December 05, 2016, 02:16:35 PM

Author Topic: Why the DxO bashing?  (Read 67659 times)

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2198
Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« Reply #180 on: March 10, 2014, 10:05:54 PM »
Oh, and like many others, I think DxO's software is good (probably the best for noise reduction).

I'd argue for automatic distortion correction as well.

Well, when I asked about noise reduction software last year, I was lambasted for it.  According to many (on CR anyway), there's no such thing as noise reduction, only image softening.  I tend to disagree very much, even with the NR available from Adobe.  I've not tried DXO...perhaps if they offered it free to Canon owners in return for their bias against the brand, I would opt to try it out?

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« Reply #180 on: March 10, 2014, 10:05:54 PM »

Rienzphotoz

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3305
  • Peace unto all ye Canon, Nikon & Sony shooters
Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« Reply #181 on: March 11, 2014, 12:25:07 AM »
Oh, and like many others, I think DxO's software is good (probably the best for noise reduction).

I'd argue for automatic distortion correction as well.

Well, when I asked about noise reduction software last year, I was lambasted for it.  According to many (on CR anyway), there's no such thing as noise reduction, only image softening.  I tend to disagree very much, even with the NR available from Adobe.  I've not tried DXO...perhaps if they offered it free to Canon owners in return for their bias against the brand, I would opt to try it out?
I use noise reduction on many images, I guess some people would like to argue that it is not noise reduction and that it is is only "image softening", maybe it makes them look intelligent if they use an alternative word then what the software developer has chosen to name it ... I know some people call landing the flight a "controlled fall" coz it makes them look intelligent ... maybe they are just pessimistic people who cannot build any useful software or hardware but would like to come across as intelligent people with "clever" words to describe everything - or maybe they just want attention  ;D
« Last Edit: March 11, 2014, 12:29:57 AM by Rienzphotoz »
Canon 5DMK3 70D | Nikon D610 | Sony a7 a6000 | RX100M3 | 16-35/2.8LII | 70-200/2.8LISII | 100/2.8LIS | 100-400LIS | 40/2.8 | 50/1.4 | 85/1.8 | 600EX-RTx2 | ST-E3-RT | 24/3.5 T-S | 10-18/4 OSS 16-50 | 24-70/4OSS | 55/1.8 | 55-210 OSS | 70-200/4 OSS | 28-300VR | HVL-F43M | GoPro Black 3+ & DJI Phantom

infared

  • 5DSR
  • *******
  • Posts: 1254
  • Kodak Brownie!
Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« Reply #182 on: March 11, 2014, 04:28:51 AM »
Oh, and like many others, I think DxO's software is good (probably the best for noise reduction).

I'd argue for automatic distortion correction as well.

Yes...I'd agree...there lens correction is very good (unless you own Panasonic or Olympus lenses...no modules), but I would argue that NIK Define is just as good, if not better for NR.   I think DxO "Prime" is overrated and basically amounts to extremely time-consuming image softening....but I am open to hear from anyone with a more positive experience than I have had with it......
5D Mark III, Battery Grip BG- E11, Canon 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye, Canon 17mm f/4L TS-E, Canon 16-35mm f/4L IS, Sigma 20mm f/1.4 Art, Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art, Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 II, Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art, Canon 85mm f/1.2L,  Canon 100mm f/2.8L Macro, Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II...1.4x converter III

Rienzphotoz

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3305
  • Peace unto all ye Canon, Nikon & Sony shooters
Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« Reply #183 on: March 11, 2014, 06:42:38 AM »
It is so interesting to see all the excuses.
One company has  lower DXO scores due inferior read out and higher noise, less QE , lighter CFA . less good electronic  signal chain = older  sensor tech  that was at the peak 10 years ago  and before other companies start to make cmos sensors.
Now some people here  are busy with trying to trivialize measurements as DR, low read out noise, high color resolution because Canon can not keep up in the sensor development with others.
And that is what DXO shows today
There we go ::)
Canon 5DMK3 70D | Nikon D610 | Sony a7 a6000 | RX100M3 | 16-35/2.8LII | 70-200/2.8LISII | 100/2.8LIS | 100-400LIS | 40/2.8 | 50/1.4 | 85/1.8 | 600EX-RTx2 | ST-E3-RT | 24/3.5 T-S | 10-18/4 OSS 16-50 | 24-70/4OSS | 55/1.8 | 55-210 OSS | 70-200/4 OSS | 28-300VR | HVL-F43M | GoPro Black 3+ & DJI Phantom

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5437
  • posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« Reply #184 on: March 11, 2014, 06:45:04 AM »
It is so interesting to see all the excuses.
One company has  lower DXO scores due inferior read out and higher noise, less QE , lighter CFA . less good electronic  signal chain = older  sensor tech  that was at the peak 10 years ago  and before other companies start to make cmos sensors.
Now  some people here  are busy with trying to trivialize measurements as DR, low read out noise, high color resolution because Canon can not keep up in the sensor development with others.
And that is what DXO shows today
You don't get it.... They are bashing DXO in general. The flaws and bias apply to all manufacturers.
The best camera is the one in your hands

Roo

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 644
Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« Reply #185 on: March 11, 2014, 08:09:44 AM »
It is so interesting to see all the excuses.
One company has  lower DXO scores due inferior read out and higher noise, less QE , lighter CFA . less good electronic  signal chain = older  sensor tech  that was at the peak 10 years ago  and before other companies start to make cmos sensors.
Now some people here  are busy with trying to trivialize measurements as DR, low read out noise, high color resolution because Canon can not keep up in the sensor development with others.
And that is what DXO shows today
There we go ::)



Given the antagonistic writing style and that the member/posts have been removed I guess the serial pest that shall not be named has been back again lol  Good efficient work mods!
5Div, 5Diii, 60D,GoPro Hero 4, Canon 16-35 f4L, Canon 24-70 f2.8L ii, Canon 24-105 f4L, Canon 70-200 f2.8L is II, Canon 50 f1.8 STM, Samyang 14 2.8, Tamron 17-50 2.8 vcd, Tamron 90 f2.8macro, Tamron 150-600, Yongnuo YN-E3-RT, Yongnuo YN600EX-RT (x3), Nissin Di866 mkII

jrista

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5334
  • EOL
    • Nature Photography
Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« Reply #186 on: March 11, 2014, 08:28:26 AM »
It is so interesting to see all the excuses.
One company has  lower DXO scores due inferior read out and higher noise, less QE , lighter CFA . less good electronic  signal chain = older  sensor tech  that was at the peak 10 years ago  and before other companies start to make cmos sensors.
Now some people here  are busy with trying to trivialize measurements as DR, low read out noise, high color resolution because Canon can not keep up in the sensor development with others.
And that is what DXO shows today
There we go ::)



Given the antagonistic writing style and that the member/posts have been removed I guess the serial pest that shall not be named has been back again lol  Good efficient work mods!

Aye. He's been around for a while...he just kept his mouth shut until now. Wonderful...the cat is out of the bag, and you know what they say about herding cats...

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« Reply #186 on: March 11, 2014, 08:28:26 AM »

Eldar

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3049
    • Flickr
Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« Reply #187 on: March 11, 2014, 08:43:03 AM »
It's his second alias in three months. He was mikea in December. Edward (eml58) gave him a good beating and off he went. Reappeard as Nalle Puh (Swedish for Winnie the Pooh) and apparently he's gone again. Can't say I'll miss him. But on the other hand, he does stur up some good discussions  :P
Canonite and Zeissoholic ...

zim

  • 5DSR
  • *******
  • Posts: 1462
Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« Reply #188 on: March 11, 2014, 09:02:08 AM »
It's his second alias in three months. He was mikea in December. Edward (eml58) gave him a good beating and off he went. Reappeard as Nalle Puh (Swedish for Winnie the Pooh) and apparently he's gone again. Can't say I'll miss him. But on the other hand, he does stur up some good discussions  :P

true true, and his spelling is getting better

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5437
  • posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« Reply #189 on: March 11, 2014, 09:23:23 AM »
[Wonderful...the cat is out of the bag, and you know what they say about herding cats...

This is what they say about cat herding....

Cat Herders
The best camera is the one in your hands

Maui5150

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 564
Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« Reply #190 on: March 11, 2014, 09:47:46 AM »
My complaint has always been, the numbers, while calculated, are irrelevant, and I have never seen ANYONE provide any reasonable proof of meaning.

As a test:

Which would you rather own and which will provide a better picture:

Nikon D3s or a Nikon D3300

According to DXO Marks these cameras score the same. 

Is the D3s a better camera?
Will it produce better images?

If you chose the D3s, and since DXO gives them the same score, you have some 'splainin to do


J.R.

  • 1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1750
Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« Reply #191 on: March 11, 2014, 11:23:20 AM »
It is so interesting to see all the excuses.
One company has  lower DXO scores due inferior read out and higher noise, less QE , lighter CFA . less good electronic  signal chain = older  sensor tech  that was at the peak 10 years ago  and before other companies start to make cmos sensors.
Now some people here  are busy with trying to trivialize measurements as DR, low read out noise, high color resolution because Canon can not keep up in the sensor development with others.
And that is what DXO shows today
There we go ::)



Given the antagonistic writing style and that the member/posts have been removed I guess the serial pest that shall not be named has been back again lol  Good efficient work mods!

Wow! He was found out without having used "motive" in any of his posts? Looks like the mods have been working overtime!  ;D ;D
1DX II; 600D
17L TSE; 35L II; 40 STM; 50L, 85L II; 100 Macro; 135L; 200L; 300L; 11-24L; 24-70L II; 100-400L II; 18-55;55-250

rpt

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2626
Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« Reply #192 on: March 11, 2014, 12:19:35 PM »
[Wonderful...the cat is out of the bag, and you know what they say about herding cats...

This is what they say about cat herding....

Cat Herders
Hilarious!

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« Reply #192 on: March 11, 2014, 12:19:35 PM »

Sporgon

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3147
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« Reply #193 on: March 11, 2014, 12:53:23 PM »
You mean Whinnie the Pooh was He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named  ???     ?

BOY I am gonna get me one of those Zeiss Otus 58 1.4s !! Have you seen what that lens has done for his photography ?

Who said "gear doesn't matter" ?  :-X

Eldar

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3049
    • Flickr
Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« Reply #194 on: March 11, 2014, 01:09:57 PM »
[Wonderful...the cat is out of the bag, and you know what they say about herding cats...

This is what they say about cat herding....

Cat Herders
Hilarious!
+1000!
Canonite and Zeissoholic ...

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« Reply #194 on: March 11, 2014, 01:09:57 PM »