NEF vs. ARW?

[Handiworks]

Good Morning,


I'm sure I'm opening a can of worms here, but that is not my intent .

I'm a life-long Nikon user that switched to Sony back in 2022 due to desiring better AF, affordable glass, etc. The A7IV and now A7RV have met all my needs aside from one... color!

I have always loved Nikon color management/science and though there are work arounds in camera and PP with Sony, it's never really the same.

While looking at some former Z6ii photo shoots, I realized that all the Jpegs looked precisely the same as the NEF files side by side... this is completely opposite of my Sony ARW files, where side by side there are drastic changes in color. This is using Sony's default "Standard" Jpeg (Creative Look) Jpeg output.

Curious if there are any users of both systems that can comment on this? It just surprised me how much color difference there was... sharpening and other baked in Jpeg processing I was expecting, but not oranges to turn pink etc.

Would love Nikon to drop a Z7iii or dedicated "R" camera... perhaps they are waiting for permission to use the Sony 60+ mp sensor, or better yet, developing their own with RED.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts and experiences.

--
"The present is the only point where time touches eternity" C.S. Lewis

 

[PLShutterbug]

Good Morning,

I'm sure I'm opening a can of worms here, but that is not my intent .

I'm a life-long Nikon user that switched to Sony back in 2022 due to desiring better AF, affordable glass, etc. The A7IV and now A7RV have met all my needs aside from one... color!

I have always loved Nikon color management/science and though there are work arounds in camera and PP with Sony, it's never really the same.

While looking at some former Z6ii photo shoots, I realized that all the Jpegs looked precisely the same as the NEF files side by side... this is completely opposite of my Sony ARW files, where side by side there are drastic changes in color. This is using Sony's default "Standard" Jpeg (Creative Look) Jpeg output.

Which app are you using to view the JPG and NEF files? Nikon’s NX Studio applies the picture control and corrections automatically to the NEFs, and the JPGs have them baked in. Other apps like Adobe Lightroom have reverse-engineered these tweaks so they will look more-or-less similar to the JPGs.

Curious if there are any users of both systems that can comment on this? It just surprised me how much color difference there was... sharpening and other baked in Jpeg processing I was expecting, but not oranges to turn pink etc.

Would love Nikon to drop a Z7iii or dedicated "R" camera... perhaps they are waiting for permission to use the Sony 60+ mp sensor, or better yet, developing their own with RED.

”R”? What do you mean?

Rumors are a Z7iii is this year using a non-Sony 61MP sensor.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts and experiences.

 

[Schteeks]

Would love Nikon to drop a Z7iii or dedicated "R" camera... perhaps they are waiting for permission to use the Sony 60+ mp sensor, or better yet, developing their own with RED.

”R”? What do you mean?

Rumors are a Z7iii is this year using a non-Sony 61MP

“R” as in “Resolution.” Other companies such as Sony and Panasonic Lumix use the “R” moniker in their high resolution bodies. Nikon does not do this but it helps me understand OP’s point.

 

[Handiworks]

Good Morning,

I'm sure I'm opening a can of worms here, but that is not my intent .

I'm a life-long Nikon user that switched to Sony back in 2022 due to desiring better AF, affordable glass, etc. The A7IV and now A7RV have met all my needs aside from one... color!

I have always loved Nikon color management/science and though there are work arounds in camera and PP with Sony, it's never really the same.

While looking at some former Z6ii photo shoots, I realized that all the Jpegs looked precisely the same as the NEF files side by side... this is completely opposite of my Sony ARW files, where side by side there are drastic changes in color. This is using Sony's default "Standard" Jpeg (Creative Look) Jpeg output.

Which app are you using to view the JPG and NEF files? Nikon’s NX Studio applies the picture control and corrections automatically to the NEFs, and the JPGs have them baked in. Other apps like Adobe Lightroom have reverse-engineered these tweaks so they will look more-or-less similar to the JPGs.

Just using Apple's viewer, also the same in ON1 / Affinity 2.

Curious if there are any users of both systems that can comment on this? It just surprised me how much color difference there was... sharpening and other baked in Jpeg processing I was expecting, but not oranges to turn pink etc.

Would love Nikon to drop a Z7iii or dedicated "R" camera... perhaps they are waiting for permission to use the Sony 60+ mp sensor, or better yet, developing their own with RED.

”R”? What do you mean?

Sorry, that is "High Resolution" for Sony and Panasonic/Lumix cameras.

Rumors are a Z7iii is this year using a non-Sony 61MP sensor.

That would be sweet!

Thanks in advance for your thoughts and experiences.

 

[Handiworks]

Would love Nikon to drop a Z7iii or dedicated "R" camera... perhaps they are waiting for permission to use the Sony 60+ mp sensor, or better yet, developing their own with RED.

”R”? What do you mean?

Rumors are a Z7iii is this year using a non-Sony 61MP

“R” as in “Resolution.” Other companies such as Sony and Panasonic Lumix use the “R” moniker in their high resolution bodies. Nikon does not do this but it helps me understand OP’s point.

lol... should have read the next reply before answering. Thanks!

--
"The present is the only point where time touches eternity" C.S. Lewis

 

[Handiworks]

Well, I'm a bit embarrassed to say, that it's actually just my Mac and how Apple "Finder" renders the Sony Jpeg vs. Raw images.

ON1 & Affinity 2 renders the Sony's nearly the same (with Sony "Standard") jpeg output.

The odd thing is that the Mac Finder App renders the NEF and Nikon Jpeg nearly identical... odd. I wonder what would be different about the Sony files vs. the Nikon... just newer protocol?

Thanks everyone for chiming in, sorry for wasting your time.

 

[PLShutterbug]

Well, I'm a bit embarrassed to say, that it's actually just my Mac and how Apple "Finder" renders the Sony Jpeg vs. Raw images.

ON1 & Affinity 2 renders the Sony's nearly the same (with Sony "Standard") jpeg output.

The odd thing is that the Mac Finder App renders the NEF and Nikon Jpeg nearly identical... odd. I wonder what would be different about the Sony files vs. the Nikon... just newer protocol?

Thanks everyone for chiming in, sorry for wasting your time.

Not a waste.

Are you just looking at preview images in the Finder app, or opening up the actual NEFs in large size? Previews are of an embedded JPG thumbnail, if I remember correctly. The JPG will have been processed in camera.

Your Mac may also use a Nikon-provided CODEC that can render the adjustments.

 

[Handiworks]

Well, I'm a bit embarrassed to say, that it's actually just my Mac and how Apple "Finder" renders the Sony Jpeg vs. Raw images.

ON1 & Affinity 2 renders the Sony's nearly the same (with Sony "Standard") jpeg output.

The odd thing is that the Mac Finder App renders the NEF and Nikon Jpeg nearly identical... odd. I wonder what would be different about the Sony files vs. the Nikon... just newer protocol?

Thanks everyone for chiming in, sorry for wasting your time.

Not a waste.

Gracious of you, thanks!

Are you just looking at preview images in the Finder app, or opening up the actual NEFs in large size? Previews are of an embedded JPG thumbnail, if I remember correctly. The JPG will have been processed in camera.

I've done both, just hit the space-bar to expand, and also opened them up completely in Finder, same result (Different with ARW, same with NEF). Interesting.

Your Mac may also use a Nikon-provided CODEC that can render the adjustments.

This is what I'm wondering as well (CODEC).

--
"The present is the only point where time touches eternity" C.S. Lewis

 

[allanimal]

Are you just looking at preview images in the Finder app, or opening up the actual NEFs in large size? Previews are of an embedded JPG thumbnail, if I remember correctly. The JPG will have been processed in camera.

I've done both, just hit the space-bar to expand, and also opened them up completely in Finder, same result (Different with ARW, same with NEF). Interesting.

the quick view in finder (spacebar) is still looking at the embedded JPEG preview.

open in a NEF in photos or another RAW editor and you will surely see the difference.

 

[nightowlnz]

Keep in mind that RAW is just data - Lightroom/Capture One/DXO etc are going to interpret that data and then apply a curve/profile to give you a starting point for developing the image further. So what you initially see in those apps depends on the software and their available profiles (and any custom settings).

Generally any preview of a raw file, such as in your file explorer - is going to be the embedded JPG that the camera also records into the raw file.

 

[Bob A L]

I use Nikon and Sony interchangeably, and don't really notice a big difference in colors. But I am not one to heavily concern myself with slight differences, and also, I only shoot jpegs so only compare jpegs from the two and they may be closer than individual forms of RAW files and conversions. Have you tried comparing jpegs sooc with the two brands?

 

[Handiworks]

I use Nikon and Sony interchangeably, and don't really notice a big difference in colors. But I am not one to heavily concern myself with slight differences, and also, I only shoot jpegs so only compare jpegs from the two and they may be closer than individual forms of RAW files and conversions. Have you tried comparing jpegs sooc with the two brands?

You are one of select few here who only use Jpegs... have you found it very limiting?

I shoot with both and always want more flexibility in the files, but maybe that is more from what I've been "told to do" by influencers... well everyone aside from Ken Rockwell lol.

I'll have to experiment more with Sony Jpegs to see if there is enough data in their Jpegs for me to accomplish what I personally need. I'm always on the lookout for less post processing... nearly jumped on the Fuji bandwagon purely for that endeavor.

Is there a particular Creative Look option or customized CL settings that you use for your Jpegs?

Thanks.

 

[Handiworks]

Keep in mind that RAW is just data - Lightroom/Capture One/DXO etc are going to interpret that data and then apply a curve/profile to give you a starting point for developing the image further. So what you initially see in those apps depends on the software and their available profiles (and any custom settings).

Generally any preview of a raw file, such as in your file explorer - is going to be the embedded JPG that the camera also records into the raw file.

Good to know, thanks!

Interestingly, my Nikon Z6ii Jpeg files were nearly a mirror image of the NEF when opening them up fully in ON1 and Apple Finder.

My Sony RAW and Jpegs look nearly the same as well in ON1/Affinity 2, but the thumbnails (unlike my Nikon Jpegs) look vastly different in Apple Finder... even though the Jpeg image looks nearly identical to the Raw in ON1... the Jpeg SOOC looks very different in ON1 than in Apple Finder. Odd. Perhaps it is CODEC based as stated above. interesting nonetheless.

Thanks everyone!

My Sony Jpegs

 

[Bob A L]

I experiment a lot whenever I get a new to me camera with the in camera adjustments, and rarely modify anything other than noise reduction and maybe sharpening. A lot of cameras use more noise reduction than I like and some times more or less sharpening than I like. I hate processing photos on the computer and can really mess up a good image by trying to fix it, so I am much better to basically leave it alone. If someone loves to process their images and especially if they are good at it, that's what they should do. But I see lots of images that surely have been ruined by heavy handed processing of RAW files because I've never seen jpegs that messed up. I tend to have my jpegs with slightly less sharpening in most instances and leave that to be done afterward depending on what the final use of the photo is. I use my digital cameras just like they were film cameras that I would be sending the film off to be made into slides but with the added bonus of being able to tweak some things that I could not do with Kodachrome.

 

[jtr27]

I experiment a lot whenever I get a new to me camera with the in camera adjustments, and rarely modify anything other than noise reduction and maybe sharpening. A lot of cameras use more noise reduction than I like and some times more or less sharpening than I like. I hate processing photos on the computer and can really mess up a good image by trying to fix it, so I am much better to basically leave it alone. If someone loves to process their images and especially if they are good at it, that's what they should do. But I see lots of images that surely have been ruined by heavy handed processing of RAW files because I've never seen jpegs that messed up. I tend to have my jpegs with slightly less sharpening in most instances and leave that to be done afterward depending on what the final use of the photo is. I use my digital cameras just like they were film cameras that I would be sending the film off to be made into slides but with the added bonus of being able to tweak some things that I could not do with Kodachrome.

Shooting JPEG only is a lot like "sending the film off to be made into slides" - it is convenient, but it is also punting the ultimate responsibility for the image to someone else.

Shooting in RAW is a lot like shooting in film, but developing the negatives yourself. You can do it as many times as you like, for different use cases, and you have far more latitude to correct problems, for example with contrast, white balance, and exposure. But this "digital developing" is far more easy than working with chemicals and film negatives in a darkroom.

True, an image developed from RAW can be "overprocessed" but an OOC JPEG can be "underprocessed" - that is to say, it came out wrong for some reason, and very little can be done to fix it.

If it's an image of say, a hummingbird, and you blew the highlights, no big deal. But if it's your daughter's wedding? Do you want your daughter to speak to you again?

Please don't anyone take this as a ding on the quality of Nikon JPEGs. I am merely saying that RAW format exists for good reasons, which clearly are not always well understood.

--
Jonathan
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jtr27/