>>4498384Can you point out exactly what part of my post indicates that I shoot Sony or like Sony colors?
>>4498387>Color accuracy isn't subjective. Some brands exaggerate certain colors or mute colors more than others.That's right, and there's an objective metric for that called the sensitivity metamerism index. If you want to rank cameras based on that, be my guest. But it has nothing to do with SOOC JPG, where you instantly ruin whatever color accuracy you might have had the moment you install a 'vintage Kodachrome recipe'. Or are you suggesting that JPGfags shoot JPG for color accuracy? LMAO
>Sharpness isn't subjective. Some brands have a habit of blurring and adding fake edge enhancement to the image.resulting in actual detail loss.Okay? Just shoot raw then. Are you starting to see where your premise falls apart?
>Dynamic range isn't subjective.Some brands provide inadequate controls while others leave nothing to be desired.Your dynamic range as a SOOC JPG shooter is always going to be compressed dogshit by definition. Just embrace creative control and shoot raw. Don't be afraid of sliders, it's really not that hard to process a picture properly.
>It comes down to the quantity of options that the JPG engine provides, and the quality of their implementation. With a good JPG engine there's no need to shoot RAW since you get the results you want at the moment of capture.You are basing your entire value system on how well a camera performs a gimmick toy function for kids and beginners. I can therefore only assume you are a kid or a beginner or both, which tracks given your posts in this thread. Refer to global rule 2.
