Color of M5...

Recently I got M5 and have been testing it.

Yesterday, my family visited Joshua Tree National Park with my new camera.

Definitely, it is faster than my original M. Using EVF is also fun, though I did not use it much because I needed low and high angles.

But the problem is the color that does not satisfy my family. Especially, when looking at the color of the back LCD, I can tell M is better than M5. Now others' concern become mine.

Here are some examples of M5:

What do you think of from them?

My wife is saying, "Let us sell it out. The original M is better. Color is more important than control and speed. If we have to do RAW conversion, we would better use 1D."

What picture style is selected? Canon's Digic processors yield dynamic range, colors and contrast in a bolder sense now. If these are not quite to your liking they can be adjusted.

Back when I picked up the M3 I didn't like it initially and it took a bit to dial out/adjust so that I was happy with the results. That camera is taken with frequency now because it adjusted to my preferences and the small size is easy to have along over the SLR.

Color preference is highly subjective. It looks like you want to get a certain look from the OOC JPEGs, without tweaking in RAW. I know that there are endless tweaks available, so it shouldn't be too hard to adjust it to your liking. Can you say what, specifically, you prefer about the original M's colors? If it's something fairly simple, like warmer or cooler colors, that's really easy to adjust in the camera. There are also zillions of custom picture styles that various people have created, that you can download and use. I always shoot RAW, so I haven't bothered to mess around too much with JPEG settings. That said, I have recently done some in camera RAW conversions to send images to my phone. For that, I've changed the picture style to fine detail, because someone (Marco, perhaps) recommended doing that to get closer to the original M. When I do the in-camera RAW conversion, I use the shot settings, and generally like the results.

I also have the M and M5. I implemented Marco Nero's settings in my 5, using "fine detail" as the base, and to my eyes, both in JPEG fine and RAW, the colors in the LCDs approximate each other well. Scroll down to the thread M5 vs. M Colors.

...and no two folks will agree on what they like.  Having said that, I personally prefer the overall color tonality coming from both the M and M2.  To be the M and M2 have an overall "warmer" look to the colors (more traditional Canon, that is).

With the M3 and M10 (I don't have the M5 or M6), I find the color tonality shift towards a slightly more yellowish or greenish hue (not in all scenes though - but it is noticeable).  This effect is even more noticeable when the sun has a more warmish glow as in Autumn scenes.

But since I shoot in RAW only, regardless of what camera I use, I will try to adjust whatever is needed to get the look I'm aiming for.

I think the colors still look very nice. But I think Canon’s default colors are starting to look more Nikon-esque as they shift towards using sensors with better DR.

You might consider setting a more specific white balance setting for your scene rather than using auto white balance.  I am finding with a lot of recent camera from all manufacturers that the AWB is too warm.

SilverSwede wrote:

Mike, do you mind sharing your M3-settings? Regards, Henrik

Modified from the "standard" setting: 3, -1, -1, 0

For the OP, this discussion about the M and M5 colors thread here:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4219761

J A C S wrote:

lumenite wrote:

My wife is saying, "Let us sell it out. The original M is better. Color is more important than control and speed. If we have to do RAW conversion, we would better use 1D."

Listen to your wife.

That said, I do not have experience with the M5, only with the M (of the M line). On the other hand, I do agree that colors is very important. When the M3 was released, there were many doubts about its color. I have not studied the M5 enough to have an opinion. The M100 which looks interesting to me seems to have good color.

I could manage to make an excuse of a new camera. "We need both. One for me, the other for you. I got your pictures with mine, and you mine with yours. Additionally, we do not have to change lenses."

J A C S wrote:

lumenite wrote:

J A C S wrote:

lumenite wrote:

My wife is saying, "Let us sell it out. The original M is better. Color is more important than control and speed. If we have to do RAW conversion, we would better use 1D."

Listen to your wife.

That said, I do not have experience with the M5, only with the M (of the M line). On the other hand, I do agree that colors is very important. When the M3 was released, there were many doubts about its color. I have not studied the M5 enough to have an opinion. The M100 which looks interesting to me seems to have good color.

I could manage to make an excuse of a new camera. "We need both. One for me, the other for you. I got your pictures with mine, and you mine with yours. Additionally, we do not have to change lenses."

The next step is to ask - honey, do you want a new lens? (which you will "share", meaning she will be allowed to use it). I tried to buy a G-Canon camera "for my wife" but she got a Samsung Note phone...

As you may know, I have a lot of lense already. She is saying, "Now we have two crop cameras, why don't we sell all other fullframe lenses?" My answer is that they are too old to get a good money for them.

RA40 wrote:

SilverSwede wrote:

Mike, do you mind sharing your M3-settings? Regards, Henrik

Modified from the "standard" setting: 3, -1, -1, 0

For the OP, this discussion about the M and M5 colors thread here:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4219761

I will try your setting. Thanks. Marco's Fine Detail does not seem to be my taste.

Alastair Norcross wrote:

Color preference is highly subjective. It looks like you want to get a certain look from the OOC JPEGs, without tweaking in RAW. I know that there are endless tweaks available, so it shouldn't be too hard to adjust it to your liking. Can you say what, specifically, you prefer about the original M's colors? If it's something fairly simple, like warmer or cooler colors, that's really easy to adjust in the camera. There are also zillions of custom picture styles that various people have created, that you can download and use. I always shoot RAW, so I haven't bothered to mess around too much with JPEG settings. That said, I have recently done some in camera RAW conversions to send images to my phone. For that, I've changed the picture style to fine detail, because someone (Marco, perhaps) recommended doing that to get closer to the original M. When I do the in-camera RAW conversion, I use the shot settings, and generally like the results.

Yes, too many possibilities. Moreover, the setting should vary according to the situations. I hope that this journey to find the color would be another joy of getting a new camera, not a stress.

justmeMN wrote:

geoffmalter wrote: Scroll down to the thread M5 vs. M Colors.

Marco Nero

... try the 'FINE DETAIL' setting...

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60381249

Thanks, all. I think FD does not fit my need, but I will try it more.

Ben Herrmann wrote:

...and no two folks will agree on what they like. Having said that, I personally prefer the overall color tonality coming from both the M and M2. To be the M and M2 have an overall "warmer" look to the colors (more traditional Canon, that is).

With the M3 and M10 (I don't have the M5 or M6), I find the color tonality shift towards a slightly more yellowish or greenish hue (not in all scenes though - but it is noticeable). This effect is even more noticeable when the sun has a more warmish glow as in Autumn scenes.

But since I shoot in RAW only, regardless of what camera I use, I will try to adjust whatever is needed to get the look I'm aiming for.

Yes, I want to be warmer and more vivid. At this point, it is difficult to run RAW converting as my main process. But I will try some later. Thank you.

pacnwhobbyist wrote:

I think the colors still look very nice. But I think Canon’s default colors are starting to look more Nikon-esque as they shift towards using sensors with better DR.

When many people prefer Canon colors, I do not understand why Canon is moving toward Nikon. I think that the phenomena happened several times when Canon's DIGIC changed. Is it just because the users are used to the old colors or because Canon's color policy is changing?

It started when they are switched to using the same type of tech that Sony uses in their sensors (on-chip A/D conversion or something like that) in order to address complaints from customers about relatively poor DR in their raw files. It’s rather ironic that people were whining about lack of DR got what they wanted but now complain the colors aren’t as vibrant.

Although objectively speaking, they still look pretty good. And I still prefer them over all the other camera makers.