differences in color between Mark ii and Mark iii?

[iso79]

Yep, the Mark III has much better color metering than the MKII even the D800.

[Invertalon]

Somebody did a color-checker calibration with the 5D3 and looks excellent processed through LR for me. I did notice reds are a bit saturated by default, but after loading the calibration profile it looks really good and no longer an issue.

If you want it, PM me your email and I can email it to you. All you do is load it up into lightroom and have it apply as default and good to go.

[kubrick]

http://cdtobie.wordpress.com/2012/03/29/color-comparison-canon-5d-mark-ll-and-mark-lll/
...

[mboss13]

Did you try adjusting color settings in the styles?

sek

So we got lucky and secured two Mark iii bodies from Amazon and received them at the end of March. At least we thought they would be a great replacement for our Mark ii bodies.

Now, after noticing a difference in color, we wanted to make sure and ran some tests. There is a definite difference in the color that we are getting. Skin tones look way too red. I am at loss, and registering here to see if anyone is experiencing this? I am highly hopeful it is something in our settings, but we color balanced with both white and gray cards and all the shots come like this.




Both images were taken exactly the same with 24-70 lens  iso100 1/160 f/8.0
We have tried multiple things and they are all coming this way, on both new bodies.
Any suggestions?

hmmm you 5d2 image looks pinker to me than the 5D3 image and the 5D3 image looks more natural

EDIT: i was looking at skin tones, apparently you are focusing on your hair color, the 5D3 does seem a bit redder there so it's probably a camera profile difference (maybe,maybe CFA array difference but it really doesn't seem at all likely)   are they jpgs from the cam? prcoessed in some RAW program?

anyway it can be down to tons of different things from color filter array to more likely camera color profile or white balance engine in the camera

Do you mean setting it on portraiture? We did that.

[mboss13]

Here are two more shots, outdoor. Taken raw and processed in lightroom. Same white balance card was used.

[mboss13]

Somebody did a color-checker calibration with the 5D3 and looks excellent processed through LR for me. I did notice reds are a bit saturated by default, but after loading the calibration profile it looks really good and no longer an issue.

If you want it, PM me your email and I can email it to you. All you do is load it up into lightroom and have it apply as default and good to go.

PM sent, I am glad you read my op instead of jumping like crazy cause I dare found an issue with our $3500 cameras that I didn't care for. Thank you

[Invertalon]

No problemo! Email sent!

[RichATL]

ah!  I see the problem!
you are shooting in JPEG, and letting some Japanese engineer decide what the image should look like!...

but seriously... I like the color of the 5d3 better (in my own personal tests with it)

[Christian_Stella]

I can definitely see the red tones on the 5d3 in your hair in the first sample, but I have to say that I find the 5d3's grass sample to look far better on my calibrated IPS monitor.  The red of the ball is far better and the photo looks to have more dynamic range.  I can see the green is much more saturated, but it also looks far more neutral than the 5d2's shot, which looks to be white balanced a little toward the yellows... which is obviously more pleasing to most people, but isn't the neutral it should be.

I'm not sure color can be questioned this specifically right now... Lightroom's support for the 5d3 isn't even officially released.  Quick question though... are you using Lightroom's camera profiles for your pictures or the generic Adobe profile?  Because this makes a HUGE difference in color.

[mboss13]

thanks for the email. Trying to make it work in lightroom. Thanks to all that have tried to help me fix this. The issue I have with it is that you can see those red tones in the hair already in the camera. No lightroom necessary to see the difference. We always shoot manual and raw. I think in the outdoor shot you can see the colors are much more vibrant from the Mark ii, which to my taste and taste of our clients is better. I'd hate to jeoperdize our business over wanting to shoot with the newest coolest camera.

[mboss13]

Figured out the lightroom calibration. That makes a huge difference. Still is there a way to set the camera to get it right in the camera?

[Ryant]

I think you are splitting hairs. You can't tell me your clients care about this slight change, for the better in my opinion. What I do know is your clients will thank you when your photos are more in focus which the 5d 3 will do. You can't tell me that you take pictures and print them and get perfect real to life color with no editing. That just does not happen. If you send your photos to a print shop them do tons of color changing to make the photos print as close to what is desired.

[Tcapp]

I think you are splitting hairs. You can't tell me your clients care about this slight change, for the better in my opinion. What I do know is your clients will thank you when your photos are more in focus which the 5d 3 will do. You can't tell me that you take pictures and print them and get perfect real to life color with no editing. That just does not happen. If you send your photos to a print shop them do tons of color changing to make the photos print as close to what is desired.

+1. Unless your client is a hair dye company and your shooting for their product box cover photo, I really doubt a client would notice, much less care.

Anyway, it looks like a slight WB change in the tint. Just add a touch more green to the WB in camera with the little graph thing and it might match up a little better.

And whoever mentioned that adobe is still in beta... +10 to you. Don't jump to conclusions before the camera is even officially supported in a released program.

[Martin]

Well is nobody seeing the difference in the images I posted? You can tell the difference even on the back of the camera, no need for raw conversion. As for these, they were taken as RAW.

I see the difference and it's obvious. Looks really strange for me. In order to judge I would need raw files. Looks like tint purple tint.

[tasteofjace]

Looks like the skin tone looks more accurate with the MKIII. Strange that they would improve on a newly released camera. Shocked!