October 20, 2014, 11:13:12 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - aj1575

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 12
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: IQ comparison; or how meaningful is DXO
« on: September 06, 2013, 07:47:48 AM »

You do not really think that posting selected OOF crops of JPEGs with different noise reduction proves anything, do you?

Tell me which brand you want to see a winner, and I will post similar crops from IR proving that that brand is the best.

Two things here, dp uses different lenses. For Canon APS-C they use a EF 50mm f1.4 for Nikon the 50mm f1.4 AF-S and for the FF they use the 85mm f1.8 from each brand. They shot at f8. So the differencr in quality should be rather small (check the tests of these lenses at various sites, also DXOmark)

The OOF claim is understandable. I was thinking the same when I looked at the samples. The D600 looks worse in the poker card than the 70D. But I do not think that this is an OOF problem, for several reasons.
1. The 7100D and other Nikons show this problem, so either they focus many Nikon cameras wrong, but not the Canons; or the Nikon AF is not accurate enough...
2. This softnes does not appear on the whole picture, you just need to move down on dp-site tool a little bit to the black and white circle. This seems to be on the same plane, but it looks sharp enough to me.

So to me, this is not an OOF problem, the Nikon sensors just have a problem to resolve that properly.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: IQ comparison; or how meaningful is DXO
« on: September 06, 2013, 07:29:31 AM »
I think to say that DXO is complete nonsense isn't fair.

I did not say that DXO is complete nonsense, I said that the DXOmark score is nonesense.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: IQ comparison; or how meaningful is DXO
« on: September 06, 2013, 03:22:46 AM »
What I wanted to show is, that the DXOmark score is nonsense. Their measurements are nice, but even they lack information to conclude which camera makes the best pictures. Sure, there are some things that can be derived from the DXO numbers, but others not. One is for example noise; you can have the same amount of noise for two cameras, but to the human eye they look different, because of the patterns and the colors they appear in.

I also found the test interessting, because it even worked for myself, since I forgot most positions of the cameras, and also did a blind test (and I judged the pictures differently then when I knew from what camera they were).

My conclusion.
-The DXOmark score difference between the 70D and the D7100 is definitly not justified.
-The Fujifilm x-pro1 makes some nice pictures.
-The Sony a99 is a bit dissapionting, the D7100 and the 70D produce pictures that are about on the same level.
-FF is better, but not but the difference is not as big as I thought (the 70D was often rated higher than the D600 at JPEG).

I really tried to make a fair test; I took samples from colorcards to show noise performance at low ISO, I took parts with high contrast and some with details. So I think the comparison is quite fair. If it is meaningful to you, I don't know, this is up to you.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: IQ comparison; or how meaningful is DXO
« on: September 04, 2013, 02:52:36 PM »
Here is the comparison with the camera models and the settings of the pictures taken.

I leave it to you to judge your results; I will make some kind of statistics later.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: IQ comparison; or how meaningful is DXO
« on: September 04, 2013, 02:31:19 AM »
its just not possible to siply rank them as each row has different pixtures that have different qualitys better like colour sharpness and noise are not always equally good on each shot.


so depending on what you look for different photos might fit your need best.

Thanks, a very nice analysis.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: IQ comparison; or how meaningful is DXO
« on: September 03, 2013, 09:44:08 AM »
I like to see some more ratings, so that it makes sense to put the results into some nice graphs.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: IQ comparison; or how meaningful is DXO
« on: September 03, 2013, 04:12:15 AM »
Do you mean sort per row or sort once to pick the most pleasing one of the four cameras?

You can also only pick the best and the worst. What I like to do is a blind test; just look at the pictures, without knowing what camera it is, and what the settings were.

It is very interesting. I made the table, but I can remember the position of only a few cameras, so there is nothing else to do than just look carefully at the pitures, and rate them by what I see.

I think I will do a table with only the DXO mark attached to it, this would also be interesting.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: IQ comparison; or how meaningful is DXO
« on: September 03, 2013, 02:03:12 AM »
I will do a ranking.


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: IQ comparison; or how meaningful is DXO
« on: September 03, 2013, 01:32:24 AM »
Ok, I'll kick: :)
3A is the Canon 7D
3B is the Nikon D7100
3C is the Sony A77
3D is the Canon 70D
Did I kicked too far? ???

Mostly Wrong. Try to sort the rows from best to worst, I will post the pic the names on it soon.

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: September 02, 2013, 04:23:57 PM »
I made an interesting table to compare IQ of different cameras (the EOS 70D is also part of it). If you like to check it out, I started a new thread here:http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=16749.msg309137#msg309137

EOS Bodies - For Stills / IQ comparison; or how meaningful is DXO
« on: September 02, 2013, 04:19:58 PM »
Hello, I made a table with different samples from different cameras at different settings. I took the pictures from dpReview, and arranged them in 6 rows with 4 pictures each. The picture in each row are taken with the same setting (ISO, Raw or JPG). The pictures are mainly from Canon or Nikon cameras, but others are also included.

Feel free to rank the pictures in each row, or to just point a interesting things. I will post the picture with the settings and the cameras later.

You should download the picture to see it at 100%

The goal is not to spot the 70D. The idea is to rank the picture according to your impression, and then see later from what cameras they were.

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D vs D7100 ISO Comparison at 100%
« on: September 02, 2013, 03:58:35 AM »

The test means nothing if they were not exposed the same way, and there is no mentioning of that. Also, NR is on , one of the shots is misfocused, etc.

I do not agree with the active NR is a negative point about the test; it just depends what you like to test. Is it only the sensor, or the image pipeline as a whole, or the camera. Since I buy a camera, I'm interested what the camera ca do, this includes NR. If the NR withhin one camera is better than within another, than this is a selling point.

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D vs D7100 ISO Comparison at 100%
« on: September 02, 2013, 02:25:14 AM »
Ill be posting a bunch of tests between these 2 cameras. Im learning a lot of really interesting things, and so far it has been an absolute slugfest. The Nikon has been surprising me in positive ways, and then the 70D comes back and crushes the D7100 in others. Ill have a full write up available soon.

Check this out. No commentary on my part, decide for yourselves. Quick and dirty test with description of what I did here:


Thanks for the work you put in, but this is not really helpfull. These kinds of tests can be seen at dpReview easely. If you really like to make a test, then show us some real world examples, with decent quality (not like the ones of candles you posted, where some pictures are out of focus.

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: September 02, 2013, 02:22:26 AM »
I won a Photo Contest lately! My picture had a dynamic range 13,4EV at signal to noise ratio of 37,3dB. The second best only manged 12,9EV an 36,8dB.....

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: August 30, 2013, 07:45:30 AM »
The 70D...has not improved and is slightly worse than the 9 year old 20D. 


DxOMark measures sensors, but people buy cameras, not bare silicon sensors.  You can rehash DxOMark data until hell freezes over, it doesn't change the fact that Canon has been outselling Nikon for years, nor the fact that the 5DIII outsells the D800. The obvious conclusion is that 'better' sensors (where 'better' is defined as low ISO DR) have not helped Nikon or Sony sell more cameras.

I would even go further; it is not only a question of salesfigures, it also a question of the qualitiy of the camera. Sure the sensor is an important part, but the DXOmark numbers is somehow like playing topcard with cars, and the Nikon has the biggest engine with the highest torque. But this only shows part of the true real life quality of a car.
Sure, Nikon has some nice sensors at the moment, they are better in some aspects than Canon, and somehow this is reflected in the DXOmark score by a wide margin (the sensors in the Sony cameras are also suposed to be better according to DXO, but just compare them against Canon at high ISO and you realize pretty fast that the Canon sensor gives you better pictures in real life). This score system makes it "easy" for everybody to somehow rank cameras by a single number; this is easy, so everybody does it. But as I mentioned befor, it only shows a small part of the whole thing.
For example, to me it seems that Canon has the better chips, their Digic5+ does a great job when it comes to noise reduction in JPEGs, while the RAWs seem to look a bit noisier from Canon, they look better than the Nikons as JPEG (maybe Nikon shooters are all RAW shooters so JPEG is no priority).

So looking at the camera as a whole, I'm happy with what Canon does and how the pictures I got straight out of the camera look.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 12