I'm just glad they used prints! I would love to have seen an advanced compact into the mix (e.g., RX100).
I often use in-camera conversion (Pentax, Fuji, Ricoh) or RAW+JPG (Panasonic) to see what the colours come out like. In the case of the Panasonic (which may come as a surprise), and the Fuji, I am frequently shocked at how good they are. With Fuji, if you back off the sharpness in camera, and apply to the JPG in LR, you are often done.
Two comments:
Lenses affect colour. Don't really know what they used.
Per comment elsewhere, selecting the applicable profile (e.g., "Portrait", or "Velvia", or even frankly auto mode, which would have selected these) may have changed the outcome significantly for each scenario.
Fun comparison, and I think it generated some buzz. The comment about the minor differences is valid - all modern cameras can take a really good shot.
---------- Post added 11-19-2016 at 10:09 PM ----------
Originally posted by stevebrot I seldom shoot JPEG, but when I have, that has not been my experience.
Seeing the full spread of images on the video, I was surprised at how close the cameras were to each other. As mentioned above, I generally shoot RAW, but in one specific situation, the in-camera JPEG was superior to what I could do with the RAW in Lightroom. See below from the K10D:
No out-of-camera processing.
Steve
I miss that CCD sensor at ISO 100 (in my case from the K200d). Stunning colours, as you have well and truly demonstrated!