X2D vs R5 Color Science.. Straight out of camera

[billmcdad]

Tried my X2D at this session yesterday and I was blown away by X2D color accuracy and light fall-off.

[robertofranco]

Reason why I sold all my other cameras ... there is no going back.

[boojum]

I have two old CCD Leicas and an M240.  I pretty much have stopped using them and the Pixii.  The Pixii has good color.  But no one has the IQ and color of the X2D at this price.  Maybe Phase One is better.  But I do not see it.

[Usm]

Sold all my Leica gear because of the color. Also Phocus handles color smoother than C1.

[Whitten]

I find the colour in my X1D2 raw is lovely out of the camera, no fiddling.
I sold my Leica M240 because everything that came out of the camera had an orange tinge I found hard to remove, even in the raw files.
The original Leica Q had nice colour.

[ALAIN]

Good morning,
Like many, I am a fan of Leica and Hasselblad.
On the colorimetry side, and more precisely AWB, each Leica model has a different interpretation (I have had them all):
the M240 "an orange tinge",
the M10 cannot produce bright reds (they are brown),
the M11 has an omnipresent magenta cast.
After a lot of sharing and a full-scale test on a thousand very recent photos, mostly outdoors, from both the M11 and the X2D, here is my first approach to balancing the WB of the M11:
- if I have X2D photos in the same colorimetric environment: I apply the X2D temperature and shade values, which are always very accurate, to the M11 photos, and then it's magical!
- if not, for an "overcast/semi-overcast" environment, I apply the corrections +300 on the temperature and -14 on the nuance to the M11, and we are almost there!
With this, the colors of the M11 become more accurate and associated with a lens such as the 35apo, we come very pleasantly close to the renderings of the X2D.
- now, for more complex colorimetry with less "standard" values, I don't have the magic formula for corrections to make to the M11; and if there is one, it is not linear for sure and a "logarithmic dive" could well be necessary...

The gray chart when shooting simplifies the process, of course, and it should be used more often

For the reproduction of works of art (paintings, etc.), in exhibitions, museums or studios, I have been using profiles in Phocus (and recently in C1) with a ColorChecker target for a long time.
But here again, it's child's play to create a profile with Phocus and C1 and the results are really accurate, whereas for LR I had to give up due to the complexity of the method (you would probably have to persevere). "

Please, Leica, hires non-colorblind mathematician

[ALAIN]

Sold all my Leica gear because of the color. Also Phocus handles color smoother than C1.

I'm attracted to C1 but I'm not going there because it doesn't recognize the X2D files.
On files from which source is the softness of phocus more pleasant than that of C1?

[JCM-Photos]

All Hasselblad cameras have top notch colors, not only the x2D 

[ALAIN]

Totally agree
I had already noticed the quality of the Hasselblad raw renderings on the X1D and I also appreciate it on my H5D-60 (ccd), particularly in landscape and in repro of paintings in the studio!

[Tennisarm12]

the M10 cannot produce bright reds (they are brown),

Please, Leica, hires non-colorblind mathematician

So, the M10 cannot do bright reds... Below 3 pics from the Ferrari museum in Modena taken with a M10R.

Cheers

[Usm]

Sold all my Leica gear because of the color. Also Phocus handles color smoother than C1.

I'm attracted to C1 but I'm not going there because it doesn't recognize the X2D files.
On files from which source is the softness of phocus more pleasant than that of C1?

I am trained as a lithographer back in the analog days, color coherence is my theme. I am also fascinated by digital photography from the beginning.
The colors from the Leicas were always different from model to model. They changed the given software from C1 to Lightroom. Which was a mistake in my eyes. C1 was a good software but they tried to be like photoshop and added features over features. And they lost their, let's say, overview that a raw developing product should have. No image manipulated over saturated, vibrating and super crispy images as a standard. They lost it, being simple.
It started to have more work to do to get smoother and "more silent" images.
Then I tried the M10r and again, everything was different.
After a year with Phocus and the Hasselblad files I know there is no way back.

Yes I know, C1 has more features, Lightroom has, Sony and Fuji has more knobs but I am really happy with the less.

I am missing the size and weight of the Leicas...
But not enough.

[ALAIN]

the M10 cannot produce bright reds (they are brown),

Please, Leica, hires non-colorblind mathematician

So, the M10 cannot do bright reds... Below 3 pics from the Ferrari museum in Modena taken with a M10R.

Cheers

The M10R has a very different sensor (and therefore demosaicing) than the M10.
For once, Leica has offered two bodies under the same number, several elements of which relating to image rendering are not identical.
And it's true, I never had the M10R which I had somewhat forgotten, and so I can't say anything about it.

[mmanesh]

Thx for the comparison shots. I sold my X2D again for some personal reasons but I clearly see where the photos taken and edited with it start and end in my archive. I love the colors and image character of the lenses. That said, most non photographers and non-artists told me they preferred the out of camera JPG files of the Fuji for example more. Which is a shame. I could see similar comments apply to your sample shots where I appreciate the color accuracy and transitions but some others may like the more "contrasty" R5 files. Anyways, enjoy your camera and happy new year! 🎆