High ends Canon vs. Nikon - an observation

High ends Canon vs. Nikon - an observation

I do not own both cameras. However, looking through lots of samples
available in the web, I seems to notice that photos (mostly the ones
that I observed were portraits) taken using Canon high end DSLR (1D,
1Ds,5D,10D, etc.) appear to have light or bland colors. In contrast,
Nikon high end DSLR (D1, D2, D3, D200, D300, etc) appears to produce
brighter, contrasting and rich colors. Both, however, have extremely
sharp images. Is this general observation correct, or does it just
depend on the photographer, the lens, lighting and the colors on the
subject?
Thanks for comments

Re: High ends Canon vs. Nikon - an observation

On Dec 23, 8:24 pm, anira...@gmail . com wrote:
> I do not own both cameras. However, looking through lots of samples
> available in the web, I seems to notice that photos (mostly the ones
> that I observed were portraits) taken using Canon high end DSLR (1D,
> 1Ds,5D,10D, etc.) appear to have light or bland colors. In contrast,
> Nikon high end DSLR (D1, D2, D3, D200, D300, etc) appears to produce
> brighter, contrasting and rich colors. Both, however, have extremely
> sharp images. Is this general observation correct, or does it just
> depend on the photographer, the lens, lighting and the colors on the
> subject?
> Thanks for comments

The contrast and saturation are fully under the control of the
photographer for either camera. It is posible that the defult is
different between them, but you don't need to use the default setting.

And with raw you can set both the contrast and saturation after the
photos have been taken.

Scott

Re: High ends Canon vs. Nikon - an observation

aniramca@gmail . com wrote:
> I do not own both cameras. However, looking through lots of samples
> available in the web, I seems to notice that photos (mostly the ones
> that I observed were portraits) taken using Canon high end DSLR (1D,
> 1Ds,5D,10D, etc.) appear to have light or bland colors. In contrast,
> Nikon high end DSLR (D1, D2, D3, D200, D300, etc) appears to produce
> brighter, contrasting and rich colors. Both, however, have extremely
> sharp images. Is this general observation correct, or does it just
> depend on the photographer, the lens, lighting and the colors on the
> subject?
> Thanks for comments

May be more to do with Compression for the net

--
Trev
You can always tell a Yorkshire man,
But you can't tell him much.

Re: High ends Canon vs. Nikon - an observation

Trev wrote:
> aniramca@gmail . com wrote:
>> I do not own both cameras. However, looking through lots of samples
>> available in the web, I seems to notice that photos (mostly the ones
>> that I observed were portraits) taken using Canon high end DSLR (1D,
>> 1Ds,5D,10D, etc.) appear to have light or bland colors. In contrast,
>> Nikon high end DSLR (D1, D2, D3, D200, D300, etc) appears to produce
>> brighter, contrasting and rich colors. Both, however, have extremely
>> sharp images. Is this general observation correct, or does it just
>> depend on the photographer, the lens, lighting and the colors on the
>> subject?
>> Thanks for comments
>
> May be more to do with Compression for the net
>

Why would compression artifacts affect one brand more than the other?

Re: High ends Canon vs. Nikon - an observation

timeOday wrote:
> Trev wrote:
>> aniramca@gmail . com wrote:
>>> I do not own both cameras. However, looking through lots of samples
>>> available in the web, I seems to notice that photos (mostly the ones
>>> that I observed were portraits) taken using Canon high end DSLR (1D,
>>> 1Ds,5D,10D, etc.) appear to have light or bland colors. In contrast,
>>> Nikon high end DSLR (D1, D2, D3, D200, D300, etc) appears to produce
>>> brighter, contrasting and rich colors. Both, however, have extremely
>>> sharp images. Is this general observation correct, or does it just
>>> depend on the photographer, the lens, lighting and the colors on the
>>> subject?
>>> Thanks for comments
>> May be more to do with Compression for the net
>>
>
> Why would compression artifacts affect one brand more than the other?

Because different brands of cameras use different logic for the
compression, and apply different parameters to the compression process.

Re: High ends Canon vs. Nikon - an observation

Ron Hunter wrote:
> timeOday wrote:
>> Trev wrote:
>>> aniramca@gmail . com wrote:
>>>> I do not own both cameras. However, looking through lots of samples
>>>> available in the web, I seems to notice that photos (mostly the ones
>>>> that I observed were portraits) taken using Canon high end DSLR (1D,
>>>> 1Ds,5D,10D, etc.) appear to have light or bland colors. In contrast,
>>>> Nikon high end DSLR (D1, D2, D3, D200, D300, etc) appears to produce
>>>> brighter, contrasting and rich colors. Both, however, have extremely
>>>> sharp images. Is this general observation correct, or does it just
>>>> depend on the photographer, the lens, lighting and the colors on the
>>>> subject?
>>>> Thanks for comments
>>> May be more to do with Compression for the net
>>>
>>
>> Why would compression artifacts affect one brand more than the other?
>
> Because different brands of cameras use different logic for the
> compression, and apply different parameters to the compression process.

He said "compression for the net" which to me does not imply on-camera
processing. Images above even 1 megapixel are quite rare on the 'net.

Re: High ends Canon vs. Nikon - an observation

timeOday wrote:
> Ron Hunter wrote:
>> timeOday wrote:
>>> Trev wrote:
>>>> aniramca@gmail . com wrote:
>>>>> I do not own both cameras. However, looking through lots of
>>>>> samples available in the web, I seems to notice that photos
>>>>> (mostly the ones that I observed were portraits) taken using
>>>>> Canon high end DSLR (1D, 1Ds,5D,10D, etc.) appear to have light
>>>>> or bland colors. In contrast, Nikon high end DSLR (D1, D2, D3,
>>>>> D200, D300, etc) appears to produce brighter, contrasting and
>>>>> rich colors. Both, however, have extremely sharp images. Is this
>>>>> general observation correct, or does it just depend on the
>>>>> photographer, the lens, lighting and the colors on the subject?
>>>>> Thanks for comments
>>>> May be more to do with Compression for the net
>>>>
>>>
>>> Why would compression artifacts affect one brand more than the
>>> other?
>>
>> Because different brands of cameras use different logic for the
>> compression, and apply different parameters to the compression
>> process.
>
> He said "compression for the net" which to me does not imply on-camera
> processing. Images above even 1 megapixel are quite rare on the
> 'net.

Yep What I was trying to say is Un less you can inspect the originals There
is no way of telling the fault Banding being more a problem of low Pixel
count. IE the colours or lightness not spread evenly over the range.

--
Trev
You can always tell a Yorkshire man,
But you can't tell him much.

Re: High ends Canon vs. Nikon - an observation

<aniramca@gmail . com > wrote:
>I do not own both cameras. However, looking through lots of samples
>available in the web, I seems to notice that photos (mostly the ones
>that I observed were portraits) taken using Canon high end DSLR (1D,
>1Ds,5D,10D, etc.) appear to have light or bland colors. In contrast,
>Nikon high end DSLR (D1, D2, D3, D200, D300, etc) appears to produce
>brighter, contrasting and rich colors. Both, however, have extremely
>sharp images. Is this general observation correct, or does it just
>depend on the photographer, the lens, lighting and the colors on the
>subject?

Your observation is not correct. Contrast, color saturation, and
lightness are all highly adjustable and up to the photographers.
They are also adustable by image editing programs like Photoshop.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic . net