Why does the color Nikon photos seem so biased to green or red?

This baffles me. I just don't get it. It seems like the color of pictures taken

with Nikon cameras (e.g., D80 & D200) is more green or red than blue. Images

taken with Canon cameras (e.g., Canon XTI & 5D) seem to have a cooler, bluer

look. Has anyone else noticed this? I actually prefer the latter, but would most

prefer that which most accurately represents what the eye sees. This along with

a few other things (smaller sensors, magnification factor, lower image quality &

resolution) is why I've been considering selling my Nikon gear, while I only

have about $1,100 invested, and moving over to Canon camp. Is there something

I'm missing here? Does anyone else see this, or is it just me? I'm still

relatively new to digital photography, so maybe I'm jumping the gun . . .

I think Ken Rockwell takes about it.

Yeah. I ran a Google search using the best search terms I could think of but couldn't find any articles by Ken Rockwell related specifically to this issue. I realize now that I'm not hallucinating--the colors captured and reproduced by Canon equipment--the 5D in especial--is much richer than those of Nikon.

Ken Rockwell talks about it in this D200 and D80 reviews.

 

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d200performance.htm

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d80/users-guide/index.htm

 

"I use AUTO and a clear UV filter to protect my lens. The D80 has a much warmer color balance than earlier cameras like the D70 so I don't need the 81A filter or the -3 trim. See examples of different settings here and details on my White Balance page."

 

It's a feature not a bug. If the warmer colors bother you, you can probably use the white balance trim to get it back to blue.

 

Only if you get the Canon 5d will you get benefits of a larger sensor. Nikon Prosumer sensors are actually bigger than the Canon sensors and also have more resolution and supposedly the D40x has low noise and image quality than the XTi.

I have a D200, a 20D and a 5D. If you shoot in raw and adjust colors afterwards in PS etc... then there is no difference in color bias from either Nikon or Canon. There are many reasons to switch to Canon gear, but color bias is not one of them. If you shoot in JPEG then its just a matter of setting up the D200 correctly so that you get the results you desire. I am not sure if the D80 has as many user contols over JPEG color.

Small variances in white balance are not an issue. Some cameras shoot warm while some cameras shoot cool. My D70 shoots a bit cool. These things are easy to adjust in the computer or by using the white balance preset. Back in ancient times photographers used to use this stuff called film. This film needed to be processed in noxious chemistry and color corrections were done by experienced lab techs. Color was affected by how fresh this chemistry was, the type of film being printed, the brand of paper, the time of day, the weather, the age of the lamp in the print processor, and the mood of the baristas at the coffee shop. Digital is SO much easier!

Digital images are just numbers. You can associate any colors you like with those numbers. Try a different raw conversion software or adjust the wb in your camera.

Well if you like richer colors, go to the menu and set it to More Vivid. I used to think that my D80 was different in color then the D50. But it was just me. In matter of fact the D80 has more features then the XTi, XT, 30D. And even if you don't like the color, the White balance lets you adjust it in Kelvin grades or just do a preset custom white balance and wallah! better colors right away. "Its not the camera but the photographer that creates the pictures" That is what Ken Rockwell says. And it is true learn to use your camera to it fullest and then you'll be able to create better pictures. A better camera doesn't mean better pictures, its just means a better tool. Its like instead of having a wooden handle hammer you opt for the fiberglass handle. They both nail, its just how they are made for different people. Besides Nikon;s software lets you adjust the colors easier then Photoshop. just learn to use what you have then after you know what you need, buy it.

Funny, I actually think some of my Nikon lenses tend to be a bit "bluish", whereas Tamron tends to be warmer in colour.

I've heard sillier reasons to switch from Nikon to Canon (or vice versa), but this is in the top 10 ;-)

 

You don't have to take whatever comes out of the box, and are foolish if you make buying decisions on that basis. Minor differences in white balance have a strong effect on the appearance. Lenses may have some effect, but not nearly so much as in years past - glass technology has come a long way, as well as coatings. The underlying cause is probably the "decisions" the camera makes to establish the "as taken" white balance.

 

It is fairly simple to correct the white balance in Photoshop. If you shoot RAW images, white balance can be corrected even more easily in the conversion process, and can be changed later without any loss. Nikon D2 cameras have an additional sensor on top of the prism to measure ambient color temperature, so the Auto WB is exceptionally accurate on these cameras. For other cameras, it's best to avoid Auto WB for best consistency. You may still have to make corrections, but have less "fiddling" with each image if the results are consistent.

 

All digital sensors are sensitive to infrared light, and the effect depends strongly on the IR filtration at the sensor and possibly the lens. This may account for some of the differences seen, particularly in the quality of blacks. I find that an hot mirror filter (B+K #486) improves color significantly in both incandescent light and daylight, but especially the former.

I forgot to add the mantra, "Is your monitor calibrated?". If you don't have a calibrated monitor, you have no idea what you are getting. If you make adjustments using an un-calibrated monitor, the adjustments are invariably wrong. An hardware calibration device is as important to digital photography as a tripod is to photography in general.

<I>Only if you get the Canon 5d will you get benefits of a larger sensor.</i><P>

 

Or the 1D (mk. I, II, III) or the 1Ds (mk. I, II) -- but those are pro-level cameras and have

prices to match.

Michael you seem to be less troubled by knowledge or you are a troll.

 

If you prefer bluish images why not shoot with a fixed white balance and a blue filter? You are most likely better off using a point and shoot camera.

 

In case you want a technical comment here it is: The balance of colors is in a digital camera is done by a process that is called "white balance". Read up on the subject and learn how to white balance your images. To assume that you get any better images using Canon is just hilarious.

Think of your camera as a photon counter. The BFA (Bayer filter array) separates the photons falling on the sensor into RGB values, which are essentially the same regardless of camera brand. The next step is to assign a specific colors to red, green and blue; and that is where things change between camera brands (and even models) and RAW converters. To understand this better, see: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/color-management1.htm

 

To get accurate colors you need to start with three reference points:

 

1. What is grey?

 

2. What is white?

 

3. What is black?

 

Once you have established the Kelvin temp of the light and fixed the luminance values, your colors will be accurate. For more on understanding how luminance values are determined for computer displays, see: http://www.bberger.net/rwb/gamma.html

 

To see those colors reasonably accurately, you will need to make sure your monitor is calibrated and agrees on the luminance and RGB values, and that the output devices are also assigning the same colors.

 

Now comes the rub, because accurate representation and what your eyes see are two different things. We each individually interpret colors and there is also a cultural dimension to this. Accurate colors appear linear, but everyone's brains apply a tonal curve to what they are seeing. Further complicating matters are the role of memories, which are constantly changing (they are not fixed). The bottom line is that you can deliver an accurate image but no one will remember seeing the scene that way, and everyone will in fact remember seeing the scene differently. People in western cultures want to see themselves with warm skin tones even when those skin tones usually appear much cooler under most lighting to an unbiased capture. A good photographer understands this (even if just intuitively) and delivers the images with pleasing colors and contrast; and a good photographer either controls their tools to accomplish this, or they are controlled by their tools.

Maybe your monitor needs to be calibrated>

Canon sets the pace for reddish and unsharp images straight from the camera. This was in the case in my Rebel 350D and the 20D which I hoped would offer improved results.

 

Recently I have been supplied a Nikon D70 to use and it is tack sharp for a huge percentage of shots and does seem to have a tinge of blue. In Photoshop the images are way more forgiving to correct than the Canon images from Mars.

"This along with a few other things (smaller sensors, magnification factor, lower image quality & resolution) is why I've been considering selling my Nikon gear, while I only have about $1,100 invested, and moving over to Canon camp. Is there something I'm missing here?"

 

Yes, you are missing a great deal.

 

"Does anyone else see this, or is it just me?"

 

It's just you.

 

"I'm still relatively new to digital photography, so maybe I'm jumping the gun . . ."

 

We would never guess that you are new. No, you are not jumping the gun. You should sell your Nikon gear and switch to Canon. What Nikon gear are you selling?

Thanks for the feedback, people. No, I am not a troll. I've seriously been considering switching to Canon for the aforementioned reason but have changed my mind due to much of what has been explained in this thread. I think that maybe I should learn to use the D80 to its full potential before making so brash a decision. I honestly didn't know what white balance was. Now that I've played with it a bit, I've noticed that, in Photoshop, there isn't a feature allowing me to set a specific color temperature--merely predefined modes (e.g., cloudy, shady, direct sunlight, etc.). When I open the RAW file of an image, it does allow me to select one of these modes, but there don't seem to be as many value options for in the exposure compensation slider as there are in the in-camera menu. The in-camera menu for each white balance mode has seven values (-3, -2, -1, 0, 1, 2, 3). Photoshop offers 5 from -2 to 0 to +2. Are the in-camera values exposure values or am I confusing them with something else?

Michael, color temperature is measured in Kelvin. e.g. daylight is somewhere between 5400-5600K. each of those + and - values represent about 200K increments I believe. so Daylight -1 is 5300K, assuming Daylight is 5500K, and +1 is 5700K. on the pro bodies, you can set White Balance as a color temperature explicitly, instead of a predefined mode, but you can essentially do the same using the presets and numeric adjustments.

 

Regarding color, white balance is definitely the first step. Personally, I do agree with you that Canon has a bluer look and Nikon has stronger greens. I don't agree with you on the reds in that Canon actually has stronger reds to my eyes (you see this in the skintones), but Nikon has stronger yellows. You'll find disagreement about this because people will process their images differently. E.g. if you process for strong reds, that implies weak cyan. If you process for strong yellows, it means weak blues. Etc..

 

Once you've figured out the White balance, from there you can play with other things like Hue, Saturation, and Color Modes to get the colors you desire.

 

No system is perfect. I sometimes like Canon skintones, but hands down prefer Nikon for landscapes (that's where those strong greens are really favorable). And yet, at other times I like Nikon skintones over Canon. So it's definitely a no-win situation as far as thinking there is a perfect camera out there and that switching between systems will solve your problems--they'll just introduce other problems. In which case it's better to learn how to make what you have, into what you want.

 

The thing about digital is that if you don't like the colors, you can't simply swap out the film. Instead, you have to learn all these things and tweak the colors to get what you want. There's definitely a learning curve, but once you've figured it out, the camera you've got will do what you want and you can be satisfied with your equipment. Try to figure out different combinations of color settings that will produce the "looks" you desire, and you'll effectively have different "films" for different scenarios.

If you really, really want to get the color correct, you need to purchase an XRite White card and Color chart. Then, you can see exactly what you're getting. The white card "white" will show you how badly colored other "white" sources are.

Each has its bias. You can fiddle the color with the menu settings and the white balance to your heart's content. Until you color calibrate your monitor with an Eye-2-Eye & color charts, consider your results biased.

Michael there is a tremendous range to set white balance in the Adobe camera raw importer for Photoshop. You do not mention your PS and camera raw versions so I assume the latest version CS3 and the current AC_RAW 4.1 version. The slider allows you to set color temperature from 2000 to 50000. (Wow i did not even know the range is so huge until I just checked that for you - so let us assume it is more than you ever need).

You can also play around with the "tint" slider. Go to a good bookstore and find Books on basics of digital photography. Not too basic but in terms of "work-flow" is a book by Bruce Fraser "Real World Camera RAW.." It may be a hard start but it will give you a real understanding how to get RAW images into PS. If you convert RAW images perfectly you reduce the amount of post processing in PS to a minimum. And to know PS is much harder to start than to know RAW conversion.<div></div>

Here is an image I took to test a light box for macros.

 

Using a light meter I measured the light temperature as 4600K, pretty close to its listed value. The camera (D200) measured 4650K. The image taken at the preset temperature of 4650 was imported in Camera RAW into PSCS3. I needed minor adjustments during import. In PS the posted image was only cropped and exported for net posting without any further processing.

 

1) Is the white balance ok? It depends on how accurate you need it. If you look at the numbers in the neutral grey milk-glass the rgb (8bit) values differ within 2-3 from neutral. Is your viewing medium better than that? In the darkest areas of the macro-lightbox I get deviations a strong as 7 or 8 in rgb values. This is probably due to ambient light and could be avoided by working in a dark room.

 

2) Is the image "bluish"? Not according to the numbers. Your monitor or print or room-light (sunlight at the window?) may give you such an impression.

 

3) Would a "Canon image" be less bluish? It should not be different at all. In a controlled environment all pro cameras should give the intended result.

 

If you shoot a girl in a white dress on a green lawn next to a red wall will the result be the same if you use a Canon or a Nikon? (Example for shooting under uncontrolled conditions.)

 

I bet it will look different for most Canon and most Nikon cameras because these cameras use "intelligent" software and hardware that is different in different models. The microcomputers will have a gamble trying to figure out what the hell you are trying to capture. Is the dress on fire? Then the dress should show a strong red. Is the girl near a red wall? Then the dress should not appear red. Does the dress have slight green spots? Then the dress should have greens. Is the green tint from the lawn and the dress is perfectly clean...? May be we ask a little much for the "intelligence" of the camera? The "intelligence" of the camera may or may not be superior to the intelligence and the intentions of the photographer. Despite this, the laws of physics will give you different colors in the shades of the white dress facing the red wall and away from the red wall. OK my example is a bit extreme but perhaps it may illustrate the problem better this way.

You should consider getting Thom Hogan's excellent D80 ebook. It has over 700 pages of

info.