arguably no more used film than Velvia... etc.
Eventhough Fuji's default is Provia ,i believe the Real Standard simulation is 'Pro Neg Std' which produces a bit brighter images than Provia.
I really enjoyed this and was pleasantly surprised about Nikon's lead on this. I hope to see more advancements in their camera tech.
What an interesting video. What if you did a large scale test online where viewers can rate the images over a set period of time? It doesn't hurt to have some more data
It would be fair only if you get an equal amount of voters from the every camera brand fans.
And all viewers on calibrated displays. Its just too many variables.
Should we check the testers for properly calibrated eyes too? :D
I think if you have a large enough sample it would average out quite well
It'd obviously be a blind test, you wouldn't tell them what camera brand each picture corresponds to. For added precision (you´d need to lose the iPhone though), you'd shoot them all at equivalent FOV, DOF and the exact same level of brightness (same exposure, not same settings), so people are really comparing only colors and not other variables that affect how we perceive images.
Really great video. I always love your comparisons. This is actually one of the first times i've seen all those cameras physically side-by-side online, so that was nice to see as well. Also, I'm a nikon guy so i liked the results!
come on people this is just a fun test . this lens that lens bla bla bla , this is the default test means probably kit lens kids . TCS seriously nailed it ! great job from them , don't be too rough & offended . duh
Ruben Kristianto, good points! Yes, though I respect Chris and the effort he put into this and other "reviews", I tend to agree that this particular "test" should be viewed as entertainment only. (Just the fact that an iPhone "topped" the Landscape category over several dedicated cameras with superior lenses and processing engines, IMHO, relegated this "review" into the category of entertainment!
Very surprised about the fuji, but like stated it was the straight out of camera. Maybe worth stating, there are different colour profiles with all the brands.
I've just swapped from canon to Fuji, for portability and their colour. The film simulation mode is amazing! Great thing is you can apply them to raw images.
When I had Pentax i shoot in raw. Now I have Olympus and I shoot in jpg - it's good enough for me.
Thanks for taking the time to do this video. Very interesting and informative.
Wow that was one really busy squirrel.
I have Canon and Sony and I tend to agree with your results. Very few people I know do any post processing and it's a shame because great shots are hard to look at when something simple like the wite balance is skewed . I think most people do tweak their camera setings to get the best JPG they can and I would be very interested in the same test from the pros to do your best to get a great JPG out of each camera. Your model was adorable 😆
With a different film simulation on the Fuji it would have destroyed the other cameras.
There's a great company called DXO and they make this awesome software called Filmpack 4, or what ever they are up top now, Its worth checking out, even if you shoot Fuji. in other words, you have even more choice of film renderings, both 35mm, and 120 mm. and setting options in post.
No because it's an X-T2. There's a reason the X100T (same sensor as X-T1) is still selling for more than the X100F (X-T2 sensor) - you can't compare X-T1 and X-T2 this way because the X-T1's video is fried assholes and the X-T2 has usable video. Basically, the X-T2 has the worst X-trans sensor yet. The X-T3 and X-T4 is an improvement, though the X-T4 is better than the 3 because of software developments.
This was a really cool video guys! No one else on the internet has done this and its great to see! Keep it up!
He guys thanks great test! But it will be much much better if you also put the image files online so people can download them and make their own mind up thanks. :)
Thanks for taking the time to make this. I am a fuji shooter, and as much as I love my fuji, in each of the jpegs I found myself getting annoyed that a different simulation would have improved the image quite a bit. That is arguably one of the biggest down falls of the fuji line up for amateur use. Too many film simulations that don't give the user enough detail about what this profile will truly excel at. You could see in the baby portraits shot in Provia...that sim just didn't work..proneg high would have worked a lot better..but only if you knew that to begin with, and changed your sims accordingly for your jpegs.
Shooting more with your camera will help you figure it out and it will eventually become instinctual. Also shooting flat out raw and could help too
Fuji is famous for their film like color reproduction, which you didn't use in the test because you left the color profile on standard...It's just a flip of a switch to change it to any film simulation you prefer, so I think even the most amateur can use it without breaking a sweat...
The Fuji X-Series defaiult profile is 'Provia' simulation, which we used for this test. I've always been a fan of this profile and was quite surprised when it ranked where it did.
Jordan @ TCSTV
TheCameraStoreTV i feel like the auto performance I get on my xt1 was different than what the xt2 gave you. (You kinda mentioned that) No surprise that Nikon and Canon were top tier. Really enjoyed this!
I guess the title "The Great JPEG Shootout of major brands based on their ignored and totally customizable film simulation / color preferences" wasn't as click-bait worthy. Ought to be a very helpful guide to people that are going to buy an enthusiast or pro camera, and never do anything more than shoot it in P mode without even once visiting the menus.
Maybe it's just me. But Provia is not that kind of color profile you would normally use to produce straight out JPEG photos. It is obviously lack of color pop which most people want. Velvia would be far more pleasing to most eyes. But personally, if I want to print untouched jpeg photos, I would always go for classic chrome.
@@Captn_Slow Provia is standard , fujifilm said it in their website.. maybe your eyes is not standard.
Very interesting test I think the summary here is there are no bad photos just different preferences, and some love things that others hate. Looking forward to the next video! Please do more of these cool comparisons videos I love them
Based on just 3 photos it's hard to make anything conclusive, next is of course all the camera settings that you could apply. Noise reduction, white balance, simulation profiles, exposure, etc. etc. So many variables here that can alter the perception for any brand and its results. Good effort, but it's still hard to conclude anything from this imo
Exactly
They did make it very clear though that the test was for an average photographer using the camera's in auto.
They'd never end the testing if they actually decided to make it "scientific" or "accurate". Also, ten minutes in post could've turned any of the raws from the ILCs into an indistiguishable copy from another maker's jpeg.
What this test shows that there isn't a camera that has best colors for anything. And while nikon might have been good on those photos, there are many photos where it will look "yellow-ish" and situations where canon will look more pleasing (or some other brand). This is unfortunate, but RAW does help with this a little bit.
The Fuji, does slightly under expose, which could have had a baring. Where Fuji stands out against the competition is its film modes, which are really good.
I was surprised Nikon did so well. I am not generally a big fan of Nikon Jpegs particularly when it comes to skin tones but they seem to be upping their game.
Canon have always been considered good at Jpegs, so it wasn't a surprise to see them up there, particularly when it came to the skin tones.
I don't have D500 but I have D5, and I think I agree with this result. I'm super impressed with its new JPEG engine. When I'm on vacation, taking hundreds of pictures, I no longer hesitate to use JPEG.
Sitti2300 I think it's crazy to take a D5 on vacation, but more power to you if that's what you like.
Well, D5 is the best camera I have. Why wouldn't I take it with me ;-)
and there's risk of losing lots of money if somebody steals it, but I guess insurance with good insurance it shouldn't be "that" big of a deal.
Most seem to prefer compact cameraw on vacations.
Great idea for a video! You guys are the best photo channel on youtube.