Why so long on the DXOMark and DPReviews?

[moreorless]

If anyone is looking to "make sensors for DxO tests" then I'd say its Sony rather than Nikon, the D4 with Nikons own sensor in afterall follows Canon performance more closely with DR holding up well thoughout the lower ISO settings.

The D800 on the other hand follows the pattern of Sony's recent sensors with the DR declining steadly below ISO 100 which with the DxO criteria does tend to overplay its performance at bit.

[LetTheRightLensIn]

If anyone is looking to "make sensors for DxO tests" then I'd say its Sony rather than Nikon, the D4 with Nikons own sensor in afterall follows Canon performance more closely with DR holding up well thoughout the lower ISO settings.

The D800 on the other hand follows the pattern of Sony's recent sensors with the DR declining steadly below ISO 100 which with the DxO criteria does tend to overplay its performance at bit.

You got that in reverse it is the Sony Exmors where the DR holds up well in the low ISOs and the Nikon and especially Canon ones where the lines curves over and you don't keep gaining the expected stop better each stop you go below ISO800-1600 or so.

[moreorless]

If anyone is looking to "make sensors for DxO tests" then I'd say its Sony rather than Nikon, the D4 with Nikons own sensor in afterall follows Canon performance more closely with DR holding up well thoughout the lower ISO settings.

The D800 on the other hand follows the pattern of Sony's recent sensors with the DR declining steadly below ISO 100 which with the DxO criteria does tend to overplay its performance at bit.

You got that in reverse it is the Sony Exmors where the DR holds up well in the low ISOs and the Nikon and especially Canon ones where the lines curves over and you don't keep gaining the expected stop better each stop you go below ISO800-1600 or so.

It doesnt really matter how you state it, my point was that the DxO headline scores will tend to overstate the performance of a sensor who's DR declines in a steady fashion over one who's DR holds steady for longer.

Add to that of course that Sony hasnt produced a FF sensor with the extreme ISO range of the D3s, D4 and 1DX which DxO also do not take into account with their headline scores.

Just seems to me that thus headline marks are rather overused given that they are to some extent subjective, you don't for example see people throwing around photozone marks out of 5 in the same fashion.

[scrappydog]

Scrappy be a good dog and don't get yourself back in trouble. Companies routinely advertise who they work with. That does not imply any unethical or dishonest behavior as some here would posit.
If you don't believe in the integrity of their testing methods or of their business relationtionships just ignore them  but don't start some lame whisper campaign quietly implying what you won't openly say.

Your condescension is noted.  You need to tone down your language.  Facts are facts, Tracy.

[Wrathwilde]

To quote DxO's site: "Here is just a sample of our current customers:..." with a picture of Nikon's image below it.  I think it is fair to say that they have ties to camera and lens manufacturers because they are expressly advertising these businesses as their customers on their site.  Paste the link in a browser and look for yourself.  This isn't conjecture nor is it conspiracy theory; it is fact.

EDIT:
I created a PDF of the website.  See the attached.  Opening the page sometimes defaults to their Home page.

  Wrong. It means that several large companies find enough value in DxOMark products and services that they are willing to purchase them, and Nikon happens to be one of many. It's not advertising for Nikon, it's advertising for DxOMark. A lot of large companies list who their customers are, so what? It provides a reassurance for other companies who are looking at purchasing their equipment and services, and therefore further establishes their legitimacy. It doesn't make DxOMark beholden to Nikon in any way.

  A customer is a customer, either they find value in your products and services, or they don't. Nikon currently finds that DxoMark's equipment and procedures are helpful in their quest to make better sensors. If anything this makes Nikon beholden to DxOMark, not the other way around.

[PhilDrinkwater]

It doesn't make DxOMark beholden to Nikon in any way.

No. But it doesn't discount it either.

I doubt there's anything in the DxO / Nikon "connection" but to assume it is or isn't true (ie. to assume either side is true) is as random as taking the opposite stance.

The simple truth is this:
* Nikon pay DxO for "something".
* We don't know what it is.
* We don't know whether it gives Nikon any advantage.

Past that everything on BOTH sides is just guesswork.

[JR]

Past that everything on BOTH sides is just guesswork.
[/quote]

Maybe some educated guess  but well said!

[well_dunno]

Mark III results will be on DxO within the next few days it seems...

http://forum.dxomark.com/index.php?topic=720.15

[Invertalon]

I can't wait for the flood of D800 vs. 5D3 DXOMark results... (not!)