Some color observations

[Gunbucker]

Hi folks,

I have this habit of browsing online galleries and magazine work to get ideas about composition etc.

Through this, there was some observations I made, and am hoping to get some insights from the experienced brudders (and sisters!) photographers:

1. Whenever I see shots of desserts, earthern outbacks (e.g., Middle East), get awestruck by the color, the texture, and how the sunlight illuminates the subject... and then check the credentials, 9 out of 10 times, it was shot through Nikon optics. Most probably coz most pros are still holding on to their Nikon equipment + lenses I suppose, but it is very rare to see shots made with Canon optics (except for sports shots)

2. I literally grew up reading National Geographic, and needless to say, is kinda "brainwashed" with the punchy colors from the shots. Again, when I research a little on the background of the photographers, a huge majority of them are shooting with Nikon optics.

3. This made me hunt even more for pro shots made with Canon optics. My observations were that majority were shots of European-weather shots (i.e., very light hues) under overcast/cloudy weather. Another style of shots where Canon optics see a healthy usage is in Japanese photo mags, or at least the ones I came across.

My questions are:

1) Are Canon optics more suited to certain applications than others?
2) Why are most National Geographic photographers Nikon users?
3) Canon optics seem to produce solemn/sober (almost on the verge of being somber) atmosphere and color tones. Nikon optics seem to produce vibrant, the-worlds-a-great-place-to-be-in kinda colors for lack of a better description. While a large part would be in the post-processing, I seldom see Canon optics produce the latter kind of shots.

This is not to start a Canon vs Nikon pointless debate, but to get a better understanding of which tools are better suited for specific applications.

Thanks in advance for your answers and comments!

GB

 

[slaam]

haha i think you really are barking up the wrong tree... lol and starting the thread in canon somemore.

my reasons for the proportion of photos is this.

1) nikon are more well received before the digital slr war. they have made a few mechanical cameras that earned reputation as being like a tank and would survive alot of harsh conditions esp in far off places. like a single button cell can be used for the FM camera for thousands of hours of shooting cos its jus metering and the shutter is mechanical. So you jus need film..

2) Canon for obvious reasons are more well received by japanese. Their virtue was in autofocus and electronics. Something that not very one needs.


i think a more recent poll on photos shot in the past few yrs will see more canon shots..

 

[sabahan]

National geographic photographer use mostly three brand,Nikon,Canon and leica.

In australia,according to one of my friend,they like to use Leica optics to shoot birds,yes,its like a tank,very heavy but optic wise,no japs manufacturer can come close.

Micheal yamashita switch from Nikon to Canon on his trip of the Marco polo .

 

[Gunbucker]

Hi slaam,

If you read my post carefully, I'm trying to understand the color capture aspects of the optics, nothing to do with which is better.

BTW, if you did read carefully, I'm a Canon system owner myself. Just trying to expand my understanding.

Thanks,
GB

 

[slaam]

Hi slaam,

If you read my post carefully, I'm trying to understand the color capture aspects of the optics, nothing to do with which is better.

BTW, if you did read carefully, I'm a Canon system owner myself. Just trying to expand my understanding.

Thanks,
GB

Hi GB
dun be offended! i understood your questions. But I jus doubt that nikon lens gives more of a 'color punch' than canon lens. :devil:
and the explanation for the phenomena you have seen, i've given my honest opinion why Nat geog ppl use more nikon.

i dun doubt that you are a canon user, I am jus saying that haha this thread sure to invite a flame war.

if my answers dun answer ur query i hope others' input will.. have a nice weekend

 

[Snoweagle]

Hi GB
dun be offended! i understood your questions. But I jus doubt that nikon lens gives more of a 'color punch' than canon lens. :devil:
and the explanation for the phenomena you have seen, i've given my honest opinion why Nat geog ppl use more nikon.

i dun doubt that you are a canon user, I am jus saying that haha this thread sure to invite a flame war.

if my answers dun answer ur query i hope others' input will.. have a nice weekend

I doubt it's the Nikon lens that gives more saturated colours, it's the sensor in the DSLR.

 

[Gunbucker]

I doubt it's the Nikon lens that gives more saturated colours, it's the sensor in the DSLR.

Snoweagle, thanks. That's an interesting way to look at it too.

All that said, I love my Canon :lovegrin: ... and here's proof :bsmilie:

 

[boen]

hmm.. so far,
when i ask around.. in terms of digital senors wise... a lot says canon is better...when compared to nikon..but when compared to fuji's SCCD.. Fuji win, but body and electronics not as good. Never really tried fuiji DSLR b4.. just heard people saying woah.
Still i think for low light, canon CMOS works pretty well without flash or tripod.

 

[Snoweagle]

I also love my Canon, especially when coupled with slide films!

Here's another proof too...pic is scanned in a photolab.

 

[Snoweagle]

hmm.. so far,
when i ask around.. in terms of digital senors wise... a lot says canon is better...when compared to nikon..but when compared to fuji's SCCD.. Fuji win, but body and electronics not as good. Never really tried fuiji DSLR b4.. just heard people saying woah.
Still i think for low light, canon CMOS works pretty well without flash or tripod.

Canon is good for its as natural colours to the human eyes.

Nikon is good in colour saturation as they use Sony sensors. (same as my cybershot, saturated colours)

Fuji's sensors are the best to date i think cos they incorporate a mixture of both in a balanced way.

 

[Gunbucker]

Canon is good for its as natural colours to the human eyes.

Nikon is good in colour saturation as they use Sony sensors. (same as my cybershot, saturated colours)

Fuji's sensors are the best to date i think cos they incorporate a mixture of both in a balanced way.

Snoweagle, thanks!!! That's roughly what I was scratching my head about

 

[speedblade]

If you shoot JPEG, then i guess then Brand X and Brand Y and Brand Z will be different straight from camera. Point and Shoots are highly tweaked for that purpose. DSLR .... not sure, maybe. Canon's picture style is for that.

Me? I shoot RAw. More post processing, sure. But hey, JPEGs need too you know.

 

[tsdh]

Hi folks,
1. Whenever I see shots of desserts, earthern outbacks (e.g., Middle East), get awestruck by the color, the texture, and how the sunlight illuminates the subject... and then check the credentials, 9 out of 10 times, it was shot through Nikon optics. Most probably coz most pros are still holding on to their Nikon equipment + lenses I suppose, but it is very rare to see shots made with Canon optics (except for sports shots)

I suggest you add one more parameter to your observation:
- How many of those pictures you saw, were shot using film (either slides or negatives) and how many using digital.

Today's Canon optics are as good as Nikon.
Nikon had been popular longer than Canon, and still popular today with nature/landscape photographers. The ability of its lenses to be compatible with fully mechanical film body (such as FM2) is a plus for those who travel to the remote area for long period of time.
Canon started to gain impressive popularity after they embraced electronics technology by introducing the EOS lines. Canon's main strength is the technology.

 

[boen]

Canon started to gain impressive popularity after they embraced electronics technology by introducing the EOS lines. Canon's main strength is the technology.

yup yup... canon started out as a technology company...:thumbsup:

 

[Snoweagle]

Snoweagle, thanks!!! That's roughly what I was scratching my head about

No probs!!

Actually most of those photography books i see in bookstores such as Borders and Kinokuniya, the pics are practically all shot in film, and they're using slides most of the time.

 

[sharif890]

No matter what, NIKON or CANON, I think till today, neither DSLR cameras euipped with pro lenses can match the color satuaration and richness of a good SLIDE film. Although I myself am a 300D user, to reach comparable color quality i need to do a lot of post processing, which always does not take good shape.


Slide photography needs a lot of experiece to reach the optimum results. Comparable using a DSLR is easier. Then again, its every ones opinion which varies. I think no mass scale camera can beat the quality and color of a Leica with f/1.0 lens.

 

[Snoweagle]

No matter what, NIKON or CANON, I think till today, neither DSLR cameras euipped with pro lenses can match the color satuaration and richness of a good SLIDE film. Although I myself am a 300D user, to reach comparable color quality i need to do a lot of post processing, which always does not take good shape.


Slide photography needs a lot of experiece to reach the optimum results. Comparable using a DSLR is easier. Then again, its every ones opinion which varies. I think no mass scale camera can beat the quality and color of a Leica with f/1.0 lens.

Agree! As my pic posted above shows, it's done using Velvia 100.

 

[+evenstar]

With the improvement in technolody, colour of photos can be easily manipulated via Photoshop

 

[speedblade]

ah hem, here i go again........heh heh.....

when i was wearing shorts to school, it used to be,

SHOOT SHOOT SHOOT

Then i'll pass the rolls to the photo labs and viola, a day or 2 later, enjoy all the shots in their glossy glory. (or gory)

Now, i no longer pay these people to adjust the shots to their taste. I'll have to help myself. But the money goes to SingPower for the longer time needed to keep the CPUs running. :devil:

Each man to his own poison. :sticktong

 

[Snoweagle]

ah hem, here i go again........heh heh.....

when i was wearing shorts to school, it used to be,

SHOOT SHOOT SHOOT

Then i'll pass the rolls to the photo labs and viola, a day or 2 later, enjoy all the shots in their glossy glory. (or gory)

Now, i no longer pay these people to adjust the shots to their taste. I'll have to help myself. But the money goes to SingPower for the longer time needed to keep the CPUs running. :devil:

Each man to his own posison. :sticktong

I send every single roll i take to the lab for post-processing and i also suppose there's some colour correctioning done, similar to digital format.