Canon R6 bad/washed out colors?

Those Dell monitors are getting fierce, but again you’re buying an XPS laptop. The old adage, you get what you pay for, is still true. Speaking of Dell, equivalent Dell laptops are as expensive as Apple these days.
Yes, which was my point. I paid north of $3k for mine. Since I have an older MacBook, which I like, it was the choice between the XPS and the 16" M1 MacBook. I do not want to go into details now because this would derail the thread, but I considered the screens equally good, after a lot of time spent in several stores comparing them almost side by side. My choice was based on other factors.
I just bought a used 2020 iMac with an i9, 5700XT and the nano glass, 8TB storage, sub $2k... Works great for my DPP4 (Intel-based, still). Someone ditched it for Apple silicon, but someone else's junk? Treasure to me.

That's another grump, why, do we still not have a 27" 5K monitor in an iMac? I suspect LG and Apple's contract expired.

I'm still fine tuning the iMac btw, getting there. Have a mega-thread coming up in the Mac forum on it which I've almost punched post on a couple times, but it's still a work in progress. Having trouble with the cooling on it; the i9 and 5700XT are very power hungry, very heat intensive.
 
I am so grateful, that I am not alone with that problem!

Just for your information: I am using raw, Lightroom Classic, Canon DPP, colour calibrated monitor and have excellent color vision myself- regularly tested. Most men haven't btw.

The skintones, especially with very light caucasian skin, are not good anymore. I do not know if it is a problem of the camera or Lightroom, but my tests with DPP are also not producing the results I was used to with the 6d and the 5d MK IV. It was like a poor man's Hasselblad file quality. Simply georgeous. That is gone!

I am really unhappy. There seems to be something new going on with the new cameras. I do not know what it is, but most people seem to be obsessed with high iso noise, sharpness and dynamic range. Colour seems to be neglected. I can understand Canon, because people seem to get used to these oversharpened and oversaturated phone pictures.

I honestly do not know what to do, because in the forums, people who discuss the issue are generally criticized for having the wrong workflow.

I sold the R6 and ordered an RP with the "old" sensor. I am thinking of no longer investing in Canon, as long as this issue persists.
I agree 100%, finally somebody with my opinion.

it seems that r, r6, r6m2, r5, r8, r7, etc. (all except rp) produce very bad:

- skin tones (mostly for caucasian/asian/light skinned), "zombie grey" or oversaturated

- shadows in bright scenes (faces) with bad color casts

- severe color casts

this is mostly due to the obsession with high dynamic range and pixel peeping which most brands fail to deliver (computational photography is a million times better in smartphones).

of course all this can be corrected in raw but it's very very bothersome and only works with custom profiles (not presets) and makes any workflow way more labour intense than it should be (except you like ken rockwell picture-style).
 
Last edited:
My outcome was selling the R6 and be happy with the original R and the old 6D :)
is the r much different than the r6 in raw profiles (camera matching) for LR?

I've bought the RP now to test against the R8 (which is the same as the rest of the Rs I've heared) and if that doesn't please me, I give it back and buy the r instead (which is very desired by the way and more expensive than the r8). since my r8 is already damaged (sensor) and in repair I took out the 550d - oh what glory colors in raw with portrait style! and the rendering/sharpness with a cheap 15 year old 50mm f1.8 is easily on par with r8+85mm f2 in most cases. the r8 has a very weird way of rendering fine hair (it looks like compression artefacts) in sunlight, which the 550d doesn't have.
 
My outcome was selling the R6 and be happy with the original R and the old 6D :)
is the r much different than the r6 in raw profiles (camera matching) for LR?

I've bought the RP now to test against the R8 (which is the same as the rest of the Rs I've heared) and if that doesn't please me, I give it back and buy the r instead (which is very desired by the way and more expensive than the r8). since my r8 is already damaged (sensor) and in repair I took out the 550d - oh what glory colors in raw with portrait style! and the rendering/sharpness with a cheap 15 year old 50mm f1.8 is easily on par with r8+85mm f2 in most cases. the r8 has a very weird way of rendering fine hair (it looks like compression artefacts) in sunlight, which the 550d doesn't have.
6D, SL1 and EOS M were the last models that had the glory colors. :)

--
Hello, my name is Steve and I have GAS.
 
Last edited:
My outcome was selling the R6 and be happy with the original R and the old 6D :)
is the r much different than the r6 in raw profiles (camera matching) for LR?

I've bought the RP now to test against the R8 (which is the same as the rest of the Rs I've heared) and if that doesn't please me, I give it back and buy the r instead (which is very desired by the way and more expensive than the r8). since my r8 is already damaged (sensor) and in repair I took out the 550d - oh what glory colors in raw with portrait style! and the rendering/sharpness with a cheap 15 year old 50mm f1.8 is easily on par with r8+85mm f2 in most cases. the r8 has a very weird way of rendering fine hair (it looks like compression artefacts) in sunlight, which the 550d doesn't have.
6D, SL1 and EOS M were the last models that had the glory colors. :)
The M was unacceptable, in my experience.
 
My outcome was selling the R6 and be happy with the original R and the old 6D :)
is the r much different than the r6 in raw profiles (camera matching) for LR?

I've bought the RP now to test against the R8 (which is the same as the rest of the Rs I've heared) and if that doesn't please me, I give it back and buy the r instead (which is very desired by the way and more expensive than the r8). since my r8 is already damaged (sensor) and in repair I took out the 550d - oh what glory colors in raw with portrait style! and the rendering/sharpness with a cheap 15 year old 50mm f1.8 is easily on par with r8+85mm f2 in most cases. the r8 has a very weird way of rendering fine hair (it looks like compression artefacts) in sunlight, which the 550d doesn't have.
6D, SL1 and EOS M were the last models that had the glory colors. :)
The M was unacceptable, in my experience.
I find the EOS M and SL1 colors so very close.
 
My outcome was selling the R6 and be happy with the original R and the old 6D :)
is the r much different than the r6 in raw profiles (camera matching) for LR?

I've bought the RP now to test against the R8 (which is the same as the rest of the Rs I've heared) and if that doesn't please me, I give it back and buy the r instead (which is very desired by the way and more expensive than the r8). since my r8 is already damaged (sensor) and in repair I took out the 550d - oh what glory colors in raw with portrait style! and the rendering/sharpness with a cheap 15 year old 50mm f1.8 is easily on par with r8+85mm f2 in most cases. the r8 has a very weird way of rendering fine hair (it looks like compression artefacts) in sunlight, which the 550d doesn't have.
The camera profiles of the R are more pleasing applied in Lightroom than the profiles of the R6.

Sometimes you get almost the same with the R and R6 but on the R6 there is almost always something that looks unnatural like the colors of trees or the fur of my dachshund 🤷🏼‍♂️ When you use the Camera Neutral profile you can get them close but I prefer Landscape or Standard most of the time.

The R does have the old EOS 5D Mark IV sensor. The RP the EOS 6D Mark II sensor.

I find the RP colors more saturated and the R is a bit more neutral. It’s similar like old 5D Mark III vs 6D where I find the 6D was more saturated

I hated the shadow noise of the RP and 6D Mark II.

Although the R has more resolution the R6 looked sharper. But this looked kinda unnatural to me. The old Canon cameras, where I put the R as well because of the old 5D Mark IV sensor, had a natural and smooth sharpening. The R6 and R8 have this unnatural Sony like sharpening (I used the A7 for a while vs 6D Mark II) which I don’t like. The images look kinda flat.

So the R is for my taste a perfect Canon camera: old sensor paired with new mirrorless technology.

Yes my running dog was almost always perfectly in focus with the R6 but this doesn’t help when my small Dachshund doesn’t look like him on the photo 🤷🏼‍♂️ Now he can run a few more times for the perfect photo with a slower R but the end result is more pleasing: he looks like my dog.

I’m using a 2020 27’ iMac 🖥️ and don’t have the resources to calibrate it. Almost all files of the Canon cameras I owned look just like I expect them to look except the R6 and to a lesser extend the R8.
 
R6 Standard profile vs 6D Standard profile. In camera JPEG.

R6
R6



6D
6D
 
My outcome was selling the R6 and be happy with the original R and the old 6D :)
is the r much different than the r6 in raw profiles (camera matching) for LR?

I've bought the RP now to test against the R8 (which is the same as the rest of the Rs I've heared) and if that doesn't please me, I give it back and buy the r instead (which is very desired by the way and more expensive than the r8). since my r8 is already damaged (sensor) and in repair I took out the 550d - oh what glory colors in raw with portrait style! and the rendering/sharpness with a cheap 15 year old 50mm f1.8 is easily on par with r8+85mm f2 in most cases. the r8 has a very weird way of rendering fine hair (it looks like compression artefacts) in sunlight, which the 550d doesn't have.
The camera profiles of the R are more pleasing applied in Lightroom than the profiles of the R6.

Sometimes you get almost the same with the R and R6 but on the R6 there is almost always something that looks unnatural like the colors of trees or the fur of my dachshund 🤷🏼‍♂️ When you use the Camera Neutral profile you can get them close but I prefer Landscape or Standard most of the time.

The R does have the old EOS 5D Mark IV sensor. The RP the EOS 6D Mark II sensor.

I find the RP colors more saturated and the R is a bit more neutral. It’s similar like old 5D Mark III vs 6D where I find the 6D was more saturated

I hated the shadow noise of the RP and 6D Mark II.

Although the R has more resolution the R6 looked sharper. But this looked kinda unnatural to me. The old Canon cameras, where I put the R as well because of the old 5D Mark IV sensor, had a natural and smooth sharpening. The R6 and R8 have this unnatural Sony like sharpening (I used the A7 for a while vs 6D Mark II) which I don’t like. The images look kinda flat.

So the R is for my taste a perfect Canon camera: old sensor paired with new mirrorless technology.

Yes my running dog was almost always perfectly in focus with the R6 but this doesn’t help when my small Dachshund doesn’t look like him on the photo 🤷🏼‍♂️ Now he can run a few more times for the perfect photo with a slower R but the end result is more pleasing: he looks like my dog.

I’m using a 2020 27’ iMac 🖥️ and don’t have the resources to calibrate it. Almost all files of the Canon cameras I owned look just like I expect them to look except the R6 and to a lesser extend the R8.
I agree, the R produces more natural sharpening, that never really bugged-bugged me, but then again I went for the R3, which both has 4 more MP than the R6, but also, apparently, has a real AA filter, which the R6 doesn't.

Again, if something doesn't make you happy? Believe your eyes, don't let someone on this forum tell you otherwise. Now granted take the comments of others, try if you wish, there is quite a bit to be had from post processing as I've personally learned of late. But things like colors and AA sharpening? Those are "tough" to crack with post.

in other news, I've got a thread for that coming, the iMac 2020 ;) Keep your eyes on the Mac forum, I'll slap it up in the next couple weeks, I hope. Waiting for some components from mouser before the next phase of tweaks.
 
Last edited:
My outcome was selling the R6 and be happy with the original R and the old 6D :)
is the r much different than the r6 in raw profiles (camera matching) for LR?

I've bought the RP now to test against the R8 (which is the same as the rest of the Rs I've heared) and if that doesn't please me, I give it back and buy the r instead (which is very desired by the way and more expensive than the r8). since my r8 is already damaged (sensor) and in repair I took out the 550d - oh what glory colors in raw with portrait style! and the rendering/sharpness with a cheap 15 year old 50mm f1.8 is easily on par with r8+85mm f2 in most cases. the r8 has a very weird way of rendering fine hair (it looks like compression artefacts) in sunlight, which the 550d doesn't have.
I know what you mean about the hair, I just posted a sample on my other thread. I think Canon has baked NR in the raw files to make the sensor look better. I don't see this on my previous Canon bodies. If I PP my image in DPP or Lightroom, I can't get fine details to look good. Look at my daughter's face, it's all smeared detail. I have shot with camera bodies 10 years older than this that look better.

 

Attachments

  • 4420828.jpg
    4420828.jpg
    5.8 MB · Views: 0
Last edited:
My outcome was selling the R6 and be happy with the original R and the old 6D :)
is the r much different than the r6 in raw profiles (camera matching) for LR?

I've bought the RP now to test against the R8 (which is the same as the rest of the Rs I've heared) and if that doesn't please me, I give it back and buy the r instead (which is very desired by the way and more expensive than the r8). since my r8 is already damaged (sensor) and in repair I took out the 550d - oh what glory colors in raw with portrait style! and the rendering/sharpness with a cheap 15 year old 50mm f1.8 is easily on par with r8+85mm f2 in most cases. the r8 has a very weird way of rendering fine hair (it looks like compression artefacts) in sunlight, which the 550d doesn't have.
I know what you mean about the hair, I just posted a sample on my other thread. I think Canon has baked NR in the raw files to make the sensor look better.
What you see here is misfocus. The teeth are in focus, a small part of the hair, too.
I don't see this on my previous Canon bodies. If I PP my image in DPP or Lightroom, I can't get fine details to look good. Look at my daughter's face, it's all smeared detail. I have shot with camera bodies 10 years older than this that look better.

 
My outcome was selling the R6 and be happy with the original R and the old 6D :)
is the r much different than the r6 in raw profiles (camera matching) for LR?

I've bought the RP now to test against the R8 (which is the same as the rest of the Rs I've heared) and if that doesn't please me, I give it back and buy the r instead (which is very desired by the way and more expensive than the r8). since my r8 is already damaged (sensor) and in repair I took out the 550d - oh what glory colors in raw with portrait style! and the rendering/sharpness with a cheap 15 year old 50mm f1.8 is easily on par with r8+85mm f2 in most cases. the r8 has a very weird way of rendering fine hair (it looks like compression artefacts) in sunlight, which the 550d doesn't have.
I know what you mean about the hair, I just posted a sample on my other thread. I think Canon has baked NR in the raw files to make the sensor look better.
What you see here is misfocus. The teeth are in focus, a small part of the hair, too.
I don't see this on my previous Canon bodies. If I PP my image in DPP or Lightroom, I can't get fine details to look good. Look at my daughter's face, it's all smeared detail. I have shot with camera bodies 10 years older than this that look better.

JACS, thank you. I have been having one stupid user error after another and I keep thinking something is wrong with the camera, but yet everyone praises the sensor. I feel so much better now. I am using eye focus, am I doing something wrong ? Used this before in past bodies, but I know the new AF system is another animal.
 
Last edited:
The left eye seems in focus. Which part of the face doesn't have the details you are looking for? I can see the little bumps of the skin on the left cheek and the chin; the details look excellent to me there.

BTW I don't think you can get this level of details from a cheap 50mm 1.8 lens from most (if not all) of the 10 year old cameras, especially DSLRs.
 
Last edited:
My outcome was selling the R6 and be happy with the original R and the old 6D :)
is the r much different than the r6 in raw profiles (camera matching) for LR?

I've bought the RP now to test against the R8 (which is the same as the rest of the Rs I've heared) and if that doesn't please me, I give it back and buy the r instead (which is very desired by the way and more expensive than the r8). since my r8 is already damaged (sensor) and in repair I took out the 550d - oh what glory colors in raw with portrait style! and the rendering/sharpness with a cheap 15 year old 50mm f1.8 is easily on par with r8+85mm f2 in most cases. the r8 has a very weird way of rendering fine hair (it looks like compression artefacts) in sunlight, which the 550d doesn't have.
I know what you mean about the hair, I just posted a sample on my other thread. I think Canon has baked NR in the raw files to make the sensor look better.
What you see here is misfocus. The teeth are in focus, a small part of the hair, too.
I don't see this on my previous Canon bodies. If I PP my image in DPP or Lightroom, I can't get fine details to look good. Look at my daughter's face, it's all smeared detail. I have shot with camera bodies 10 years older than this that look better.

JACS, thank you. I have been having one stupid user error after another and I keep thinking something is wrong with the camera, but yet everyone praises the sensor. I feel so much better now. I am using eye focus, am I doing something wrong ? Used this before in past bodies, but I know the new AF system is another animal.
JACS will also tell you, the R8 doesn't have a prim and proper AA filter ;) He hasn't said it yet, but he's thinking it... Now is one really needed? And is the R8 better without one? That's a tough one.

.

@ JACS Any thoughts?

.

I didn't mind the R8's fine detail rendering in my usage of it, in fact it's quite good. Most of it though is the fact it has a really good knack for nailing focus and metering, which sure, AF misses still happen, even on the R8.

You got the right idea though, 1/125, sharper shots at faster shutters. The R8 doesn't need IBIS, but without it? You should punch 1/125, my 2 cents.

Now f/2.8? The new DLO that comes with the RF lenses is quite good, don't be afraid to push f/1.8 on that nifty fifty, it works better this side of more advanced lens corrections. Now sure, you'll get more sharpness at f/2.8, absolutely. But, f/1.8, f/2, f/2.5, are more approachable on RF glass, assuming this is the RF flavor of the 50mm.
 
Last edited:
My outcome was selling the R6 and be happy with the original R and the old 6D :)
is the r much different than the r6 in raw profiles (camera matching) for LR?

I've bought the RP now to test against the R8 (which is the same as the rest of the Rs I've heared) and if that doesn't please me, I give it back and buy the r instead (which is very desired by the way and more expensive than the r8). since my r8 is already damaged (sensor) and in repair I took out the 550d - oh what glory colors in raw with portrait style! and the rendering/sharpness with a cheap 15 year old 50mm f1.8 is easily on par with r8+85mm f2 in most cases. the r8 has a very weird way of rendering fine hair (it looks like compression artefacts) in sunlight, which the 550d doesn't have.
I know what you mean about the hair, I just posted a sample on my other thread. I think Canon has baked NR in the raw files to make the sensor look better.
What you see here is misfocus. The teeth are in focus, a small part of the hair, too.
I don't see this on my previous Canon bodies. If I PP my image in DPP or Lightroom, I can't get fine details to look good. Look at my daughter's face, it's all smeared detail. I have shot with camera bodies 10 years older than this that look better.

JACS, thank you. I have been having one stupid user error after another and I keep thinking something is wrong with the camera, but yet everyone praises the sensor. I feel so much better now. I am using eye focus, am I doing something wrong ? Used this before in past bodies, but I know the new AF system is another animal.
JACS will also tell you, the R8 doesn't have a prim and proper AA filter ;) He hasn't said it yet, but he's thinking it... Now is one really needed? And is the R8 better without one? That's a tough one.

.

@ JACS Any thoughts?

.

I didn't mind the R8's fine detail rendering in my usage of it, in fact it's quite good. Most of it though is the fact it has a really good knack for nailing focus and metering, which sure, AF misses still happen, even on the R8.

You got the right idea though, 1/125, sharper shots at faster shutters. The R8 doesn't need IBIS, but without it? You should punch 1/125, my 2 cents.

Now f/2.8? The new DLO that comes with the RF lenses is quite good, don't be afraid to push f/1.8 on that nifty fifty, it works better this side of more advanced lens corrections. Now sure, you'll get more sharpness at f/2.8, absolutely. But, f/1.8, f/2, f/2.5, are more approachable on RF glass, assuming this is the RF flavor of the 50mm.
nope, it sucks big time

Canon RF 50mm F1.8 STM Lens Image Quality (the-digital-picture.com)
 
I am so grateful, that I am not alone with that problem!

Just for your information: I am using raw, Lightroom Classic, Canon DPP, colour calibrated monitor and have excellent color vision myself- regularly tested. Most men haven't btw.

The skintones, especially with very light caucasian skin, are not good anymore. I do not know if it is a problem of the camera or Lightroom, but my tests with DPP are also not producing the results I was used to with the 6d and the 5d MK IV. It was like a poor man's Hasselblad file quality. Simply georgeous. That is gone!

I am really unhappy. There seems to be something new going on with the new cameras. I do not know what it is, but most people seem to be obsessed with high iso noise, sharpness and dynamic range. Colour seems to be neglected. I can understand Canon, because people seem to get used to these oversharpened and oversaturated phone pictures.

I honestly do not know what to do, because in the forums, people who discuss the issue are generally criticized for having the wrong workflow.

I sold the R6 and ordered an RP with the "old" sensor. I am thinking of no longer investing in Canon, as long as this issue persists.
I agree 100%, finally somebody with my opinion.

it seems that r, r6, r6m2, r5, r8, r7, etc. (all except rp) produce very bad:

- skin tones (mostly for caucasian/asian/light skinned), "zombie grey" or oversaturated

- shadows in bright scenes (faces) with bad color casts

- severe color casts

this is mostly due to the obsession with high dynamic range and pixel peeping which most brands fail to deliver (computational photography is a million times better in smartphones).

of course all this can be corrected in raw but it's very very bothersome and only works with custom profiles (not presets) and makes any workflow way more labour intense than it should be (except you like ken rockwell picture-style).
Most people seem to disagree, myself included. Not denying your opinion and experience, of course. And it’s good that there is a choice of manufacturers and many different picture styles, profiles, presets etc. Hopefully you can find something somewhere that will suit your preferences.
 
My outcome was selling the R6 and be happy with the original R and the old 6D :)
is the r much different than the r6 in raw profiles (camera matching) for LR?

I've bought the RP now to test against the R8 (which is the same as the rest of the Rs I've heared) and if that doesn't please me, I give it back and buy the r instead (which is very desired by the way and more expensive than the r8). since my r8 is already damaged (sensor) and in repair I took out the 550d - oh what glory colors in raw with portrait style! and the rendering/sharpness with a cheap 15 year old 50mm f1.8 is easily on par with r8+85mm f2 in most cases. the r8 has a very weird way of rendering fine hair (it looks like compression artefacts) in sunlight, which the 550d doesn't have.
I know what you mean about the hair, I just posted a sample on my other thread. I think Canon has baked NR in the raw files to make the sensor look better.
What you see here is misfocus. The teeth are in focus, a small part of the hair, too.
I don't see this on my previous Canon bodies. If I PP my image in DPP or Lightroom, I can't get fine details to look good. Look at my daughter's face, it's all smeared detail. I have shot with camera bodies 10 years older than this that look better.

JACS, thank you. I have been having one stupid user error after another and I keep thinking something is wrong with the camera, but yet everyone praises the sensor. I feel so much better now. I am using eye focus, am I doing something wrong ? Used this before in past bodies, but I know the new AF system is another animal.
JACS will also tell you, the R8 doesn't have a prim and proper AA filter ;) He hasn't said it yet, but he's thinking it... Now is one really needed? And is the R8 better without one? That's a tough one.

.

@ JACS Any thoughts?

.

I didn't mind the R8's fine detail rendering in my usage of it, in fact it's quite good. Most of it though is the fact it has a really good knack for nailing focus and metering, which sure, AF misses still happen, even on the R8.

You got the right idea though, 1/125, sharper shots at faster shutters. The R8 doesn't need IBIS, but without it? You should punch 1/125, my 2 cents.

Now f/2.8? The new DLO that comes with the RF lenses is quite good, don't be afraid to push f/1.8 on that nifty fifty, it works better this side of more advanced lens corrections. Now sure, you'll get more sharpness at f/2.8, absolutely. But, f/1.8, f/2, f/2.5, are more approachable on RF glass, assuming this is the RF flavor of the 50mm.
nope, it sucks big time

Canon RF 50mm F1.8 STM Lens Image Quality (the-digital-picture.com)
I use mine for bounce flashing with the R8 using an old 580EXII.

The RF 50mm STM on the R8 can get focus in low light at f1.8, stop down to f4 then bounce flash.

Starting at about f4 the RF50mm STM becomes very sharp.

The low weight of the RF 50mm STM makes the whole rig much easier to handle because I have the flash on a bracket on the left side way up.

Don't ask why because that is the way it has to be for me.

The low light focus and high ISO powers of the R8 make it a bounce flasher's dream even with Canon's cheapest lens and a flash that sells for about $75 used . :)

https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/canon-speedlite-580ex-ii

--
Hello, my name is Steve and I have GAS.
 
Last edited:
JACS will also tell you, the R8 doesn't have a prim and proper AA filter ;)
And he would be right!
He hasn't said it yet, but he's thinking it... Now is one really needed? And is the R8 better without one? That's a tough one.

.

@ JACS Any thoughts?
Soft images are not caused by weak AA filters...

This is a so-so lens but my experience with the EF 50/1.8 II was that it was capable of very sharp images at f/2.8... when it focused right, and it did it by mistake only. :-|
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top