Canon has been evolving their Auto White Balance to be more true to life lately, but in doing so, has alienated some folks along the way (ie traditional Canon shooters). As such, on newer models, they now have split that track in two and permit both a white priority auto white balance for absolute accuracy, and, ambience priority auto white balance for folks like myself that prefer the (perceived) warmth common to certain scenarios. Having choice is usually better than not, no exception here. I personally am looking forward to shooting a future Canon with this option. It should be noted, at the time of this entry, you cannot go back and reprocess archived RAWs from cameras that do not have ambience and white priority AWBs onboard in Canon’s DPP4 with those settings; it’s AWB, period, no flavor choice even though it’s just software from all I can tell. Also, it goes without saying, you can’t change your white balance if you don’t shoot in RAW to begin with. And lastly, sometimes the old ways are best, that is, using preset white balances either in camera, or in your post processor of choice to mitigate the issue is always an option (I personally prefer as little post as possible, so that’s not my favorite option).

Canon has also been evolving their color filtering arrays and it changes on a generation basis from what I gather. Cameras made around the same era, irregardless of sensor size difference, share similar rendering from my observations. Canon also appears to be swinging that pendulum back with the 6DII to a more classic rendering, a trend I hope they will continue and learn to have their cake (of color), and eat it (have better sensor metrics going forward) too.

Part of the success of Canon colors is optics. Third party or non-Canon lenses (which I’ve shot) are going to render color differently. Don’t expect to match Canon colors if you’re not shooting Canon glass. And, color, bokeh, and contrast quality (not talking quantity IE f-stop) often go unnoticed as a benefit to L glass, other than the red ring as those are very perceptual qualities, not a hard metric on a spreadsheet you can readily compare (heck that’s what this whole article is about, perception, not metrics).

Picture profiles (jpeg engine). Using a modified picture profile like Fine detail (or standard) with more kick (+1 or +2 saturation and +1 tone) can bring back some more traditional Canon punchiness despite using a newer Canon sensor with a revised Color Filtering Array without making an artificial looking image. Likewise, if you prefer more muted tones/colors IE don’t like Canon’s punch, faithful is a good option. Keep in mind what picture profile you use when shooting video. Landscape for example, should be used for well, landscapes as it makes green and blues pop and has a stronger sharpness as an example. There’s also quite a few video centric picture profiles out there, Technicolor’s Cinestyle being notable. It should also be noted, fine detail is only available in camera on newer (80D and newer) models. You can however use RAWs from older cameras and apply fine detail to them in Canon’s DPP4, so differing (or even customized) picture profiles is a good option for going back and reprocessing old RAWs, if you still have them.

(Still) Shooting a 5D classic or 5DII/III/6D (original)? You’re not crazy, it really does give that special look for reasons I’ve outlined.

Shooting a non-Canon (body) and want that Canon look? Warm up your WB, try to shoot Canon glass if you can, and expect to spend some serious time in post, and you should be able to get closer but not quite match Canon colors as CFAs change the input, not the output, meaning even color matching techniques can’t completely address the root cause of differing input RAW data and therefore not completely match with exact fidelity, but, like a modified fine detail picture profile, you can get close-r if you try. Also, you’re dealing with double jeopardy here as although Canon’s JPEG engine isn’t and doesn’t appear to be changing anytime soon, matching both the CFA response, WB response, and JPEG engine response of a Canon, good luck without a Canon. Trust me, I considered trying to make a Sony “work” for me. I couldn’t. And hence never jumped ships as I have no desire to have higher FPS, 400+ AF point, IBIS, etc, if I’m just generating all those images with less salt, with less pepper, with less spice/secret sauce. That sauce makes the burger sometimes and I’m having a hard enough time dealing with Canon changing their own sauce/spices just a little bit, why would I want to change sauces entirely? The other guy has to get their sauce right, first. Maybe they’ll get there someday, but that isn’t today. That said, I have no investment in Canon glass presently; if the other guy wants to get their sauce right before I spring for a full frame? Sure, I’ll consider it at that time.

The 6D II may be worth a second look, as is the EOS M10, if you’re okay with mucking with WB for the latter as I know those are less popular cameras, but, are hidden gems for color rendition while maintaining somewhat newer feature sets at an affordable price point.

The 5D III, 6D (original), EOS M (original), EOS M2, SL1, T5i, 70D, 7D (original) and Powershot G1X (original) all maintain the same rendition from what I can tell, with the latter having the atypical highlight blowouts common to Powershots of that era. If you’re looking to maintain your existing colors but upgrade, say you have a T2i, the T5i or SL1 might be worth a look if you’re sensitive to the topic of color rendition, and likewise, a 70D, M2 and 5DIII may make some sense if say you have a 60D, EOS M (original) or 6D (original) and depending why you’re looking to upgrade, may be a more logical upgrade path then say a 80D, M5, or 5DIV respectively and want to maintain that special Canon look. Likewise, if you’re unhappy with say that new 5DIV, maybe that original 6D or 5DIII, if nothing is wrong with it otherwise for your use, may be worth the “downgrade”.

To sum up, (Canon) colors are produced from:

Optics > Sensor (CFA) > WB/JPEG Engine

Optics only change if you change them, and Canon optics have a very specific look to them. L optics, too.

Canon’s (on sensor) color filtering arrays on recent cameras has been generating more muted responses vs former CFAs of old. It’s subtle, but adds up real quick.

Canon’s (auto) white balance has been slowly changing too, but thankfully Canon is just now giving us options if we don’t like these changes, if, you own a new enough camera.

Canon’s JPEG engine (picture profiles) haven’t changed. But, the new fine detail picture profile, customized at that, is really worth a look for giving back some of what the former two points take away.

Lastly, I never addressed a question I’m personally dealing with in this journey; what full frame option will I choose next as a result? The upcoming Canon full frame mirrorless in all likelihood. With no rumors of an upcoming 1D, 5D or 6D replacement coming (and them being far off due to where they are in refresh cycle), and, the Sony A7’s still don’t do it for me, logically the next new full frame sensor Canon will debut will be in the rumored full frame mirrorless (due late this year) and also in all likelihood from what we’ve seen in the 6D II, they just might use something with a stronger CFA, or at least one with more traditional rendering. Either way, whether they do or not, arguably just if not more importantly, it’ll ship with a choice of AWB, which combined with customized picture styles, may be good enough here as even Canon’s existing generation CFAs are still closer to what I want then alternatives (IE non-Canon) at the end of the day. As much as color matters greatly, you do have to weigh how much features like eye-AF weigh vs color rendition. Be nice to have our cake and eat it too..