Question for Michael Reichman - Leica color vs. Sony Color

[iCanvas]

Michael,

Thanks so much for your rolling review of the Nex 7. I have gone over it many times and appreciate all the work you put into it. I don't plan on buying a Leica M9. Not in my budget. A Sony Nex 7 is in my budget. I am just wondering, besides all the comparisons that you made in your rolling review, what is your opinion of the Leica color vs. the Sony color? Do you have more keepers with your M9 or is the Sony Nex 7 just as good? There is a certain quality to the Leica colors that makes them stand out. Do you have to do more post processing to bring the Sony colors to that standard, or are the out of camera jpegs as good as the Leica? I have liked all the Sony Nex 7 pics that you took in Mexico, but in other online website samples the Sony Nex 7 colors appear to be a little flat. I will buy in a new camera in August and my choices will be a Leica X2 (if it comes out), an Olympus OMD or a Sony Nex 7 (maybe by that time there will be a Nex 7n). Thanks in advance,

Gar

[iCanvas]

OK, Michael doesn't want to answer the question, but can anyone who has a Nex 7 and Leica M9 offer a comparison in the difference in OOC (out of camera) colors? Are they about the same? Are the Leica colors more stunning?

Gar

[eleanorbrown]

I have both and I don't notice much difference in colors...it all depends on processing, really... Difference I do notice is that M9 files are smoother at base ISO when viewed at 100 percent.... The nex7 files look slightly more grainy...possibly due to having much smaller pixels.... not sure but these are only my personal observations. Eleanor

[iCanvas]

Thanks Eleanor. That helps.

Gar

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Depends on what you mean with "out of camera" and "stunning". There are a few factors involved. The first is the CGA (Color Grid Array), tha can have different characteristics. The one on the Leica is probably designed by Kodak.

The next issue is white balance. The camera estimates white balance.

The rest is depending on your processing pipeline. Most readers here are probably shooting "raw" and most of the color is coming from the raw processing pipeline. If you shoot JPEG than the cameras image processing ASIC will decide the color rendition.

Best regards
Erik

OK, Michael doesn't want to answer the question, but can anyone who has a Nex 7 and Leica M9 offer a comparison in the difference in OOC (out of camera) colors? Are they about the same? Are the Leica colors more stunning?

Gar

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Eleanor,

One should not forget that the Leica has a larger sensor, about a factor two larger. So it will collect more photons when exposing to the right. That factor should give the Leica a one stop advantage, or techically speaking 40% better SNR at base ISO. But the Leica should have the same amount of "grain" at 200 ISO as the NEX7 at 100 ISO.

Best regards
Erik

I have both and I don't notice much difference in colors...it all depends on processing, really... Difference I do notice is that M9 files are smoother at base ISO when viewed at 100 percent.... The nex7 files look slightly more grainy...possibly due to having much smaller pixels.... not sure but these are only my personal observations. Eleanor

[eleanorbrown]

Eric I would even like a 50 iso option on the nex7. Im having great fun with the camera tho! Eleanor

Hi Eleanor,

One should not forget that the Leica has a larger sensor, about a factor two larger. So it will collect more photons when exposing to the right. That factor should give the Leica a one stop advantage, or techically speaking 40% better SNR at base ISO. But the Leica should have the same amount of "grain" at 200 ISO as the NEX7 at 100 ISO.

Best regards
Erik

[michael]

Sorry, but I missed the question first time round.

Frankly, the differences that people report seeing in colour between different cameras are almost entirely a function of the camera profile and post processing (or in the case of JPGs, the camera's in-built JPG engine.

I wouldn't consider choosing a camera or a sensor based on its "colour rendering". Dynamic range, resolution, and noise are IQ characteristics to consider. Colour rendering is so easy to alter or adjust that it's the least important when considering a sensor's capabilities, to me at least.

Michael

[Rob C]

Sorry, but I missed the question first time round.

Frankly, the differences that people report seeing in colour between different cameras are almost entirely a function of the camera profile and post processing (or in the case of JPGs, the camera's in-built JPG engine.

I wouldn't consider choosing a camera or a sensor based on its "colour rendering". Dynamic range, resolution, and noise are IQ characteristics to consider. Colour rendering is so easy to alter or adjust that it's the least important when considering a sensor's capabilities, to me at least.

Michael

And that's the thing, really: where there are few constants, as in digital processing, it must be impossible to arrive at meaningful conclusions about quality. With film, where the variations between lenses/cameras could be tested, in many cases, on a single cassette of film, it was fairly simple to see which exposure was the more attractive for whichever reason was driving the photographer.

A challenge would be taking the same RAW file off the card, and seeing whether or not a new, blind, development of it would give you the same result every time you were to do it... I would suggest not, so devoid of constants, how can anyone compare?

Loved the lightbox. Still have it since 1966; Kodak did make some great stuff!

;-(

Rob C