Strange AWB results on Sony A7R II vs. A900/850

[Cyril]

Have been testing various lenses on the A7RII  and comparing RAW files with my old but reliable A850 files under similar conditions. I was surprised how different the WB was with AWB ...  

I am not talking about particularly "exotic" lighting conditions. For example, shooting some garden scenes under overcast skies the greens from the A850 (on AWB too) were reasonably vivid but the A7RII looked grayish... way way different....

Both RAW files converted in Adobe camera raw on "adobe standard" setting....    This did not seem to be lens specific.

 

Anybody experiencing something similar ?  

This is my first mirrorless , is it usual to see the AWB react so differently from the old a900/a850 bodies ?

 

Thanks for any help. Feeling quite puzzled so far.

 

c.

[Singingsnapper]

Have been testing various lenses on the A7RII  and comparing RAW files with my old but reliable A850 files under similar conditions. I was surprised how different the WB was with AWB ...  

I am not talking about particularly "exotic" lighting conditions. For example, shooting some garden scenes under overcast skies the greens from the A850 (on AWB too) were reasonably vivid but the A7RII looked grayish... way way different....

Both RAW files converted in Adobe camera raw on "adobe standard" setting....    This did not seem to be lens specific.

 

Anybody experiencing something similar ?  

This is my first mirrorless , is it usual to see the AWB react so differently from the old a900/a850 bodies ?

 

Thanks for any help. Feeling quite puzzled so far.

 

c.

To be fair, A900 is now 7 years old - I had one of the first.  So algorithms will have changed but I don't know how much by.  

[seb]

I cant compare them, but some find the adobe conversion of the A7RII RAWs not ideal. Try C1, maybe it's better.

I compared a few freshly opened RAWs in both and colorwise I always prefered the C1 over the LR.

[Singingsnapper]

The 'as shot' temperature in a little different in LR and C1...

 

For this shot:

 

Cherhill horse and fields copy by singingsnapper, on Flickr

 

the as shot in LRCC is 4100 and 0 tint

 

in C1 it is 4725 and -1

 

I don't really know how to use C1, my experience and most of my software is with adobe, plus my archiving routine is through LR (though trying to figure out how to add further hard drives) so Sony, please get your heads together with Adobe - the camera calibrations are awful, and the adobe standard isn't great....

[Singingsnapper]

I part processed in C1 then exported as tiff (exporting as dng wasn't successful) I ended up using the as shot WB...  the shot as above was processed as Daylight WB

 

Cherhill Horse C1 copy by singingsnapper, on Flickr

[Singingsnapper]

I part processed in C1 then exported as tiff (exporting as dng wasn't successful) I ended up using the as shot WB...

 

Cherhill Horse C1 copy by singingsnapper, on Flickr

 

 

Mind you they are so different, not sure it's fair as a comparison...

[Jamooche]

If you shoot RAW, this really isn't a big issue, but sometimes it's hard to fix it / find the right settings.  I like to use the WhiBal and usually carry one with me all the time. 

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=whibal&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ma&Top+Nav-Search=

[Singingsnapper]

If you shoot RAW, this really isn't a big issue, but sometimes it's hard to fix it / find the right settings.  I like to use the WhiBal and usually carry one with me all the time. 

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=whibal&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ma&Top+Nav-Search=

To be honest, it is a bit of an issue as there is quite a difference between the Kelvin values reported.  4100 to 4700 is quite a shift in temperature...

[Jamooche]

To be honest, it is a bit of an issue as there is quite a difference between the Kelvin values reported.  4100 to 4700 is quite a shift in temperature...

I see, you are right.  I don't have the camera in front of me and can't tell from the manual.  Can you chose a specific kelvin color temp in camera?  I wonder which program is closer to what you set in camera. 

[Guest all8]

The 'as shot' temperature in a little different in LR and C1...

 

For this shot:

 

Cherhill horse and fields copy by singingsnapper, on Flickr

 

the as shot in LRCC is 4100 and 0 tint

 

in C1 it is 4725 and -1

 

I don't really know how to use C1, my experience and most of my software is with adobe, plus my archiving routine is through LR (though trying to figure out how to add further hard drives) so Sony, please get your heads together with Adobe - the camera calibrations are awful, and the adobe standard isn't great....

 

That's quite a difference. Is the RAW file available anywhere, to try, or look in the meta data.

[Singingsnapper]

That's quite a difference. Is the RAW file available anywhere, to try, or look in the meta data.

No it's not.  The wheat shows the difference most between the two raw files .  The adobe is darker and more reds in it.  I have deliberately underexposed to protect the colour of  the sky when shooting.  the sky is less different...

[Guest all8]

Sorry, I misunderstood. I though it was the same RAW file processed through two different tools, LR & C1.

[Singingsnapper]

Sorry, I misunderstood. I though it was the same RAW file processed through two different tools, LR & C1.

Sorry it is the same raw file.  The first one had a wb of 5500 and +10 applied to it.  

[Cyril]

Further experimentation showing me that part of the issue is (way) stronger magenta/red in the A7rII when AWB setting...

[Singingsnapper]

No it's not.  The wheat shows the difference most between the two raw files .  The adobe is darker and more reds in it.  I have deliberately underexposed to protect the colour of  the sky when shooting.  the sky is less different...

I meant the two edited files, sorry for the confusion.