Is Old Fuji Color Better? Or Even Different?

FujiShooterCY wrote:

robert1955 wrote:

Sensors don’t see colors

Yes, exactly. Also, RAW is not an image at all. When "comparing RAWs" from different sensors, OP is actually comparing different softwares and their (default) settings, not sensors per se.

So the whole discussion may be reduced to the following: "how did the default settings of RAW-processing engines changed with years".

Or we may speak about the rise and fall of the "fancy color pop" fashion since early 2000s.

RAW is not an image.

Sensors don't see colors. (only the mind sees colors - but for the sake of argument let's say RGB values are colors.)

But sensors do have different thresholds at which the Red, Green and Blue filters cut off.

The below should be famous by now - it measures the "quantum efficiency" of each color dye on the Canon 5D and 5Dmk2 against different frequencies.

The original 5D was less sensitive to Red and Green (dashed lines). That is - for a given light value, the sensels below those dyes in the CFA "counted" fewer photons.

At any given frequency for the same frequency of light, the 5D and 5Dmk2 will produce different values at each sensel. The differences between Nikon and Canon are more dramatic.

The RAW Converter must be tuned to the sensor if it's to have any hope of producing similar results between two cameras.

So while it's accurate to say that the OP is comparing RAW Converters. The OP is also necessarily also comparing sensors, because the RAW Converter must first measure the sensor - if it is to have any hope of producing a consistent result between cameras. (RAW values to RGB values.)

I'm aware that there are software packages that will do RAW conversion without having a deep database of sensors - I have a few installed on my computer. But to say that the Sensor has no opinions about colors (how frequencies get measured, and then therefore turned into RGB values) is an oversimplification.