STICKY: Fuji Users Unite - Post your comments, questions and images here

Bobby,

Until you rent a 5dmk4 you will never know how much different it is compared to your previously owned 5dmk3 Colour isn't the drastic difference between the 5d3 and 5d4. Sharpness and render is different between the two Canon bodies. I would pick my 5dmk4 over my 5dmk3 in many cases.

The Sony A7iii render is completely different to Fuji or Canon. The 3d pop factor in Sony is almost like you've hit an image with aggressive contrast/clarity even in RAW file form compared to Canon and especially Fuji. This can be both taken in a negative way or positive depending on your image you want to create. Crafty post processing is required.

Now that I've been using the new Sony body for well over a month I've observed many different things with Sony compared to Canon and Fuji.

Fuji is still the easy "eye candy" maker with little effort in post processing. Sony for me has been an incredibly challenging journey with AGGRESSIVE greens, reds and orange for skin tones. The sharpness from the Sony sensor is almost too sharp with my adapted canon glass. So far Sony makes my Canon and Fuji softer in shadow transitions and overall micro contrast. I'm reducing Sony's raw contrast, clarity and even playing with dehaze in LR classic CC.

Greens in some lighting is punch you in the face green. I'm manipulating my post processing with a bunch of Xrite passport presets I'm creating. Also lowering the "green" path.

Over a month of playing with my own Sony files I'll say there is NO doubt a huge difference in how the electronics running the Cmos sensor rendering different.

Google sony images and you'll see a lot more contrasty images. Definitely the micro contrast is piercing sharp almost like hitting an image with aggressive unsharp mask in Photoshop. This is where my observation sees piercing sharpness and aggressive colours when you would imagine the photog depicting a subtle sensual image. I find contradiction in how Sony images looks sometimes in how Sony Raw files are NOT easy to make the eye candy fuji produces with NO effort.

Sony files I'm finding I have to use the slider to reduce contrast/clarity. Strangest thing I've ever had to do for human subjects.

AlanU wrote in post #18629941
Bobby,

Until you rent a 5dmk4 you will never know how much different it is compared to your previously owned 5dmk3 Colour isn't the drastic difference between the 5d3 and 5d4. Sharpness and render is different between the two Canon bodies. I would pick my 5dmk4 over my 5dmk3 in many cases.

The Sony A7iii render is completely different to Fuji or Canon. The 3d pop factor in Sony is almost like you've hit an image with aggressive contrast/clarity even in RAW file form compared to Canon and especially Fuji. This can be both taken in a negative way or positive depending on your image you want to create. Crafty post processing is required.

Now that I've been using the new Sony body for well over a month I've observed many different things with Sony compared to Canon and Fuji.

Fuji is still the easy "eye candy" maker with little effort in post processing. Sony for me has been an incredibly challenging journey with AGGRESSIVE greens, reds and orange for skin tones. The sharpness from the Sony sensor is almost too sharp with my adapted canon glass. So far Sony makes my Canon and Fuji softer in shadow transitions and overall micro contrast. I'm reducing Sony's raw contrast, clarity and even playing with dehaze in LR classic CC.

Greens in some lighting is punch you in the face green. I'm manipulating my post processing with a bunch of Xrite passport presets I'm creating. Also lowering the "green" path.

Over a month of playing with my own Sony files I'll say there is NO doubt a huge difference in how the electronics running the Cmos sensor rendering different.

Google sony images and you'll see a lot more contrasty images. Definitely the micro contrast is piercing sharp almost like hitting an image with aggressive unsharp mask in Photoshop. This is where my observation sees piercing sharpness and aggressive colours when you would imagine the photog depicting a subtle sensual image. I find contradiction in how Sony images looks sometimes in how Sony Raw files are NOT easy to make the eye candy fuji produces with NO effort.

Sony files I'm finding I have to use the slider to reduce contrast/clarity. Strangest thing I've ever had to do for human subjects.

Care to post some examples?

I had heard they had solved their green and red issues, it'd be disappointing to see otherwise.

AlanU wrote in post #18629941
Bobby,

Until you rent a 5dmk4 you will never know how much different it is compared to your previously owned 5dmk3 Colour isn't the drastic difference between the 5d3 and 5d4. Sharpness and render is different between the two Canon bodies. I would pick my 5dmk4 over my 5dmk3 in many cases.

The Sony A7iii render is completely different to Fuji or Canon. The 3d pop factor in Sony is almost like you've hit an image with aggressive contrast/clarity even in RAW file form compared to Canon and especially Fuji. This can be both taken in a negative way or positive depending on your image you want to create. Crafty post processing is required.

Now that I've been using the new Sony body for well over a month I've observed many different things with Sony compared to Canon and Fuji.

Fuji is still the easy "eye candy" maker with little effort in post processing. Sony for me has been an incredibly challenging journey with AGGRESSIVE greens, reds and orange for skin tones. The sharpness from the Sony sensor is almost too sharp with my adapted canon glass. So far Sony makes my Canon and Fuji softer in shadow transitions and overall micro contrast. I'm reducing Sony's raw contrast, clarity and even playing with dehaze in LR classic CC.

Greens in some lighting is punch you in the face green. I'm manipulating my post processing with a bunch of Xrite passport presets I'm creating. Also lowering the "green" path.

Over a month of playing with my own Sony files I'll say there is NO doubt a huge difference in how the electronics running the Cmos sensor rendering different.

Google sony images and you'll see a lot more contrasty images. Definitely the micro contrast is piercing sharp almost like hitting an image with aggressive unsharp mask in Photoshop. This is where my observation sees piercing sharpness and aggressive colours when you would imagine the photog depicting a subtle sensual image. I find contradiction in how Sony images looks sometimes in how Sony Raw files are NOT easy to make the eye candy fuji produces with NO effort.

Sony files I'm finding I have to use the slider to reduce contrast/clarity. Strangest thing I've ever had to do for human subjects.

Thank you for this most interesting explanation.

I wonder if Sony is applying what is, in essence, an S curve to the data before writing the RAW file...

A medium to strong curve makes most images look good, but you loose data trying to reverse the effect. Subtle differences are easy enough to punch up in post.

Personally, I would rather have a subtle, lower contrast, because I can choose how to interpret it and how I want to apply the contrast.

But I could see that for some, contrast out of the box will seem better...

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #18630102
Care to post some examples?

I had heard they had solved their green and red issues, it'd be disappointing to see otherwise.

I think we know the answer to this...

Randomly thinking about how I miss my little X70, it was an ideal little pocket camera. Kim can you ask Fuji to make an x70s?

Osa713 wrote in post #18630144
I think we know the answer to this...

I would have posted but I've managed to do some serious catalog issues while I upgraded to LR Classic CC. Just completed about 6 hrs of editing of a wedding and now my catalog is missing. This is what happens when you workflow changes and I've been manually changing Sony raw to DNG via adobe dng converter. OMG what a mess I just did!!! Too busy at work now to deal with past edits!!!

Not a good example. This is virtually an exposure correction and minor sharpening. So essentially Sony RAW converted to jpg with next to no tweaking. You can see heavy vignette too. Just think this is piercing prime lens sharp at f/2.8 with my Canon 16-35 f/2.8mk2 (not known to be this sharp wideopen).

Human subjects require less contrast, clarity. The look Sony gives in your face colours with little to NO manipulation in post. Sony definitely has NOT changed their colour science as far as aggressive red, orange and greens.

Sony A7iii w/ adapted Canon 16-35 f/2.8mk2

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

F2Bthere wrote in post #18630137
Thank you for this most interesting explanation.

I wonder if Sony is applying what is, in essence, an S curve to the data before writing the RAW file...

A medium to strong curve makes most images look good, but you loose data trying to reverse the effect. Subtle differences are easy enough to punch up in post.

Personally, I would rather have a subtle, lower contrast, because I can choose how to interpret it and how I want to apply the contrast.

But I could see that for some, contrast out of the box will seem better...

I'd rather have a milder RAW file that I can manipulate. Almost like how people prefer flatter profiles for video colour grading and post sharpening...kinda off topic.

The Sony Raws show now fear in aggressive popping colours and very high contrast and clarity. I'm just so use to having "less in your face" images in RAW form. Fuji has such a milder to your eyes approach.

It's a piece of cake making a gritty hard look with Sony files. This is just my genuine "feel" when I look at images from Sony. Sometimes you don't want the punch in the face "pop" factor. Sony images really pop with incredible sharpness to the point that it's almost difficult to remove it in post. Just think a friend/manager at my local camera shop warned me about this before jumping into sony. Popping colours takes more post processing time to tame to mellow them out. I know exactly what he was talking about now........

As I've mentioned.....Sony is just another tool in the bag

Osa713 wrote in post #18630145
Randomly thinking about how I miss my little X70, it was an ideal little pocket camera. Kim can you ask Fuji to make an x70s?

X70s? Sure, I'll ask....

Two Hot Shoes wrote in post #18630251
X70s? Sure, I'll ask....

And note increased interest in TS lenses

I'll have to disagree, based on my experience,
Sony has definitely toned down the green/red/Orange aggressiveness .

The a7r3 compared to the a7sii and a6500 I owned was much better in colour ,
I found less tweaking necessary and easier to achieve "proper" skin tones , and grass color

rantercsr wrote in post #18630261
I'll have to disagree, based on my experience,
Sony has definitely toned down the green/red/Orange aggressiveness .

The a7r3 compared to the a7sii and a6500 I owned was much better in colour ,
I found less tweaking necessary and easier to achieve "proper" skin tones , and grass color

Man the past was not very good then. I didn’t get that much exposure to Sony Raw. I don’t remember it being that aggressive. The crisp unsharp mask look is also a different look I’m not use too.

Previous pros using older Sony colour sciences were troopers! It’s taken me over a month to formulate enough presets and xrite passport calibrations for specific lighting.

Why the photo of weeds? Lol

Osa713 wrote in post #18630337
Why the photo of weeds? Lol

I grenaded my catalogs in LR!

Weeds photo is virtually a straight Raw to jpeg. No vibrance. Saturation, colour tweaks. I’ve taken photos of my kids in open shade and the greens took a lot of work to tweak to my taste. Playing with kelvin didnt warm up the image collectively as the geeen retained cold tones.

Sony Raw reacts so different to my canon and Fuji. Harder 3D imaging that isn’t so easy to make it easier on the eyes compared to Fiji.

After getting my XT2. I finally decided that my Canon days are done. Posted all of it and plan on picking up the 90 f2 and 100-400 for my Fuji and feel like that will be a pretty good kit for me