My 5dmkiii vs High End Nikon (color accuracy)

I assisted a gentlemen with a wedding yesterday and he at every opportunity made note that I had a mid grade (as he referred to it) Canon (5dmkiii) and complained about how he would have to adjust the horrible magenta color cast that my body would slap on to every photo.

Is this even true? I've never noticed a color cast. It has seemed pretty spot on to me. At the time I felt like he was telling me how expensive his cameras were.

Than it's not to be true. You know your camera better than some Nikon fanboy right? So don't worry about it. I use to meet guys like that when I first started in Photography in the 80's and I pity them.

Guy is an idiot. Most Nikon shooters I know complain about the color cast on skin that Nikon renders. Go figure. They tell me that the canon skin tones are Big reasons for switching to canon when they switched.........perso​nally I dont care. I shoot raw. Not a big deal especially with Lightroom.

Canon and Nikon colour balance out of factory is different I must admit. To someone who likes Canons standard, the Nikon product can appear rather green and the Canon rather pink to someone used to Nikons standard.

Neither is right or wrong and each can be adjusted to suit individual preferences, both before and after the event.

I'm curious...what was his "high end" camera?

I'd like to believe that gentlemen don't behave like that. At best, I'd classify him as a man...or probably a boy.

First, the 5DMkIII is not a "mid-grade" camera. It is a fabulous camera, one that professionals could only dream about just a few years ago. Lots of pros use it. In fact, at least three of the wedding photographers I have seen recently were using Canon 5-series cameras.

The comment about a color cast is nonsense.

First of all, if you want to get the best out of the camera, you should shoot raw, which makes most of this discussion moot. The major issue of color casts comes from the choice of "picture styles," which by design process the photo to have a certain color mix, saturation level, etc. Take the same shot with the standard and landscape styles and you will see this. Those styles are irrelevant if you shoot raw, because a raw file contains all of the original data. The software may read the style for an initial rendering, but that has no real effect.

With any camera, if you are concerned about maximizing color accuracy, you can use a color checker and set a profile for the camera. I have been using Canon digital bodies for 6 or 7 years (currently, a 5DIII) and have never seen a need to do this. I use a white balance card if I am uncertain about lighting (you have to do that with any camera) and use the Adobe Standard profile for an initial rendering. I adjust WB in post, but I only rarely have to tweak individual colors. I can't even recall encountering a magenta cast.

The real bottom line, to paraphrase Ansel Adams, is that the most important piece of photographic equipment is the 12 inches behind the viewfinder.

The guy had four Nikon D4s.

FOUR D4s?? Um yeah.. that's only $24,000 worth of bodies right there.. but still, he didn't have to be rude about it. Next time tell him... Listen up fanboy, YOU make sure YOUR D4s don't have that green tinge before making snide remarks about my camera. Tell him Scott Kelby said that

I have a D4... great camera but not perfect.. and certainly NOT a license to be a d-bag.

Tell this idiot that he's special:
He belongs to the 8% of men who are colorblind


either that or he's so used to the green cast that he sees everything with magenta bias.
He's living in one green world...

He's one of those photographers that uses gear to make themselves feel relevant. Its not limited to Nikon fanboys

Gear bragging aside, doesn't the "gentleman" have a point with regards to PP after the OP gives him the cards? I know I had trouble trying to match colors when a friend and I shot an event. While we used raw, the pictures didn't have the same colors, lens differences aside. If the Nikon vs Canon tint issue is real like some say, I would think it would be frustrating having a second shooter with a different brand of camera when trying to deliver a set of photos.

Well, maybe the guy just likes the "Shrek" movies. In that regard, the Nikon cameras really suit him well.

blindshooter wrote in post #16676302
Gear bragging aside, doesn't the "gentleman" have a point with regards to PP after the OP gives him the cards? I know I had trouble trying to match colors when a friend and I shot an event. While we used raw, the pictures didn't have the same colors, lens differences aside. If the Nikon vs Canon tint issue is real like some say, I would think it would be frustrating having a second shooter with a different brand of camera when trying to deliver a set of photos.

Bingo. He probably has a standard action to get his photos close and the action most likely adjusts the colour balance for a Nikon camera...which would make the Canon over saturated on the red. Makes much more sense to shoot all photos using the same brand...even the same camera to smooth out post processing.

After a while of listening to that I would have told him to do the wedding on his own.

Could be simpler, quite often bosses give reasons why those under them cannot exceed them. If your photos are better than his by final production he can turn around and say they are good now, you wouldnt believe how much processing Ive done to them. This would fall hand in hand with someone who boasts about gear. Either way, take your money, walk away and don't work with people you dont like a second time.