I have no idea how anyone puts up with Nikon

Scougar said:
Lots of replies with no evidence.....

Maybe the camera was defective? (or user error)... or maybe he's right?
Click to expand...

H=If the OP is right that implies some kind of giant global conspiracy where millions of Nikon users all lie on a daily basis and millions of canon//Sony/Fuju/* users who view Nikon files are all part of some great conspiracy.

Or we can conclude the OP is wrong, either making a user error or lieing because he is a troll.


Make a bet, but I would suggest the latter is more likely. Unless I'm color blind then the files my Nikon have produced are spot on, i barely do any PPing.


The OP probably had some kind of custom Wb set on his Nikon or had made adjustments to the lightroom import settings he didn't understand.
 
OP..

rof26feb10.jpg
 
D.P. said:
Things like tint and WB dont affect RAW in the slightest. Nikon OOC jpegs generally have less contrast, saturation, sharpening and noise reduction compared to Canon out of the box but even here the differences are much smaller than they used to be. Nikon's philosophy was originally to have jpegs that could still be processed to some extent but they got bad reciws for jeg IQ because of that so now they are much more punchy to compete with canon/Olympus/Fuji.

.
Click to expand...

That is a common misception - on import of a raw in lightroom WB is usually taken from mea data attached tot he raw file (as shot) - ie, how the camera worked it out. Most of the time with Canon it nails it.
 
Chimp Paradox said:
That is a common misception - on import of a raw in lightroom WB is usually taken from mea data attached tot he raw file (as shot) - ie, how the camera worked it out. Most of the time with Canon it nails it.
Click to expand...

But WB settings don't affect the RAW file one bit, don't like what you see then just change the setting which is what DP is trying to say.

Lightroom will also import any way you tell it to, if LR was displaying images in Auto import that weren't to your taste then why didn't you just spend 5 minutes setting up an import profile that did suit you instead of trying to fix it with thousands of pounds.

Oh and some samples please?
 
Chimp Paradox said:
That is a common misception - on import of a raw in lightroom WB is usually taken from mea data attached tot he raw file (as shot) - ie, how the camera worked it out. Most of the time with Canon it nails it.
Click to expand...

And you can tune the Auto WB to your hearts content, so user error it is.
 
Columbo said:
But WB settings don't affect the RAW file one bit, don't like what you see then just change the setting which is what DP is trying to say.

Lightroom will also import any way you tell it to, if LR was displaying images in Auto import that weren't to your taste then why didn't you just spend 5 minutes setting up an import profile that did suit you instead of trying to fix it with thousands of pounds.

Oh and some samples please?
Click to expand...

Wrong. It picks it up from the meta data. What it doesnt do is change the WB in a lossy way - you are free to change the WB, or indeed anything else like you say in the raw image. Think about what you are saying - it has to have SOME WB attributed to the file else it wouldnt look like anything
 
Chimp Paradox said:
Wrong. It picks it up from the meta data. What it doesnt do is change the WB in a lossy way - you are free to change the WB, or indeed anything else like you say in the raw image. Think about what you are saying - it has to have SOME WB attributed to the file else it wouldnt look like anything
Click to expand...

I know exactly what I'm saying, you can set the WB on import or just change it in the raw file its not rocket science. I havent felt need or fiddled with white balance profiles for years, I've owned and shot extensivley with Nikon, Sony and now Samsung and the white balance settings are the furthest thing from my mind. Raw + Auto WB is good enough for 99% of situations.

I cant speak for the pro's on here but I personally know 4, 2 shoot Nikon, 1shoots Canon and the other Sony and the common theme between them all........they use Auto WB.

Oh and any samples on the way?
 
this thread was to prompt discussion. I suggest anyone who wants samples look on the net.

I was genuinely interested whether Nikon users have to constantly tweak their WB like I experienced. Clearly not.
 
Last edited:
I use Canon but I just leave my camera WB settings to defaults since I shoot RAW anyway.


Unless you're trying to shoot for shots that are usable straight out of the camera then I would say you're generally better off adjusting the shots later anyway?
 
This thread is sad, irritating and hilarious all at once.

Either set the white balance correctly in camera (if auto isn't 90% accurate, then use custom white balance if you must), or shoot RAW and change it afterwards, which is a 5 second fix. But your refusal to show your own samples is either out of embarrassment or you're trolling.
 
Chimp Paradox said:
this thread was to prompt discussion. I suggest anyone who wants samples look on the net.

I was genuinely interested whether Nikon users have to constantly tweak their WB like I experienced. Clearly not.
Click to expand...

There is nothing to discuss unless you believe in some giant global conspiracy where Nikon and other camera user consistently lie for no reason.



Nikon's auto WB is as good as Canons which is as good as any Sony/Olympus/Panasonic/Fuji/Pentax.

Every manufacturer gives a slightly different look, but it is easy to change that. Nikon choose a slightly cooler WB to canon- but that is a simple one time fix of a camera setting. And all of that is irrelevant if you shoot RAW in any case.



If you had consistent auto WB issues with your Nikon then your camera was defective or you were using it wrong. There is nothing to discuss.

Your posts are just flamebait of the weakest kind.
 
Phal said:
I use Canon but I just leave my camera WB settings to defaults since I shoot RAW anyway.


Unless you're trying to shoot for shots that are usable straight out of the camera then I would say you're generally better off adjusting the shots later anyway?
Click to expand...

yes but even raw starts with something - I cant believe no one here realises that!!
 
Chimp Paradox said:
yes but even raw starts with something - I cant believe no one here realises that!!
Click to expand...

We do realize that, but we also realize that the WB can be changed with no loss of quality when shooting RAW, that the camera can be adjusted to whatever WB you prefer, and that Nikon bodies do not have an issue with auto WB - you do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom