p.2 #1 · Old Digic colors. Sensor or profiles? Or both
rscheffler wrote:
I'd like to see Canon revisit multiple in-camera RAW resolution options, but do it right, the way Leica has with cameras like the M11. That camera will do full/60MP and reduced ~36 and ~18MP.
There are tons of times I don't need 45MP from the R5II. And considering the escalating cost of storage currently, would love the option to shoot lower resolution 'proper' RAW files with it. With the R5II, I'd like full/45 and at least 24MP options.
Yes, this is a good point. I do love the idea of a true "multi-resolution" sensor. The downsampled Leica files remain in true RAW format and are not demosaiced? If so, that is pretty cool.
p.2 #2 · Old Digic colors. Sensor or profiles? Or both
Anyone remember Pixmantec RawShooter? https://www.keptlight.com/rawshooter-a-look-back/ . I used it back in my 10D days. Many advanced raw processing features but I recall struggling to get the colors right. Adobe bought it and it was part of the basis for Lightroom 1.0 for which I was gifted a gratis license.
Mar 31, 2026 at 07:17 AM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.2 #3 · Old Digic colors. Sensor or profiles? Or both
rscheffler wrote:
Sure you can do low contrast on a low DR sensor. If the scene DR is lower than the sensor's. If you set the camera's contrast to the lowest setting, it's just modifying the tone curve but has no effect on the black and white clipping points. With a newer, higher DR sensor, there are more tones captured between the clipping points, which if tone mapped to 8-bit jpeg or SDR display, will look flat in comparison.
I'd like to see Canon revisit multiple in-camera RAW resolution options, but do it right, the way Leica has with cameras like the M11. That camera will do full/60MP and reduced ~36 and ~18MP.
There are tons of times I don't need 45MP from the R5II. And considering the escalating cost of storage currently, would love the option to shoot lower resolution 'proper' RAW files with it. With the R5II, I'd like full/45 and at least 24MP options....Show more →
I think you probably get more DR 1) setting the camera at the lowest contrast 2) using DPP. Someone is probably going to get mad at me for saying that, one response might be something like 3rd party processors don't see the in camera settings, but, well, i tried other processors and didn't really like them, especially the way they ruined the image with auto "corrections" and you had to get it back. I don't really think they're better, as much as people complain about DPP sharpness is better in my limited testing (if you do it right, most probably don't)
The older bodies have really low contrast sooc in DPP if you set it at lowest contrast in camera. I remember having problems on 40d, even, because I didn't know as much about pp as I should have, back then, had issues in bright sun because too much contrast sooc. I guess you could say 40D has more DR but sooc looks contrastier in DPP
Another point that might come up, I'm pretty skeptical in camera settings have no effect on the raw. People get funny ideas about raw but i wouldn't want to shoot b&w set in camera for color output, as one example. I suspect you'd lose something as far as color
p.2 #4 · Old Digic colors. Sensor or profiles? Or both
bobrcw wrote:
Anyone remember Pixmantec RawShooter? https://www.keptlight.com/rawshooter-a-look-back/ . I used it back in my 10D days. Many advanced raw processing features but I recall struggling to get the colors right. Adobe bought it and it was part of the basis for Lightroom 1.0 for which I was gifted a gratis license.
I too started with RawShooter Pro and got the Lr 1.0 license gratis. That was a great move on Adobe's part to retain RawShooter user base. It sure worked on me, as I am a Lr user to present date.
With modern lenses on my R5s, I have no issues at all getting the colors I desire. Heck, even with vintage glass, e.g. the Zeiss 75/1.5 Biotar, it is relatively easy to get great results, IMO.
p.2 #5 · Old Digic colors. Sensor or profiles? Or both
AmbientMike wrote:
I'm pretty skeptical in camera settings have no effect on the raw. People get funny ideas about raw but i wouldn't want to shoot b&w set in camera for color output, as one example. I suspect you'd lose something as far as color.
I can confidently say (both from practical experience and as someone with a tech background in imaging) that this is almost never the case. Using the Monochrome Picture Style does not affect the RAW sensor output whatsoever; it's merely a JPEG processing choice.
I can think of only one in-camera setting on a Canon camera that permanently affects the RAW output, and that is Highlight Tone Priority. That's because when HTP is enabled, images are underexposed by one stop (to protect highlights), and a compensating tone curve is applied to boost levels back to "normal". Third-party software like ACR and Lightroom recognize this setting and do the same, so the results are transparent. However, because the underexposure *does* affect the RAW image, shadow noise can be boosted. (This is far less of a consideration on modern sensors with gobs of dynamic range then it used to be on cameras like the 5D2.)
p.2 #6 · Old Digic colors. Sensor or profiles? Or both
AmbientMike wrote:
Another point that might come up, I'm pretty skeptical in camera settings have no effect on the raw. People get funny ideas about raw but i wouldn't want to shoot b&w set in camera for color output, as one example. I suspect you'd lose something as far as color
You never shot RAW in B&W by mistake? I can assure you that the results are perfectly normal color.
I never figured out how to get the previews back to color, so I always see those B&W bat-eared fox kits frames and it is annoying. I still don't know how settings changed from color to B&W, but at least I'm not a hapless JPEGer.
EBH
Mar 31, 2026 at 12:16 PM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.2 #7 · Old Digic colors. Sensor or profiles? Or both
garyvot wrote:
I can confidently say (both from practical experience and as someone with a tech background in imaging) that this is almost never the case. Using the Monochrome Picture Style does not affect the RAW sensor output whatsoever; it's merely a JPEG processing choice.
I can think of only one in-camera setting on a Canon camera that permanently affects the RAW output, and that is Highlight Tone Priority. That's because when HTP is enabled, images are underexposed by one stop (to protect highlights), and a compensating tone curve is applied to boost levels back to "normal". Third-party software like ACR and Lightroom recognize this setting and do the same, so the results are transparent. However, because the underexposure *does* affect the RAW image, shadow noise can be boosted. (This is far less of a consideration on modern sensors with gobs of dynamic range then it used to be on cameras like the 5D2.) ...Show more →
I'd be curious what evidence you have but I've seen shooting highest contrast in camera give a different result vs contrast upped in pp. Canon camera vs DPP which i thought they'd be the same, but they weren't.
So even if you say the difference is camera vs raw processor being different you can't really get the result of shooting at the higher contrast in camera. At least I couldn't then, not sure i could today either.
So I'm curious what evidence you have but skeptical that raw doesn't vary due to in camera settings.
p.2 #8 · Old Digic colors. Sensor or profiles? Or both
AmbientMike wrote:
Canon camera vs DPP which i thought they'd be the same, but they weren't.
DPP provides a very close approximation of the in-camera JPEG processing but is not always an exact match. Without knowing more about what you did, it would be hard to say why you saw differences.
AmbientMike wrote:
So I'm curious what evidence you have but skeptical that raw doesn't vary due to in camera settings.
The simplest practical test of this (assuming you have access to the software) is to shoot some test images with widely-varying in-camera settings. Choose whatever settings you want for sharpening, contrast, Picture Style, etc. Then, open those images in Adobe Camera RAW. You will find that they appear identical, provided exposure and white balance were the same. Third-party RAW software does take into consideration the exposure and white balance, but virtually nothing else.
An alternative test would be to open the same files in DPP, note that they all look different, then select all of them and apply the identical Picture Style, sharpening, and other adjustments as you see fit. They will all look the same after their settings are normalized.
Mar 31, 2026 at 12:37 PM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.2 #9 · Old Digic colors. Sensor or profiles? Or both
garyvot wrote:
DPP provides a very close approximation of the in-camera JPEG processing but is not always an exact match. Without knowing more about what you did, it would be hard to say why you saw differences.
The simplest practical test of this (assuming you have access to the software) is to shoot some test images with widely-varying in-camera settings. Choose whatever settings you want for sharpening, contrast, Picture Style, etc. Then, open those images in Adobe Camera RAW. You will find that they appear identical, provided exposure and white balance were the same. Third-party RAW software does take into consideration the exposure and white balance, but virtually nothing else.
An alternative test would be to open the same files in DPP, note that they all look different, then select all of them and apply the identical Picture Style, sharpening, and other adjustments as you see fit. They will all look the same after their settings are normalized....Show more →
I didn't even change Picture Styles, just contrast, and got different results in DPP. So apparently the raw files are different, per the test in your last paragraph
p.2 #10 · Old Digic colors. Sensor or profiles? Or both
AmbientMike wrote:
I didn't even change Picture Styles, just contrast, and got different results in DPP. So apparently the raw files are different, per the test in your last paragraph
DPP will reflect all of the camera settings, which is why you are seeing a difference. Open them in ACR and they will appear identical, assuming of course that the WB and exposure were the same.
p.2 #11 · Old Digic colors. Sensor or profiles? Or both
AmbientMike wrote:
I didn't even change Picture Styles, just contrast, and got different results in DPP. So apparently the raw files are different, per the test in your last paragraph
Yes, because as Canon's own software, DPP respects the camera settings; other RAW software does not.
The contrast setting is just recorded as metadata; the underlying RAW data is not changed.
Apr 01, 2026 at 10:26 AM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.2 #12 · Old Digic colors. Sensor or profiles? Or both
garyvot wrote:
Yes, because as Canon's own software, DPP respects the camera settings; other RAW software does not.
The contrast setting is just recorded as metadata; the underlying RAW data is not changed.
You said I'd get the same results changing the Picture Styles but as I mentioned I got different results leaving the Picture Style the same and just adjusting contrast. So you have to say changes to in camera settings affect the raw
I don't consider how it looks in Adobe to be much evidence of anything. I suspect adobe tries to equalize things, because that's required for some kinds of photography
p.2 #14 · Old Digic colors. Sensor or profiles? Or both
AmbientMike wrote:
You said I'd get the same results changing the Picture Styles but as I mentioned I got different results leaving the Picture Style the same and just adjusting contrast. So you have to say changes to in camera settings affect the raw
I don't consider how it looks in Adobe to be much evidence of anything. I suspect adobe tries to equalize things, because that's required for some kinds of photography
I fear you interpreted my comment too literally.
A Picture Style is simply a collection of various settings that includes contrast, sharpening, color and tone curve, saturation, etc. *All* of these settings are just metadata, and do not affect the RAW sensor data.
On Canon cameras, you can adjust these individual parameters for each Picture Style, to customize that Picture Style for your particular tastes. For example, you can increase the contrast for the Canon Standard Picture Style. All this does is affect how the camera renders jpegs, it does not change the sensor data recorded in the RAW file.
I think you are conflating the fact that because you see differences in DPP when you change things in camera that that is actually changing the RAW data. It's not. It's merely changing how DPP renders that file. You can adjust the contrast setting in DPP to undo whatever change you made in the camera. This flexibility is possible because the RAW sensor data is not modified.
I can't explain this any more clearly, as I am now simply repeating what I have stated in earlier comments.
Perhaps you should give this some further thought and devise your own test that will satisfy your curiosity.
p.2 #15 · Old Digic colors. Sensor or profiles? Or both
johnctharp wrote:
I had the 60D, which had the same sensor as the 7D - and my EOS-M (first one!) has a similar sensor.
They're terrible without good light, and require neurotic levels of processing in anything remotely resembling challenging light.
That was a dark age of Canon sensors - I liked the one in the T1i I started with more!
I recall thinking the 7D 18MP CMOS was amazing in low light. You could actually use ISO 800 and get decent images. Well, that was 2010; expectations were low. Of course, I came from the 50D, among the worst performing sensors ever made. Even in good light and ISO 100, clouds and shadows had noise resembling river pebbles.
p.2 #16 · Old Digic colors. Sensor or profiles? Or both
I discovered the same a few years back when I picked up a dusty 40D for chump change
After a hour of cleaning it transpired the camera was Infact mint with. a crazy low shutter count
I used the efs 55-250 stm to take a few test shots and like you was blown away by the colours, I decided to compare the exact same shot on a 80d using same lens and identical settings… the 40d simply produced a nicer picture (JPEG’s)
Later I realised it was probably due to in camera corrections. The 40d doesn’t have those. So lens vignetting is evident, this accentuates the 3D look as opposed to the very flat images given when lens corrections are switched on.
My most modern current body is the R50. The AF accuracy is brilliant and the sharpness is addictive . But there’s no denying that the files from earlier DSLR’s do actually have a nicer look.
Keep meaning to take the old 1div out as I’ve not used it once in anger since I bought it used a few years back - by all accounts the files from the 1div are supposedly beautiful??
p.2 #18 · Old Digic colors. Sensor or profiles? Or both
philip_pj wrote:
A lot of insight here:
..
Of course he's talking about video color, which is not really the same as when you take an in-camera JPG or let alone raw file processed in your favorite app.
p.2 #19 · Old Digic colors. Sensor or profiles? Or both
stanj wrote:
Of course he's talking about video color, which is not really the same as when you take an in-camera JPG or let alone raw file processed in your favorite app.
Indeed. And of course, "color accuracy" is not always the desired result, outside of strict disciplines like commercial studio / product / food photography.
I think most would say that Canon cameras produce "pleasing" colors and are in fact known for this.
p.2 #20 · Old Digic colors. Sensor or profiles? Or both
Gochugogi wrote:
I recall thinking the 7D 18MP CMOS was amazing in low light. You could actually use ISO 800 and get decent images. Well, that was 2010; expectations were low. Of course, I came from the 50D, among the worst performing sensors ever made. Even in good light and ISO 100, clouds and shadows had noise resembling river pebbles.
OMG, yes! I think I might still have PTSD from my 50D.
Edit: I just realized I have probably made way too many comments on this thread, haha.
