SteveV4D

Destroy...  destroy... destroy!!!! 😂😂😂
What you mean is that the R5 may well be a better camera for the work you're doing than the P6K...  that's all.  
It's not what you're saying, it's how you say it that promotes these reactions from others.  You sound like a hobbyist using cameras when you go off on one about one camera destroying another.  What, will the R5 be attacking your P6K with a baseball bat?  Destroy indeed.  😂😂😂

I like Deep Impact too.  Though most prefer the other asteroid movie from that year.  Maybe we should switch discussions to an Armageddon vs Deep Impact debate.  Would be more fun.  😂😂

It would seem so... see link 
https://www.eoshd.com/photo/shooting-with-the-canon-dream-lens-50mm-f0-95-on-my-sigma-fp/
I never knew Canon used a different colour science for Photography instead of the one they use for video.  Wow... you really know things other people don't.  😂
I do have an opinion on it, but I feel you're not in the right frame of mind to receive it.  
So which Canon colour profile is the most accurate for colour? Do you know? I feel you're making things up about colour science as you go along.

Dude, its the shooters fault. You know you need an IR filter to avoid situations like this. Its like shooting wide open at 1.2 in the sun without an ND filter and then complaining in post see everything is overexposed. Not sure why this comes into play into a color discussion.

I am sure a lot of bad footage you see online from blackmagic cameras is from people not using IR cut filters.  All blackmagic cameras even the Pocket cameras need them. Another issue is just white balance that is off. Unless shooting RAW if you rely on a faulty auto white balance or simply don't manually white balance correctly you will have funky colors. I've seen plenty Canon footage that looks pretty whacky that I attribute to bad WB, same with Fuji. One of the huge advantages of RAW, probably the biggest for me at least. 

Honestly that is one of my big issues with Black Magic. Their reasons for not including IR cut filters built in are stupid. Thankfully you can install one in the Ursa mini without having to use ones you put infront of the lens. 

 

Maybe we should debate which movie has the more accurate colour science and is easier to grade.  Deep Impact or Armageddon.... 😂
I'm joking...  let's not.. 😱 

I like Deep Impact too.  Though most prefer the other asteroid movie from that year.  Maybe we should switch discussions to an Armageddon vs Deep Impact debate.  Would be more fun.  😂😂

I'm not going to debate anything with such a blatantly obvious Armageddon fanboy troll  

Just popping in to say that I quite like Deep Impact.
Coincidentally, this thread couldn't have been more destroyed if it had been hit by a giant comet either.

Actually, while picture profiles are the same in both modes, in video mode on EOS R / 1DX3 in the Log settings you have two color options: Neutral matrix & Original EOS Cinema.
One could argue that for a video centric color accuracy test, cameras should be tested in their various log modes and have a standard Rec709 LUT applied and then compare results. I have a feeling that Canon in the Neutral matrix setting might be more accurate.

It would seem so... see link 
https://www.eoshd.com/photo/shooting-with-the-canon-dream-lens-50mm-f0-95-on-my-sigma-fp/
I never knew Canon used a different colour science for Photography instead of the one they use for video.  Wow... you really know things other people don't.  😂
I do have an opinion on it, but I feel you're not in the right frame of mind to receive it.  
So which Canon colour profile is the most accurate for colour? Do you know? I feel you're making things up about colour science as you go along.

I call you out as a fake and liar.
If you were a professional colorist, then you would know that in the age of RAW cameras, colors are what a colorist makes of them. A camera's out-of-the-box "color science" hardly matters to colorists if you work from 10bit/12bit Log or RAW; it only matters to quick turnaround-documentary and ENG video makers who rely on the camera's factory color profiles and do not have post-production colorists. 
Judging colors by YouTube videos, in highly compressed 8bit 4:2:0 Rec709, is ludicrous anyway. Any RAW cine camera today - even Blackmagic's $1200 Pocket 4K - covers more than the Rec709/sRGB color space. Difference in color gamut will only become visible in greater bit depths than 8bit, with better color subsampling than 4:2:0 and wider color spaces such as Aces, P3 and Rec2020.

but if you have it, you may as well use it right 😉
as forest would say, life is like a box of chocolates 😎

Well color can be a subjective matter, if you post your work, people will be able to tell your skill level, if your work is out of this world then people will respect your opinion more, and if they find your work bad then they will render your opinion meaningless. So def matters a lot. 

https://pdnonline.com/gear/cameras/the-best-cameras-for-color-reproduction-ranked/

Please please do tell us what is "bull sh*t" with the testing by Image Engineering for color accuracy? Explain with specifics and details, I'm all ears to listen and learn. 

Have a read of this first:
https://www.tipa.com/_assets/pdf/TIPA_Camera_Test_Image_Engineering.pdf

Have you done better scientific tests of cameras' colors than this yourself?
 

You weren't technically, but with you, the word argue just seems to fit when discussing your replies.

I think the strawman in this argument is you.  You've been consistently arguing with other members on this point.  Some of my replies to you have got likes.  Yours are not so well received. 😄 In fact one of your replies was to argue why a forum member wasn't using the viewfinder in a DSLR camera when recording video in sunlight.   Whereas we all know such a thing is impossible for DSLR cameras as the mirror is up when using the camera.  So remind me again, which of us is foolish.
Now I'm not arguing cameras like 1DX Mark III can be better than the Pocket cameras for colour grading.  I can't, I don't own the 1DX.   My only issue is with your blanket statement that Canon Colour Science is easier to grade.  Whereas I feel it is wholly dependant on the camera and codec being used. 
My point about how our eyes can see colour differently, is one of the reasons why I feel colour is subjective, even accurate colour.  I'm sorry it went over your head. 😄

I was actually thinking the same! this fella sounds dodgy claiming hes pro colourist etc knows his stuff but yet hasn't got a thing to present 
keep avoiding members questions by interpolating them. 

...and posting no links to work or a reel. Does your first name happen to be Ebrahim?

Stop changing words and post your work like everyone requested here.

@Django

Check out this list 
https://pdnonline.com/gear/cameras/the-best-cameras-for-color-reproduction-ranked/

TBH I am really confused as the Fuji's are up at the top directly followed by Sony. How can they both be super color accurate while both being very different?

We are here to share and learn...But lately i see just complete bullshit from fake users that claim their pro colorist with their science 
Post your work and talk.

I gave my opinion about my A7s which happens to BE made by Sony but I would have got it if it was made by Lego if it was the same.
The best camera I have used (my opinion) IS my A7s (on my second one) the WORST camera i have owned was ALSO a Sony.
I have a heap of little P&S cameras from a range of makers and the Sony I have is the worst of them with a Nikon the best (none are great)....I am no Sony fanboy, I am an A7s fanboy if you like because i can use it walk around at night with a Canon f4 TS lens and just shoot among other things 
The A7s WB is easy to change (who would have thunk it).
I love Canon gear (MOST of my mainly used lenses are Canon) and i am considering getting an RP for using some of them with AF over MF on my A7s (either that or an AF Sony portrait lens) but if I DO get the RP it will NOT be because "Canon colour is more accurate" because i do not think it is.
As for the R5, it may well be what it is being hyped as (I hope it is) but on past history I can understand people being sceptical.

There is a reason why people (real people not on video/photography forums) say they like Canon for VIVID colour.     The same with Fuji and Velvia and it was the same in the film days

Did  ANYONE said that?       What people ARE saying is that GOOD colour is subjective.      As for ACCURATE colour, well that is an ENTIRELY different argument and to me (my OPINION) the cameras with the most ACCURATE colour that I have used (accurate to what I saw when using them and not grading) was Sony and Canon has been close to the LEAST accurate (especially since people seem to like vivid colours from Canon..I pretty much always put lower Canon cameras into vivid mode) though no camera has had BAD colour.   
I keep looking for high end colourists saying what you have been but can not seem to find any.
Lastly, I find it funny you say you think people should use what they want, then  in the next breath putting down their choices.