Switching to Nikon was the best decision I have ever made for photography. I'm a type of person who edits every single photo they shoots and I really appreciate Nikon's color science. I just switched to Nikon Z5 from a7rii (with bunch of pricy primes, which I ended up selling) and the raw files are just sensational. I don't really have to edit anymore because photos just look exactly I want them to look straight out of camera or just minor exposure change in Lightroom. For A7rii, I always had to touch the camera calibration bar (just so the shadows don't look greenish) and always had to edit saturation, luminance, and hue of individual colors. I also often ended up just editing bunch of photos like instagram filters because I could never get the colors just right.
I have a Nikon D3300 and I feel like it was a major underrated camera, along with all their cameras. I paid $650 for it, and with the factory 18-55mm 3.5 f kit lens, it shoots razor sharp photos with background blur. I took a few photos when I first got it, and I just couldn't believe how powerful the photos are, and how neutral and accurate the colors are. I also purchased a 70D Canon, and the photos were very beautiful, but very soft, and didn't even come close to the sharp detail of the cheaper Nikon.
i switched to the Nikon Z5 from a Canon APS-C...and god behold, the difference was night and day...the raw files are insane...and this coming from the 24-50mm kit lens....the only gripe I had was with the compatibility, the canon raw files were natively supported in MacOS Big Sur, for Nikon I had to download and install a bunch of hippy shit on to my computer....
Hands down and by far the most streamlined, practical, extremely informed explanation on color science I have ever..... EVER seen explained. You actually leave the viewer confident enough to dive deeper for an even better understanding in what to look for to understand color science. Bravo my friend.
Great explanation of color science. I love Nikon colors, but I never knew why :) I'm getting the Z6 II next spring when we hopefully are able to travel more. Tired of covid already...
Finally! A video on color skin tone differences. It’s impossible to find any science on the different brands. I just recently switched from Canon to Nikon and had a heck of a time getting the skin tones to look normal. Nikon has great color and sharpness but the skin looked too pink and milky. Finally was able to fix it using Nikons Picture Control Utility 2 software and creating a custom picture profile. I was annoyed with Nikons “clarity” feature and had to tone it down a full stop to get rid of the milky look on the skin. What’s cool about Nikons software is that you can shoot Raw photos and still save your custom color/sharpness settings, you use the software and then save the raw files as tiff’s, this way it saves your custom color profile settings then you just edit the tiffs in any software you would like! Now I’m pretty happy with the results. Had to create separate custom color profiles for my Z7 & Z6 as the cameras do not match.
Can you explain who you are filming? I have pale skin with redness in some areas, and I was considering a Canon 80D, or even the terribly soft 70D, in order to make friendlier skin tones on my face, as a podcast camera. I certainly don't want crisp, blotchy, sharp looking, 4K skin, with a pale hue.
I love my Nikons - but the skin tones from the Canons are sometimes much better... Can’t understand why the Z6 II and Z7 II doesn’t support N-Log 10 Bit internally...
I could be totally wrong but it seems the highlight gradation(for lack of understanding the actual term) on canon seems more smooth. I use to use canon then nikon 'cause canon shadow details was not very good. I switch to sony A73 because I need to do videos and nikon hasn't released mirrorless then. To me sony colour really sucks, AWB seems to be getting wrong in artificial lights most of the time, skin looks pale and sickly. I feel nikon image needs less editing for the look am looking for, but that could be because of my taste.
I feel like a lot of consumers just don't understand what looks good. I purchased a Nikon D3300 and a Canon 70D. The Canon 70D was a much better camera with a focusing system that was 10 years ahead of the Nikon. But the Nikon D3300 took razor sharp photos with beautiful, rich colors, and realistic constrast. The Canon had the same good colors and contrast, but no sharpness at all. I remember the 70D couldn't even capture the detail of a medium size dog at the park, in broad daylight. I returned the Canon, and everytime I use the Nikon D3300, I am shocked at how precisely realistic, and accurate the Nikon D3300 photos look. There is a certain authenticity to Nikon's photos, which makes you trust them. I'm finding it difficult to abandon them, considering their generous free firmware updates, and their attention to professional level photo quality.
I think the nikon files out of the box have less contrast, less saturation, and more pleasing microcontrast. These attributes are what makes their files look more natural. Sony files look very punchy but as a result I think people tend to further overprocess their sony files in post, giving that homogenous "sony" film look to everything. I also agree that sony images can look oversharpened. This is why people complain about sony files looking clinical or plastic. Btw the picture of the cups is interesting. It could be a shift of light between photos, but the nikon has a more vibrant red cup, while the sony has a more vibrant higher exposed cyan cup.
Im a hybrid nikon shooter, the photo/video button is essential for hybrid work. Ive used Sony and Canon cameras and neither can move from stills to video as efficiently. If you watch Taylor Jackson's R6 review he points this out as well.
I'm kinda impressed you managed an entire video about colour science and did not mention WB. Nor camera settings affecting video & JPEG. Nor manufacturer specific differences in post processing software. Nor the trade off between accurate and "good" looking. But hey, you prefer Nikon colors, I got that part. Not that I agree, but that's not the point...
I appreciate your point, but I think all of that would be well beyond the scope of this video. I never intended to make an encyclopedic entry into colour, but instead present a very cursory look into it.
Yes, I agree with you about Nikon color. I shoot Nikon, but last year I purchased a Fujifilm Xpro2 mainly for black and white, but I think their colors are beautiful as well. The only drawback for me is that fuji isn't full frame unless you buy into their GFX system which is beautiful but both expensive and limiting in terms of lenses to choose from.
Me too, huge difference. Look at the red, it’s much brighter in the Nikon file and muted on the Sony. Same with the mugs. I could instantaneously pick out the Nikon.
I can’t help but just love the colour science of the Leica M8 and M9. So easy to deal with in post production. Almost as much information in the DNGs as on the Hasselblad H3DII series. The Nikon D4 is still a whole lot behind when it comes to colour grading, the Nikon D3 in comparison was almost colour blind.
Along with the quality of the Raw files another thing that I absolutely love about my Z6 is how tough it is!! I have shot it in the most extremes of weather conditions (negative 37 degrees Celsius to 45 degrees, harsh sunlight to heavy snowfall and rainfall) and it has always delivered!
Thank you for your informative review. None of the reviews I have watched until now, deal with the color of the photos right out of the camera, the Z6II. You have a very quick and get to the point approach. I will watch this review a few more times to fully grasp all of your information. Thanks again. 📸 🤩 👏 😆
I have a doubt ...its fine to set up sRGB in camera before shoot ... But when we begin to colour grade in davinci resolve , in Colour space transform node which profiles to choose for input color space ? and for input gamma ?
1:13 - what a big surprise honestly... I was always thinking about Canon as the only Full Frame camera brand with pleasing results (note, I mentioned results, and not only the color). Not the most natural, not the best "quality", but most pleasing. And the interesting fact is, that the Canon image looks more 3-dimensional to me, and seems that has to do more with a light falloff than just a color. I shoot Fujifilm myself, and yes colors are really nice, but it's a crop sensor with all the related results... And I'm going to buy my first Full Frame camera, just deciding which brand to go with ))). Can we really really ask you to make a comparison between something like Canon EOS R and Nikon Z6? Please, please, please!
Don't knw why but i used many canon cameras like EOS R, 90D, 6D and even budget ones and I always why at a glance the pictures look blurry both inside a camera or a mobile. That's not the case with nikon or Sony? Is there a setting in a Canon to do that, pls let me knw.
Canon tends to use overly aggressive AA filters on their cameras compared Nikon and Sony, this makes them great for reducing moire and aliasing artifacts but comes at a cost of reduced sharpness.
Hello and thank you for your video. I purchased z7ii last year and I was experiencing a lot of trouble with color science especially when I was using camera raw in photoshop. Everything seemed to have a greenish cyan tint. What was I doing wrong? I got so frustrated that I sold it but now I’m having second thoughts. Any feedback is appreciated. Thank you
You hit my biggest complaint on the Nikon too. Lack of lcd screen articulation in the portrait orientation. Drives me nuts after using my Fuji. My preference is definitely Fuji skin tones, classic chrome particularly.
Hi Don, I'd love to - but that's something that you really need scientific tools for, which I don't have. Anything else would border on edu-tainment because colours and displays are very subjective when viewed and discussed in an anecdotal fashion.
I was able to instantly pick out the Nikon image for the second example. Watching on a S20 in 1080p, same for 4K set to neutral. 🤷🏾♂️ Not sure why you couldn't tell the difference.
4:26: Gotta say, it's easy to tell the difference to me, even on my screen looking at your screen. Ditto with the color chart. The difference is obvious. Whether you prefer one to the other is a different question.
Hey I love this content, mde me go for nikon again, though the z6ii is crazy expensive. Would i be seeing the same color rendition if I go with the Nkon z6 to save some bucks (that can go to a nice lens)
@@vistek I made the same assumption until I saw the following: ruclips.net/video/4sqWQN2qMZ0/видео.html. Would love it if you can do a video comparing Z5 vs 6 color science.
The same? I mean, a camera's portrait ability lies 90% in the photographer not the camera. One could use the argument that sensor size makes a difference (neither good nor bad, just different). When you say "S5's" what S5 are you referring to?
Not fully inclined to agree, and I have shot Fuji and Canon and Nikon. I have achieved great results with all three, at times, and less so at other times. It’s all about the lighting, and you made a very valid point in your video. But I must say Canon and Nikon deliver for me most of the time. Your subject didn’t appear to enjoy having those photos taken. Peace
Thanks RUN CMD. For portraits I used the portrait setting with a +1 sharpening. I’ll be honest though, that I didn’t see much of any difference from simply using the Auto picture setting.
Nikon colors have always struck me as oddly oversaturated and yellow, especially in portraits. But I'll admit that anything is going to beat a Sony and an iPhone... He needs better bases for comparison (i.e., Canon and Fujifilm) in this test. But the luminance explanation is more or less accurate.
Wich Software are you using to edit Nikon raw files ? If you use Lightroom you will get always yellow skin tones , use Nikon’s software to see the Nikon’s real Color science , the colour is spot on , sometimes there is no editing needed .
@@Funktrainer wich Software are you using ? If you using Lightroom you will get always yellow skin tones with Nikon raw files , Lightroom or capture one doesn’t show Nikon’s colour science , there is more editing needed to get the skin tone right , use Nikon’s software and the yellow skin tones are gone .
Nah, Canon skin colour is mostly hype in my experience. A lot of the time it’s a red/magenta party with weird thin colours. Nikon on the other hand more neutral but somehow still with a lot more meatiness and punch in the files.
Which system is a better investment right now for a wanna be hybrid shooter (who doesn’t want a Sony) Nikon Z6 II (and obviously Nikon mirrorless lenses) or the Pany S5 (with L mount lenses)
If you're looking to shoot video make sure you read as much as you can about focus breathing. I own the Z 6 II along with a couple Z lenses and it's almost non existent. If you buy the Z6 with the 24-70mm you'll have an incredibly sharp zoom that works well for both photos and video. I can't speak for the S5 since I don't own one. My best advice is to find reviews from actual working photographers and take the opinions of vloggers and RUclips reviewers with a grain of salt. To learn more about Nikons try Hudson Henry, Matt Irwin and Taylor Jackson. With those three you'll have a good variation of use cases and styles. Good luck in your decision!
Just my personal opinion.... I took my time and graduated to the now Z6II. Literally came just days after shipping opened. While I’m still learning a lot, I have learned a TON and probably find myself in that “wanna be” boat with ya. Again, just my personal experience as I have not used many other brands. As to price, the Nikon bodies (Mirrorless) are winners for sure (for my case use at least) Great value and the 1.8s primes are out of this world sharp! 3 blind men and an elephant actually made a review video on the 50mm 1.8s saying it’s the last 50mm he’d own and the best 50mm 1.8 he’d ever used. Very detailed. Value wise, you can get the 35, 50, & 85mm (all 1.8) all for less than just one of any of canons RF 1.2’s. Money wasn’t an issue for me personally but I treated these as investments based on my use case and skill level. So yeah, essentially got the Z6II and 3 primes for roughly the same price as the Canon R5. Also, I think and have watched many other reviews on Nikon’s 24-70mm 2.8s lens. I own that one as well and it is super sharp. So yeah, I’ve ranted long enough. Hope it helps. Cheers.
Depends on what you shoot. If you shoot more moving subjects, Nikon is probably better. If you shoot videos that need lots of grading, S5 wins hands down. Keep in mind the Z6ii still can't shoot proper prores raw at all. It's still line-skipped aka unusable. If you just output to social media without much grading, Nikon is probably better.
The demo with the cups at 4:07 is perhaps most poignant in that it shows that there is no significant difference in what we call camera colour science. My next camera choice will be made on cost and the features, not so call colour science.
Wow - I don't know how that happened & no one caught it until now. GOOD CATCH. Thank you for noting this. Sometimes these videos get a bit rushed out to meet a deadline and errors like this (and calling it the MK II) happen.
NO, it's a "Zed Space Mark Deuce" LOL I couldn't even complete my Nikon registration looking up "z6ii" as they require the space. However, I was first on the list to get a Z6II because the vendor I used didn't show Z6II in search results if you searched for "Z6" Winning! ;)
You can setup a "picture control" or editing (Lightroom or whatever you use) color profile and get nearly ANY desired result you want out of ANY camera. What this is pointing out is that Nikon is a more neutral (natural to me) starting point, and the color spectrum doesn't lie. He properly mentions that people prefer brighter and more saturated images. I'd argue warmer too. That has traditionally been Canon's thing. As a side note, people tend to visualize memories with more saturation than in real life.
Was shooting a wedding and doing mentorship..i gave my raw files for my mentor so he can also edit it..he was surprised about the dynamic and color my nikon z6 produced vs his A9 and A7iii..just made me smile🙂
Prefer Sony colors...Nikon is always to light Sony,Canon and for sure Fujifilm colors are better .And I hate it because I want this camera but the auto focus is not even close to Sony or canon and the color science is not lush enough
This is one of the few videos I've seen, that's trying to explain camera color science to the viewer, and doing it from an objective view, rather than from and subjective view, and manage to do so without ending up being too technical. Well done. [Rant] But for the love of the brand, please stop calling it the "mark" 2. It is NOT called that. It is the Nikon Z 6II - just as a Sony a7 III is not called a Sony a7mark3 It is so sad to see so called experts on RUclips, cannot even pronounce the name correct of the product they are reviewing. For some reason, it makes me fell less comfortable in what they are saying. [/rant]
Thank you Hans for the kind comment. In addressing your rant, I suppose I can see your frustration. However, I struggle to comprehend why the exact nomenclature is so important. It's common vernacular that even the brand reps whom I speak with on a regular basis, care little about. "Mark" has become commonplace in the english language to refer to the second generation of products - which I believe was lent to us from the aerospace industry (I could be wrong on this). My personal feeling is that when it comes to "experts" (which I don't know that I would call any youtuber an expert, myself included), that there remains bigger fish to fry than the mis-use of the word mark. But to each their own, I suppose. And that doesn't make your comment any less valid. -D
@@vistek I hear you and understand your point, I just don't agree. There is a distinct difference between referring to a product as the Mark 2 and then calling it the Mark 2 Yes, it is the mark 2 version of the Z line of cameras, but it is called the Z 6II Courtesy and respect to the brand you are reviewing. As to the use of the word "Expert", it is hard to call you anything but, when you call your own channel "Your Visual Imaging Experts". 😉 RUclipsrs are the magazines of our time. The place people go to get info and knowledge about what interest them. You might not agree with or like that, but that is the way our society is heading. And that is why I'm so "hard" on youtubers. If they don't care about the trivial things... Peace out.
To be honest, I rarely feel it's worth engaging in this rhetoric. Listen, and I'm going to try to say this in the most polite way. In the five years that I've been creating content for this channel, no brand has ever said I've been disrespectful of them. Even "experts" at top of their game, still make mistakes. I made a mistake by calling it the Mark 2. The respectful thing to say is to comment "hey, FYI it's not the Mark 2 it's the Z6II, but otherwise great job." I'm not going re-record my whole video just to fix a small naming issue. The issue I have with negative comments is that they aren't constructive. People are literally sitting around watching videos and just waiting in the shadows for someone to make a minor error, just so they can verbally urinate all over them. I'm defensive about this because I'm tired of the lack of empathy or understanding from critics. 90% of those who use destructive and unhelpful language (to prop up their own ego) do so without posting ANY video content themselves. Run a youtube channel with 25K viewers (which I started from zero followers, btw), and then come to me about how I don't care to get my facts straight. Brother, I am a full time DP/Director, and and I bust my ass working 80 hour weeks just get these videos in my in-between-time, while supporting my family - all to support these brands. I'm going to make mistakes. I won't stop making mistakes. None of these are done with malice, apathy, or with disregard for brands. If I sound upset and defensive it is because I am. I'm tired of the ego, of the lack of compassion, and the toxic shaming that exists. If you want to make the internet a better place, then check yourself and your approach. All it does is create divisiveness and perpetuates anger. Peace Out. - D
99% of pro photographers do not use sony. it is what it is. and it's not the color science it's the ergonomics, and the lenses. the lenses lack character even though they are sharp, maybe too sharp. and the ergonomics are just pathetic.
@@vistek go to models.com, see the gear list, i haven't seen one use a sony so far in all the years i've been on the site. (maybe Ann Libowitz shot one in a celeb shoot for Cosmo a few years back, she shot with 9 cameras that day) also i shoot behind the scenes photos for Juventus Torino, in Turin Italy, i've yet to see a Sony camera at the Champions League games, and we get shooters from all over the world even in the covid era... well we did get the A9ii from the club to tryout, it's a great camera. not for us. canon r5's have popped up a lot lately. when i mean pro, i mean pro, not wedding photographers. though i m not knocking them they shoot whatever they want.
I understand that from your viewpoint it would appear to be one way over the other. But I would caution such an approach. For one, it's purely anecdotal and there isn't any empirical data behind it. Actual data would tell a different story. You also define professional in a very limited way. If you make money from photography, you are a professional. Wedding, sports, fashion, food, wildlife, cats. For a statement like this to be true, we would have to take a broad +/- 1000 - 10,000 sampling of users over every photo category. Even if Sony wasn't in the top 3, I think it's fair to say that it wouldn't be 1%. The retail numbers would clearly suggest quite the opposite. Finally, if you want to talk sports - two of our country's best sports photographers (here in Canada) shoot with Sony. One of them, Mark Blinch just won the World Press Photo Award - quite literally the most prestigious photo journalism award on earth. www.worldpressphoto.org/collection/photo/2020/39654/1/Mark-Blinch. So again, just be careful with your assumptions when trying to prove a personal bias.
This is simply not true, if anything the photography world says Nikon is a sinking ship...I am not a Sony shooter but I guess you shooting soccer games is the only "Pro Photographer "work lolol I see more Sony shooters than Nikon in these days.With that being said I like the Nikon z6 ii over any Sony aesthetically but trying to find a way to justify getting a camera that just van not compete with its competitors Canon (R6&5) or Sony's A7R IV. You being a action "Pro" LOLOL soccer game shooter would benefit better with the much better Sony autofocus.
There is no Nikon Z6 Mark 2! It’s an Nikon “Z 6II” any other writing or pronunciation (correct: “American Z” 6 2) is wrong!!! This is what Nikon HQ said.
Nice video - but I cringe every time I hear you call it the 'mark II' even labeling it MKII in some parts of the video - Nikon has clearly said it is Z6 II, not a 'Mark II'
We need to stop calling cameras “pro” or not by their price tag. I know many photogs making six figures off of their work horse z6s and now the z6iis. Same for the a73 etc. in fact I bet more “pros” use these over a9s/d5s/etc outside of sports
Switching to Nikon was the best decision I have ever made for photography. I'm a type of person who edits every single photo they shoots and I really appreciate Nikon's color science. I just switched to Nikon Z5 from a7rii (with bunch of pricy primes, which I ended up selling) and the raw files are just sensational. I don't really have to edit anymore because photos just look exactly I want them to look straight out of camera or just minor exposure change in Lightroom. For A7rii, I always had to touch the camera calibration bar (just so the shadows don't look greenish) and always had to edit saturation, luminance, and hue of individual colors. I also often ended up just editing bunch of photos like instagram filters because I could never get the colors just right.
I'm a longtime Nikon shooter that shoots JPG (most of the time) for the opposite reason. You can do both. ;)
I have a Nikon D3300 and I feel like it was a major underrated camera, along with all their cameras. I paid $650 for it, and with the factory 18-55mm 3.5 f kit lens, it shoots razor sharp photos with background blur. I took a few photos when I first got it, and I just couldn't believe how powerful the photos are, and how neutral and accurate the colors are. I also purchased a 70D Canon, and the photos were very beautiful, but very soft, and didn't even come close to the sharp detail of the cheaper Nikon.
i switched to the Nikon Z5 from a Canon APS-C...and god behold, the difference was night and day...the raw files are insane...and this coming from the 24-50mm kit lens....the only gripe I had was with the compatibility, the canon raw files were natively supported in MacOS Big Sur, for Nikon I had to download and install a bunch of hippy shit on to my computer....
That is why i always choose nikon over other brand, the color file is fantastic
Hands down and by far the most streamlined, practical, extremely informed explanation on color science I have ever..... EVER seen explained. You actually leave the viewer confident enough to dive deeper for an even better understanding in what to look for to understand color science. Bravo my friend.
Thank you Formless!
Great explanation of color science. I love Nikon colors, but I never knew why :)
I'm getting the Z6 II next spring when we hopefully are able to travel more. Tired of covid already...
Finally! A video on color skin tone differences. It’s impossible to find any science on the different brands. I just recently switched from Canon to Nikon and had a heck of a time getting the skin tones to look normal. Nikon has great color and sharpness but the skin looked too pink and milky. Finally was able to fix it using Nikons Picture Control Utility 2 software and creating a custom picture profile. I was annoyed with Nikons “clarity” feature and had to tone it down a full stop to get rid of the milky look on the skin.
What’s cool about Nikons software is that you can shoot Raw photos and still save your custom color/sharpness settings, you use the software and then save the raw files as tiff’s, this way it saves your custom color profile settings then you just edit the tiffs in any software you would like!
Now I’m pretty happy with the results. Had to create separate custom color profiles for my Z7 & Z6 as the cameras do not match.
Can you explain who you are filming? I have pale skin with redness in some areas, and I was considering a Canon 80D, or even the terribly soft 70D, in order to make friendlier skin tones on my face, as a podcast camera. I certainly don't want crisp, blotchy, sharp looking, 4K skin, with a pale hue.
Hey Dusty, why did you switch from Canon?
Would u happen to be able share that profile?
Would have loved to see color science compared on R6 vs Z6ii
I love my Nikons - but the skin tones from the Canons are sometimes much better... Can’t understand why the Z6 II and Z7 II doesn’t support N-Log 10 Bit internally...
While the Canon color is far better than the Sony. Nikon wins every time.
I could be totally wrong but it seems the highlight gradation(for lack of understanding the actual term) on canon seems more smooth. I use to use canon then nikon 'cause canon shadow details was not very good. I switch to sony A73 because I need to do videos and nikon hasn't released mirrorless then. To me sony colour really sucks, AWB seems to be getting wrong in artificial lights most of the time, skin looks pale and sickly. I feel nikon image needs less editing for the look am looking for, but that could be because of my taste.
I love my new Nikon Z6II cameras!! Nikon cameras are also great for nature photos as well.
I prefer Nikons color because it is accurate. I shoot raw and can adjust to my liking in post.
Thinking of picking up a Z6 to shoot vintage primes alongside my jack of all trades Fuji X-T3. This makes it easier. Sony isn't for me.
Great combo! Thanks for the comment PR!
Nice video about the color science. This is one of the reasons why I didn't swtich and I have the Z6 II. I love editing nikon files.
Thank you for the great comment, ljwhatup!
I feel like a lot of consumers just don't understand what looks good. I purchased a Nikon D3300 and a Canon 70D. The Canon 70D was a much better camera with a focusing system that was 10 years ahead of the Nikon. But the Nikon D3300 took razor sharp photos with beautiful, rich colors, and realistic constrast. The Canon had the same good colors and contrast, but no sharpness at all. I remember the 70D couldn't even capture the detail of a medium size dog at the park, in broad daylight. I returned the Canon, and everytime I use the Nikon D3300, I am shocked at how precisely realistic, and accurate the Nikon D3300 photos look. There is a certain authenticity to Nikon's photos, which makes you trust them. I'm finding it difficult to abandon them, considering their generous free firmware updates, and their attention to professional level photo quality.
I think the nikon files out of the box have less contrast, less saturation, and more pleasing microcontrast. These attributes are what makes their files look more natural. Sony files look very punchy but as a result I think people tend to further overprocess their sony files in post, giving that homogenous "sony" film look to everything.
I also agree that sony images can look oversharpened. This is why people complain about sony files looking clinical or plastic.
Btw the picture of the cups is interesting. It could be a shift of light between photos, but the nikon has a more vibrant red cup, while the sony has a more vibrant higher exposed cyan cup.
Im a hybrid nikon shooter, the photo/video button is essential for hybrid work. Ive used Sony and Canon cameras and neither can move from stills to video as efficiently. If you watch Taylor Jackson's R6 review he points this out as well.
I'm kinda impressed you managed an entire video about colour science and did not mention WB. Nor camera settings affecting video & JPEG. Nor manufacturer specific differences in post processing software. Nor the trade off between accurate and "good" looking. But hey, you prefer Nikon colors, I got that part. Not that I agree, but that's not the point...
I appreciate your point, but I think all of that would be well beyond the scope of this video. I never intended to make an encyclopedic entry into colour, but instead present a very cursory look into it.
Yes, I agree with you about Nikon color. I shoot Nikon, but last year I purchased a Fujifilm Xpro2 mainly for black and white, but I think their colors are beautiful as well. The only drawback for me is that fuji isn't full frame unless you buy into their GFX system which is beautiful but both expensive and limiting in terms of lenses to choose from.
Interesting, but I see a huge difference in those colour charts at 4:30.
Seriously, I'm not even calibrated (I'm close.) I miss my HP2475w which was basically a Mac monitor with controls. ;)
Me too, huge difference. Look at the red, it’s much brighter in the Nikon file and muted on the Sony. Same with the mugs. I could instantaneously pick out the Nikon.
That was a fantastic review on the technicality regarding color science and why some like myself have chosen to stick with Nikon.
I can’t help but just love the colour science of the Leica M8 and M9. So easy to deal with in post production. Almost as much information in the DNGs as on the Hasselblad H3DII series.
The Nikon D4 is still a whole lot behind when it comes to colour grading, the Nikon D3 in comparison was almost colour blind.
Leica 🥱
Along with the quality of the Raw files another thing that I absolutely love about my Z6 is how tough it is!! I have shot it in the most extremes of weather conditions (negative 37 degrees Celsius to 45 degrees, harsh sunlight to heavy snowfall and rainfall) and it has always delivered!
woah nice to read that
Thank you for your informative review. None of the reviews I have watched until now, deal with the color of the photos right out of the camera, the Z6II. You have a very quick and get to the point approach. I will watch this review a few more times to fully grasp all of your information. Thanks again. 📸 🤩 👏 😆
Thank you Joel!
I miss the color science of my D700
I have a doubt ...its fine to set up sRGB in camera before shoot ... But when we begin to colour grade in davinci resolve , in Colour space transform node which profiles to choose for input color space ? and for input gamma ?
1:13 - what a big surprise honestly... I was always thinking about Canon as the only Full Frame camera brand with pleasing results (note, I mentioned results, and not only the color). Not the most natural, not the best "quality", but most pleasing. And the interesting fact is, that the Canon image looks more 3-dimensional to me, and seems that has to do more with a light falloff than just a color. I shoot Fujifilm myself, and yes colors are really nice, but it's a crop sensor with all the related results... And I'm going to buy my first Full Frame camera, just deciding which brand to go with ))).
Can we really really ask you to make a comparison between something like Canon EOS R and Nikon Z6? Please, please, please!
Is this the right time to switch from d850 to z6 2.. I am thinking of benifits from IBIS and eyeAF. My hit rate will be high.
Bang on! You can do any manipulation in post, but if a camera can save you time out of the gate, that’s money earned.
You're absolutely right about luminance 💯
Don't knw why but i used many canon cameras like EOS R, 90D, 6D and even budget ones and I always why at a glance the pictures look blurry both inside a camera or a mobile. That's not the case with nikon or Sony? Is there a setting in a Canon to do that, pls let me knw.
Canon tends to use overly aggressive AA filters on their cameras compared Nikon and Sony, this makes them great for reducing moire and aliasing artifacts but comes at a cost of reduced sharpness.
@@haydennettleton3272 Which is great for portraits.
Hello and thank you for your video. I purchased z7ii last year and I was experiencing a lot of trouble with color science especially when I was using camera raw in photoshop. Everything seemed to have a greenish cyan tint. What was I doing wrong? I got so frustrated that I sold it but now I’m having second thoughts. Any feedback is appreciated. Thank you
You hit my biggest complaint on the Nikon too. Lack of lcd screen articulation in the portrait orientation. Drives me nuts after using my Fuji. My preference is definitely Fuji skin tones, classic chrome particularly.
best camera in history mate, for sure & i have been photographing 35 years
Could you compare Nikon vs Canon colors in their mirrorless cameras?
Hi Don, I'd love to - but that's something that you really need scientific tools for, which I don't have. Anything else would border on edu-tainment because colours and displays are very subjective when viewed and discussed in an anecdotal fashion.
How would you rate the Nikon D610 for colours and general image quality , being an older 2013 camera ? Great video btw 🎉
Did you used any color Profile on the nikon, if not standart, which?
Great informative content, rare to find and very useful...be different, be great ...
Thanks Uday!
Yeah, since 2000, my preference is Nikon with Canon just as a last resort backup. Since they are close to Nikon, I also prefer Panasonic & Leica.
Bro you seem to know alot about skintones. Which will you recommend canon r6 or z6ii
I was able to instantly pick out the Nikon image for the second example. Watching on a S20 in 1080p, same for 4K set to neutral. 🤷🏾♂️ Not sure why you couldn't tell the difference.
Sir can you please guide how to do setting for selective color on z6ii
Nikon and Lumix's colour is amazing. :D
Boy, that was great content. Really different and unique. Thank You.
Thank you MB!
4:26: Gotta say, it's easy to tell the difference to me, even on my screen looking at your screen. Ditto with the color chart. The difference is obvious. Whether you prefer one to the other is a different question.
Yet did the Sony α7 III and the Nikon Z 6II both have the same lens [01:46]?
Which cam do you use?
Comparing colors doesn't make sense without even mentioning which Picture Profile was used with the Nikon.
Best video to demonstrate skin colour 🤘
Nice explanation of colour science 👍
Thank you Patel! Appreciate the comment.
The Sony renders reds and yellows funny to my eye. Love the z6 colors especially on darker skin tones. It makes my life so much easier to edit.
Hey I love this content, mde me go for nikon again, though the z6ii is crazy expensive. Would i be seeing the same color rendition if I go with the Nkon z6 to save some bucks (that can go to a nice lens)
I'm pretty sure the colours would be the exact same in both cameras. The colour science hasn't changed, only their processing power.
@@vistek I made the same assumption until I saw the following: ruclips.net/video/4sqWQN2qMZ0/видео.html. Would love it if you can do a video comparing Z5 vs 6 color science.
Get the Z5. It also has phenomenal color, better than any cameras Sony made.
Love the video! Where did you get your green pants in the first part of the video?
That green tint on nikon cameras is what disappoints me a lot
How would you compare the s5's portrait ability to this camera?
The same? I mean, a camera's portrait ability lies 90% in the photographer not the camera. One could use the argument that sensor size makes a difference (neither good nor bad, just different). When you say "S5's" what S5 are you referring to?
Not fully inclined to agree, and I have shot Fuji and Canon and Nikon. I have achieved great results with all three, at times, and less so at other times. It’s all about the lighting, and you made a very valid point in your video. But I must say Canon and Nikon deliver for me most of the time.
Your subject didn’t appear to enjoy having those photos taken. Peace
I like your input on this, could you do one comparing Nikon z6ii vs Canon r6
Excellent review.of the colour science in the Z system.
Thank you!
Thanks for the deep dive! What color profile did you use?
Thanks RUN CMD. For portraits I used the portrait setting with a +1 sharpening. I’ll be honest though, that I didn’t see much of any difference from simply using the Auto picture setting.
Great vid, instant subscribed!
Z6II ❤️
Nikon colors have always struck me as oddly oversaturated and yellow, especially in portraits. But I'll admit that anything is going to beat a Sony and an iPhone...
He needs better bases for comparison (i.e., Canon and Fujifilm) in this test. But the luminance explanation is more or less accurate.
Yep, there’s way too much yellow in Nikon files, that’s why Canon will win most of the time when it comes to skin tones (more red).
Wich Software are you using to edit Nikon raw files ? If you use Lightroom you will get always yellow skin tones , use Nikon’s software to see the Nikon’s real Color science , the colour is spot on , sometimes there is no editing needed .
@@Funktrainer wich Software are you using ? If you using Lightroom you will get always yellow skin tones with Nikon raw files , Lightroom or capture one doesn’t show Nikon’s colour science , there is more editing needed to get the skin tone right , use Nikon’s software and the yellow skin tones are gone .
Nah, Canon skin colour is mostly hype in my experience. A lot of the time it’s a red/magenta party with weird thin colours. Nikon on the other hand more neutral but somehow still with a lot more meatiness and punch in the files.
Canons are pretty crummy tbh. Always preferred Nikon and Sony to canon
Nikon Z6ii or Canon R6?
Z6ii
Nikon Z 6II
Which system is a better investment right now for a wanna be hybrid shooter (who doesn’t want a Sony) Nikon Z6 II (and obviously Nikon mirrorless lenses) or the Pany S5 (with L mount lenses)
If you're looking to shoot video make sure you read as much as you can about focus breathing. I own the Z 6 II along with a couple Z lenses and it's almost non existent. If you buy the Z6 with the 24-70mm you'll have an incredibly sharp zoom that works well for both photos and video. I can't speak for the S5 since I don't own one. My best advice is to find reviews from actual working photographers and take the opinions of vloggers and RUclips reviewers with a grain of salt. To learn more about Nikons try Hudson Henry, Matt Irwin and Taylor Jackson. With those three you'll have a good variation of use cases and styles. Good luck in your decision!
Just my personal opinion.... I took my time and graduated to the now Z6II. Literally came just days after shipping opened. While I’m still learning a lot, I have learned a TON and probably find myself in that “wanna be” boat with ya. Again, just my personal experience as I have not used many other brands. As to price, the Nikon bodies (Mirrorless) are winners for sure (for my case use at least) Great value and the 1.8s primes are out of this world sharp! 3 blind men and an elephant actually made a review video on the 50mm 1.8s saying it’s the last 50mm he’d own and the best 50mm 1.8 he’d ever used. Very detailed. Value wise, you can get the 35, 50, & 85mm (all 1.8) all for less than just one of any of canons RF 1.2’s. Money wasn’t an issue for me personally but I treated these as investments based on my use case and skill level. So yeah, essentially got the Z6II and 3 primes for roughly the same price as the Canon R5. Also, I think and have watched many other reviews on Nikon’s 24-70mm 2.8s lens. I own that one as well and it is super sharp. So yeah, I’ve ranted long enough. Hope it helps. Cheers.
Depends on what you shoot. If you shoot more moving subjects, Nikon is probably better. If you shoot videos that need lots of grading, S5 wins hands down.
Keep in mind the Z6ii still can't shoot proper prores raw at all. It's still line-skipped aka unusable. If you just output to social media without much grading, Nikon is probably better.
If you like Autofocus then pick up the Nikon. Leica and Panasonic just can’t autofocus.
The demo with the cups at 4:07 is perhaps most poignant in that it shows that there is no significant difference in what we call camera colour science. My next camera choice will be made on cost and the features, not so call colour science.
thanx for this informative video 🙏🏽
Good Review, thumbs up!!
Great video explaining this color science rather than just saying “Sony color science sucks, bro! Nikon has better color!”
I don’t agree, canon color is better than both Nikon Nd Sony
Definitely any 5D smokes Nikon when it comes to skin tones.
You are using the wrong software , use Nikon’s software not Lightroom etc . , you can’t beat Nikon’s colours .
2:10 The positions of the camera names are interchanged. ☞
Sony top, Nikon bottom
Wow - I don't know how that happened & no one caught it until now. GOOD CATCH. Thank you for noting this. Sometimes these videos get a bit rushed out to meet a deadline and errors like this (and calling it the MK II) happen.
It's not MKII, its II..;-)
NO, it's a "Zed Space Mark Deuce" LOL I couldn't even complete my Nikon registration looking up "z6ii" as they require the space. However, I was first on the list to get a Z6II because the vendor I used didn't show Z6II in search results if you searched for "Z6" Winning! ;)
Pretty sure it’s just the Nikon Z6 ii not Z6 Mark ii 🤔
You are correct. I sent the video to Nikon first and no-one corrected me. I've at the very least updated the title. Thanks.
Very informational video, but I have to say I prefer the Sony portrait by far... The Nikon image looks way too pale
You can setup a "picture control" or editing (Lightroom or whatever you use) color profile and get nearly ANY desired result you want out of ANY camera. What this is pointing out is that Nikon is a more neutral (natural to me) starting point, and the color spectrum doesn't lie.
He properly mentions that people prefer brighter and more saturated images. I'd argue warmer too. That has traditionally been Canon's thing. As a side note, people tend to visualize memories with more saturation than in real life.
Was shooting a wedding and doing mentorship..i gave my raw files for my mentor so he can also edit it..he was surprised about the dynamic and color my nikon z6 produced vs his A9 and A7iii..just made me smile🙂
Great content
Weird. I love Nikon & Fuji colors.
Prefer Sony colors...Nikon is always to light Sony,Canon and for sure Fujifilm colors are better .And I hate it because I want this camera but the auto focus is not even close to Sony or canon and the color science is not lush enough
Talking about color then take a look to Hasselblad, Leica, Mamiya or Fujifilm. They all beat the crap out Canikon and Sony.
Great Video
This is one of the few videos I've seen, that's trying to explain camera color science to the viewer, and doing it from an objective view, rather than from and subjective view, and manage to do so without ending up being too technical. Well done.
[Rant]
But for the love of the brand, please stop calling it the "mark" 2. It is NOT called that. It is the Nikon Z 6II - just as a Sony a7 III is not called a Sony a7mark3
It is so sad to see so called experts on RUclips, cannot even pronounce the name correct of the product they are reviewing.
For some reason, it makes me fell less comfortable in what they are saying.
[/rant]
Thank you Hans for the kind comment. In addressing your rant, I suppose I can see your frustration. However, I struggle to comprehend why the exact nomenclature is so important. It's common vernacular that even the brand reps whom I speak with on a regular basis, care little about. "Mark" has become commonplace in the english language to refer to the second generation of products - which I believe was lent to us from the aerospace industry (I could be wrong on this). My personal feeling is that when it comes to "experts" (which I don't know that I would call any youtuber an expert, myself included), that there remains bigger fish to fry than the mis-use of the word mark. But to each their own, I suppose. And that doesn't make your comment any less valid. -D
@@vistek
I hear you and understand your point, I just don't agree.
There is a distinct difference between referring to a product as the Mark 2 and then calling it the Mark 2
Yes, it is the mark 2 version of the Z line of cameras, but it is called the Z 6II
Courtesy and respect to the brand you are reviewing.
As to the use of the word "Expert", it is hard to call you anything but, when you call your own channel "Your Visual Imaging Experts". 😉
RUclipsrs are the magazines of our time. The place people go to get info and knowledge about what interest them.
You might not agree with or like that, but that is the way our society is heading.
And that is why I'm so "hard" on youtubers. If they don't care about the trivial things...
Peace out.
To be honest, I rarely feel it's worth engaging in this rhetoric. Listen, and I'm going to try to say this in the most polite way. In the five years that I've been creating content for this channel, no brand has ever said I've been disrespectful of them. Even "experts" at top of their game, still make mistakes. I made a mistake by calling it the Mark 2. The respectful thing to say is to comment "hey, FYI it's not the Mark 2 it's the Z6II, but otherwise great job." I'm not going re-record my whole video just to fix a small naming issue.
The issue I have with negative comments is that they aren't constructive. People are literally sitting around watching videos and just waiting in the shadows for someone to make a minor error, just so they can verbally urinate all over them. I'm defensive about this because I'm tired of the lack of empathy or understanding from critics. 90% of those who use destructive and unhelpful language (to prop up their own ego) do so without posting ANY video content themselves. Run a youtube channel with 25K viewers (which I started from zero followers, btw), and then come to me about how I don't care to get my facts straight. Brother, I am a full time DP/Director, and and I bust my ass working 80 hour weeks just get these videos in my in-between-time, while supporting my family - all to support these brands. I'm going to make mistakes. I won't stop making mistakes. None of these are done with malice, apathy, or with disregard for brands. If I sound upset and defensive it is because I am. I'm tired of the ego, of the lack of compassion, and the toxic shaming that exists. If you want to make the internet a better place, then check yourself and your approach. All it does is create divisiveness and perpetuates anger. Peace Out. - D
@@vistek 👏👏👏👏👏👏👏
@@HJN67 I absolutely love Nikon but... CMON! lol & lol & lol...
It's not Mk ii, is just the Z6ii. It's not a Canon.
99% of pro photographers do not use sony. it is what it is. and it's not the color science it's the ergonomics, and the lenses. the lenses lack character even though they are sharp, maybe too sharp. and the ergonomics are just pathetic.
Just curious, where do you get this statistic from? Is this a global statistic or regional? How would you even collect such data?
@@vistek go to models.com, see the gear list, i haven't seen one use a sony so far in all the years i've been on the site. (maybe Ann Libowitz shot one in a celeb shoot for Cosmo a few years back, she shot with 9 cameras that day)
also i shoot behind the scenes photos for Juventus Torino, in Turin Italy, i've yet to see a Sony camera at the Champions League games, and we get shooters from all over the world even in the covid era... well we did get the A9ii from the club to tryout, it's a great camera. not for us.
canon r5's have popped up a lot lately.
when i mean pro, i mean pro, not wedding photographers. though i m not knocking them they shoot whatever they want.
I understand that from your viewpoint it would appear to be one way over the other. But I would caution such an approach. For one, it's purely anecdotal and there isn't any empirical data behind it. Actual data would tell a different story. You also define professional in a very limited way. If you make money from photography, you are a professional. Wedding, sports, fashion, food, wildlife, cats. For a statement like this to be true, we would have to take a broad +/- 1000 - 10,000 sampling of users over every photo category. Even if Sony wasn't in the top 3, I think it's fair to say that it wouldn't be 1%. The retail numbers would clearly suggest quite the opposite.
Finally, if you want to talk sports - two of our country's best sports photographers (here in Canada) shoot with Sony. One of them, Mark Blinch just won the World Press Photo Award - quite literally the most prestigious photo journalism award on earth. www.worldpressphoto.org/collection/photo/2020/39654/1/Mark-Blinch. So again, just be careful with your assumptions when trying to prove a personal bias.
This is simply not true, if anything the photography world says Nikon is a sinking ship...I am not a Sony shooter but I guess you shooting soccer games is the only "Pro Photographer "work lolol I see more Sony shooters than Nikon in these days.With that being said I like the Nikon z6 ii over any Sony aesthetically but trying to find a way to justify getting a camera that just van not compete with its competitors Canon (R6&5) or Sony's A7R IV. You being a action "Pro" LOLOL soccer game shooter would benefit better with the much better Sony autofocus.
There is no Nikon Z6 Mark 2!
It’s an Nikon “Z 6II” any other writing or pronunciation (correct: “American Z” 6 2) is wrong!!! This is what Nikon HQ said.
Potehto- potahto -z6 mk2- z6ii
Nice video - but I cringe every time I hear you call it the 'mark II' even labeling it MKII in some parts of the video - Nikon has clearly said it is Z6 II, not a 'Mark II'
Yeah sorry, I was mistaken and I didn't have time (or will) to completely re-record the video. Thanks for your understanding.
It should have been called the “S” anyways. I don’t know which idiot at Nikon came up with the “II”.
puts a heavy filter on his portraits and complaints about how iPhone destroys skin color...
We need to stop calling cameras “pro” or not by their price tag. I know many photogs making six figures off of their work horse z6s and now the z6iis. Same for the a73 etc. in fact I bet more “pros” use these over a9s/d5s/etc outside of sports
NAH NAH NAH I'm gonna stop you right there
ZED? ZED? Who the fuck says zEd?
Everyone except for America.
Duuude!!!
Olympus colors is the best. Canon second. Fuji third. Then Nikon and Sony.
LOL
LOL
And that’s exactly why they’re currently at the glue factory (Olympus) 😉
Sheeesh...! Let me guess, you own a recent Olympus, an old Canon 5D and a secondhand XT-3 and have never even used Nikon or Sony.
LOL
Great video; but I have a feeling Canon has better color than Nikon. What do you say?
lol
In which country?
Subjective topic really. And the least important imo.
Use Nikon software not Lightroom for your raw files , you can’t beat Nikon’s colour
Mountassiniboine you should watch this: ruclips.net/video/FRQpueEvb-U/видео.html Fuji and Nikon had best colour. Sony was dead last.
I just must say that I prefer the Sony Color Science 💪
Why is Nikon the only brand where it's users go out of their way to change their names 🤣