Thanks Nige!

PS Sproutey, it is obvious you are the one who choked.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Insights/More-pixels-offsets-noise!

[quote]
Noise measurements in RAW format are indicative of pixel performance, but the viewing conditions of the image must also be taken into account. To compare prints on a given format of cameras with different resolutions, it is more suitable to compute the equivalent SNR of a camera with a given reference resolution. For equal, normalized SNR, a high-resolution camera is still better than a low-resolution camera. While it is always possible to simulate a low-resolution camera using a higher resolution camera (since downsampling is easy), it is not possible to simulate a high-resolution camera from a lower resolution one other than by interpolating or inventing data.[/quote]

Bottomline, the 500D sensor is better since it is either equal or close to the D5000 sensor even with smaller photosites plus 3 more MP.

On a separate note: Canon, get your act together.

The transmission of light through the optics, the conversion of photons into charge in the imaging device, and the way that charge is read out, are all processes described by physics. More to the point, the analysis of the final image, which will contain the effects of whatever image processing algorithms the camera applies to the raw data, relies on proven statistical techniques which are used throughout the technical world in disciplines such as medical imaging and astronomy. In these fields, quantitative evaluation of the image has a real meaning (astronomers take pixel-peeping to new levels – but for good reasons). Many of the measurements provided by DxO adopt the same statistical approaches used in these fields. And some of these measurements have a direct relation to what we perceive as “image quality”.

What kind of “feel” an individual likes in a DSLR image is a matter of personal preference, and ultimately, personal preference is the *only* criterion that matters when choosing a camera for personal use. Perhaps this is what you’re trying to get at – I can’t tell from your posts – but if so, then yes, I completely agree – you should choose the camera you prefer, irrespective of what the reviews or specifications say. But people like to compare the performance of different cameras before buying, and unless you’re in the very fortunate situation of having access to all the models you’re considering, and time and money to make the comparisons, this means reading reviews and opinions. Here, personal preference is not always helpful, because by definition, it’s subjective – people differ in what they like about an image. So when reading reviews, we tend to look for consensus of opinion, or seek out reviews from particular individuals who are respected in the photographic community – though they themselves are usually applying their own preferences in a review. Therefore, having an impartial means of comparing camera performance based on a strict interpretation of statistics in a set of “standard” images is an extremely useful resource, and a completely valid method of making those comparisons. You don’t have to use it, and you might not like the answers you get when you do, but I don’t follow your argument against using physics to provide a metric of image quality.

I’m a Canon 10D user with a few lenses, planning to upgrade, and for financial reasons I really don’t want to switch to Nikon – so I’m disappointed that (for the kind of photography I like to do), Nikon currently has an edge. Cameras come and go, and that situation will change. But when a comparison doesn’t throw up the answer you want, I don’t think shooting the messenger, whether that be an independent reviewer or the methods adopted by a particular website, is a very intelligent response.

Dave