DxOMark trashes the Leica M9 sensor

[Rienzphotoz]

People are using exposure bracketing to extend the Dynamic Range. This indicates to me that quite a few people think about DR at low ISO, and would like to have more of it without having to resort to exposure bracketing.

Both are relevant aspects of a camera for most users. Lens sharpness is thoroughly reviewed on the net. Autofocus is hard to review objectively, and sadly, we are often only fed the subjective opinion of some reviewer.
-h

I'm not sure why you're questioning my own thoughts about what I'm personally concerned with, and implying they're irrelevant.

My thoughts exactly ... Maybe he wants to covert us to DxO religion 

[CarlTN]

My thoughts exactly ... Maybe he wants to covert us to DxO religion 

Haha, no doubt!  I don't even disagree with DXO's findings...I just disagree with their desire to hold up Nikon as "the best" sensor...because they're weighting their entire score based on ISO 100.  I find I rarely shoot at ISO 100, unless I'm using a tripod.  Perhaps DXO should just change their name to "tripod marks the spot"?  Or maybe "ND filter/HDR marky mark"?

I love doing slow paced landscape work, but springtime really screams out for fast-paced wildlife work...or at least slow paced wildlife when it gets too dark for fast paced...haha.

For me, the issue is, choosing between 5D3 and 6D.  I'd prefer to spend less...and I've not tried the 6D yet.  However, the recent "Popular Photography" review said that the 5D3 preserved a higher percentage of its detail between ISO 6400 and 12,800...than did the 6D.  The 6D's detail fell off steeply above ISO 6400, where the 5D3's didn't see the falloff until above ISO 12,800.  Then there's the superior AF sensor and fps of the 5D3.  And supposedly the 6D can't AF in low light any better, if even as well...as the 5D3 (despite claims to the contrary, at least via the 6D's center point).  So if used 6D prices also see a big fall soon...all of this points me toward the 5D3.  (i.e., it would hold it's value better, and otherwise provide superior perfomance in every way.)  Time and my own trial and error will tell.

[CarlTN]

Haha, I never said HDR is "irrelevent to everyone", and it looks like your own ego is in dire need of getting over itself, and perhaps a trip to the corner to cry it out?

Since you imply you are blessed with HDR gifts, please post your best work here, right now, and allow me to critique it.  The proof will be in the seeing.  I promise I will be thoughtful and perfectly objective. 

[wickidwombat]

People are using exposure bracketing to extend the Dynamic Range. This indicates to me that quite a few people think about DR at low ISO, and would like to have more of it without having to resort to exposure bracketing.

Both are relevant aspects of a camera for most users. Lens sharpness is thoroughly reviewed on the net. Autofocus is hard to review objectively, and sadly, we are often only fed the subjective opinion of some reviewer.
-h

I'm not sure why you're questioning my own thoughts about what I'm personally concerned with, and implying they're irrelevant.

My thoughts exactly ... Maybe he wants to covert us to DxO religion 

Cult...
I think that's more correct

[Rienzphotoz]

People are using exposure bracketing to extend the Dynamic Range. This indicates to me that quite a few people think about DR at low ISO, and would like to have more of it without having to resort to exposure bracketing.

Both are relevant aspects of a camera for most users. Lens sharpness is thoroughly reviewed on the net. Autofocus is hard to review objectively, and sadly, we are often only fed the subjective opinion of some reviewer.
-h

I'm not sure why you're questioning my own thoughts about what I'm personally concerned with, and implying they're irrelevant.

My thoughts exactly ... Maybe he wants to covert us to DxO religion 

Cult...
I think that's more correct

Ha ha ha ha 

[Rienzphotoz]

Since you think I'm "fighting strawmen" why are you replying

Because you are quoting my posts.

-h

OK so you are the "strawman"!

[Rienzphotoz]

OK so you are the "strawman"!

What exactly do you want to contribute to this thread?

-h

You should ask the same question to yourself ... I get it that you like DxO and that it means a great deal to you or whatever and I respect your belief in DxO, but that does not mean you insist on calling others ignorant and impose your "religion" on others ... but if you insist on doing that, then you can expect a lot of people getting back at you like so many have done on this thread coz many of us DO NOT CARE about what DxO has to say ... but it seems like it is too hard for you to understand that.

[Rienzphotoz]

You may hate measurements or DXO or Nikon all that you want.

1. You seriously need to understand the definition of "do not care" and "hate" ... I never said I hate DxO ... looks like you are once again misguided by your assumptions.

2. I do not hate Nikon ... see my gear list below ... my everyday camera, lens combo is Nikon D7000 and 18-300 VR ... seems like misguided assumptions are your forte.

That does not give you the right to decide what will be discussed on a public forum, or how people will reply to your posts. If you feel bad whenever people mention "DXO", perhaps you should avoid actively clicking on a thread starting with "DxO..."?

You should practice what you preach. Like I said before, I respect what you believe in but insisting others are ignorant because they do not agree with your belief system is ________ well, better left unsaid
 

[Rienzphotoz]

Like I said before, I respect what you believe in but insisting others are ignorant because they do not agree with your belief system is ________ well, better left unsaid

No, I have explained clearly why I believe that you are ignorant: because you keep saying that you don't care about what DXO has to say.

Closing your eyes, putting your fingers in your ears and singing "lalala" is not a good way to educate your self.

-h

You clearly displayed, to everyone about, your utter ignorance by your misguided assumptions of my supposed "hate" of DxO & Nikon ... I think immature discussion and misguided assumptions seems to be your forte, so no point in discussing with you ... I'm outta here.

[Hobby Shooter]

That is not a tautology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tautology
"using different words to say the same thing, or a series of self-reinforcing statements that cannot be disproved because they depend on the assumption that they are already correct"

If a camera is allready asserted to be "good", then claiming that some measurement cannot change that assertion is, in my understanding, a tautology.

-h

Yes, but you are wrong in this case anyway. The statement is a general statement, nothing else.

[BrettS]

Like I said before, I respect what you believe in but insisting others are ignorant because they do not agree with your belief system is ________ well, better left unsaid

No, I have explained clearly why I believe that you are ignorant: because you keep saying that you don't care about what DXO has to say.

Doing the equivalent of closing your eyes, putting your fingers in your ears and singing "lalala" is not a good way to educate your self.

Now, if you actually read what DXO say, what independent sources find, and explain what you believe is wrong or irrelevant about them, my guess is that these discussions will prove more interesting.

-h

Flashing red light. Mikael Risedal sockpuppet warning.

[EvilTed]

Yes but their review of the new M 240 beats all the latest FF Canon's

I wouldn't put too much faith in DxO reviews, they only tell part of the story.
Cameras don't make pictures - lenses do and Leica is about the best available...

ET

[Albi86]

I don't know why people hate DxO so much.

Are you so surprised that Leica sensors are not that good? They put a 320K dot display on a several grands worth camera in an era where Rebels have 920K dot displays. People who buy a Leica are apparently not overly interested in these features, but this doesn't make DxO's findings less true. And the same is true for Canon's vs Nikon/Sony's sensors - just get over it.

It's like complaining because the Zeiss 100/2 MP costs double as much as tthe Canon 100/2.8 L - which also has weather sealing, IS, autofocus and 1:1 macro. People who buy a Zeiss lens are after different things from mere value for money and sharp pictures, and those things are not provided by other manufacturers. This doesn't make the Canon any less of an amazing lens, and doesn't make the Zeiss any less than a unique lens.

[Hobby Shooter]

Yes, but you are wrong in this case anyway. The statement is a general statement, nothing else.

You are certainly free to believe so, but I think I have supported my case.

-h

I don't believe, I know I am right. Next time you are better off to use words that you actually understand.

[sanj]

"Doing the equivalent of closing your eyes, putting your fingers in your ears and singing "lalala" is not a good way to educate your self."

Hahahahaha. So True!!!!
I do not know anything about DxO but I know this: every study or review is made by a person or a team of persons and the reader needs to 1. Know that it is a study which could have errors and 2. It is a study which certainly gives information.

In the learning curve we need to understand everything that comes our way (including DxO) and filter out what we need. We cannot disregard any information or clue that comes our way. At least I cant. I am enjoying piecing 'photographic clues' together in life.

I embrace all studies including DxO. Having said that I must add that I have not yet visited their website as I do not find myself technical enough yet. Soon I will. And I am sure I will grow post that: I am sure I will learn something by believing or disbelieving them. Both ways...

Cheers.