I've been testing camera settings with sharpness, contrast and saturation a lot and both were taken with different settings. However the light was not cooperating with this test and that's why I thought it would be a perfect time to test it..

Which one of these 2 seems more natural and closer to the actual image in your opinion?

I vote number 1 to look more "natural".

Not wanting to complicate things but I'd vote #1 as more natural but #2 as better. #1 looks a little flat to me. However, I'm not there so I can't say which is more accurate. I'd be prepared to accept that either was a completely faithful reproduction of what you can see.

I felt that way too.. that natural doesn't actually mean better. The first one has sharpness on +1 and the second one has contrast on +1 instead of sharpness.

So I might just use the settings in the 2nd snapshot which were contrast +1, sharpness +0, saturation +1, noise reduction -2.

i agree with Martin, the #1 photo looks "flat," that is lacking in brightness, contrast, and a bit of saturation. In contrast, #2 is not much sharper, but it does have increased brightness, contrast, and saturation.

Using good post processing techniques, you can easily change #1 into #2. Here, in order of preference, are the features that most people judge first when viewing photos:

Sharpness
Brightness
Contrast
Saturation

Keep in mind that these adjustments are best made in post processing. For example increasing the contrast setting in your camera induces more electronic noise within the photo, earlier as the ISO setting is increased.

Sarah Joyce

I like #1 better...

I agree with Martin too.

#2 for the reasons mentioned above (better contrast and saturation) and no jagged edges on the curved gate caused by sharpening.

OMG I'm 20/20 and I did not see that!

Thank you Tulio for making me realize sharpness doesn't always mean better.