December 20, 2014, 02:43:06 PM

Author Topic: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon  (Read 85955 times)

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 15223
    • View Profile
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #360 on: October 19, 2012, 09:16:19 PM »
neuroanatomist


 how about to receive 4 raw files  from me and  5dmk2 and d800,  same parameters regarding time, f-stop and base iso and test for your self how it looks regarding DR, noise, or it to much work for you ?
And the same with 1dx and d800 regarding noise/banding  in lower levels. ( I am calling your cards  neuroanatomist and I will do that as long you are ridicules DXO or my findings regarding sensors DR, noise,QE and FWC. And the same to you Jrista) Im shore that this will be  a new experience for you both here at CR.


You claim that you've been shooting professionally since 1984.  Since he died in 1980, and Sweden is ~1200 km from Austria, I presume you've never met Dr. Hans Asperger.  I wonder if you're familiar with the syndrome he described - the hallmarks are perseveration and poor social skills.  Sorry, these non sequiturs slip out from time to time.

Clearly, you are failing to understand my point. Let me try one more time, despite the foreknowledge that it's almost certainly a futile effort.  I don't want your RAW files.  I don't need to be convinced that the D800 has broader DR than the 5DIII or 1D X - it does, no question. Whether its 1.5-stops or 3-stops isn't relevant to me - more is more, and I'm not ridiculing anything.  My point is there is more to a good image than broad dynamic range.  Does it help, for certain scenes? Yes. Is it necessary for every scene?  No.  Is it meaningless in some scenes? Yes.  Would I like it if Canon sensors had more DR?  Yes.  Does that disadvantage outweigh all of the advantages that the Canon system has for me? No.

I believe that covers the salient points. Feel free to continue perseverating on this issue. I'm out.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #360 on: October 19, 2012, 09:16:19 PM »

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4062
    • View Profile
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #361 on: October 19, 2012, 09:46:22 PM »
neuroanatomist


 how about to receive 4 raw files  from me and  5dmk2 and d800,  same parameters regarding time, f-stop and base iso and test for your self how it looks regarding DR, noise, or it to much work for you ?
And the same with 1dx and d800 regarding noise/banding  in lower levels. ( I am calling your cards  neuroanatomist and I will do that as long you are ridicules DXO or my findings regarding sensors DR, noise,QE and FWC. And the same to you Jrista) Im shore that this will be  a new experience for you both here at CR.


You claim that you've been shooting professionally since 1984.  Since he died in 1980, and Sweden is ~1200 km from Austria, I presume you've never met Dr. Hans Asperger.  I wonder if you're familiar with the syndrome he described - the hallmarks are perseveration and poor social skills.  Sorry, these non sequiturs slip out from time to time.

Clearly, you are failing to understand my point. Let me try one more time, despite the foreknowledge that it's almost certainly a futile effort.  I don't want your RAW files.  I don't need to be convinced that the D800 has broader DR than the 5DIII or 1D X - it does, no question. Whether its 1.5-stops or 3-stops isn't relevant to me - more is more, and I'm not ridiculing anything.  My point is there is more to a good image than broad dynamic range.  Does it help, for certain scenes? Yes. Is it necessary for every scene?  No.  Is it meaningless in some scenes? Yes.  Would I like it if Canon sensors had more DR?  Yes.  Does that disadvantage outweigh all of the advantages that the Canon system has for me? No.

I believe that covers the salient points. Feel free to continue perseverating on this issue. I'm out.

wow, you are one piece of work

(not that I disagree with the latter few technical parts of your msg there)

Razor2012

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 635
    • View Profile
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #362 on: October 19, 2012, 09:49:41 PM »
neuroanatomist


 how about to receive 4 raw files  from me and  5dmk2 and d800,  same parameters regarding time, f-stop and base iso and test for your self how it looks regarding DR, noise, or it to much work for you ?
And the same with 1dx and d800 regarding noise/banding  in lower levels. ( I am calling your cards  neuroanatomist and I will do that as long you are ridicules DXO or my findings regarding sensors DR, noise,QE and FWC. And the same to you Jrista) Im shore that this will be  a new experience for you both here at CR.



You claim that you've been shooting professionally since 1984.  Since he died in 1980, and Sweden is ~1200 km from Austria, I presume you've never met Dr. Hans Asperger.  I wonder if you're familiar with the syndrome he described - the hallmarks are perseveration and poor social skills.  Sorry, these non sequiturs slip out from time to time.

Clearly, you are failing to understand my point. Let me try one more time, despite the foreknowledge that it's almost certainly a futile effort.  I don't want your RAW files.  I don't need to be convinced that the D800 has broader DR than the 5DIII or 1D X - it does, no question. Whether its 1.5-stops or 3-stops isn't relevant to me - more is more, and I'm not ridiculing anything.  My point is there is more to a good image than broad dynamic range.  Does it help, for certain scenes? Yes. Is it necessary for every scene?  No.  Is it meaningless in some scenes? Yes.  Would I like it if Canon sensors had more DR?  Yes.  Does that disadvantage outweigh all of the advantages that the Canon system has for me? No.

I believe that covers the salient points. Feel free to continue perseverating on this issue. I'm out.

It's like saying that the only way to take good pictures is shooting high ISO.
5D MKIII w grip, 70-200 2.8L IS II, 24-70 2.8L II, 16-35 2.8L II, 100 2.8L IS macro, 600EX-RT

jrista

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4814
  • EOL
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #363 on: October 19, 2012, 10:01:13 PM »
neuroanatomist


 how about to receive 4 raw files  from me and  5dmk2 and d800,  same parameters regarding time, f-stop and base iso and test for your self how it looks regarding DR, noise, or it to much work for you ?
And the same with 1dx and d800 regarding noise/banding  in lower levels. ( I am calling your cards  neuroanatomist and I will do that as long you are ridicules DXO or my findings regarding sensors DR, noise,QE and FWC. And the same to you Jrista) Im shore that this will be  a new experience for you both here at CR.


Miakel, you've been a "new experience" from day one. Your atrocious spelling and grammar is always an entertaining moment. You can try to claim "language barrier", but for someone who hangs out on a forum riddled with good English spelling and grammar, you should have learned a few things by now.

Yes, I absolutely DO ridicule your findings. Your "findings" are nothing more special than vastly underexposing your photographs in order to purposely create the worst possible scenario for any camera. Been there, done that...and so has the entirety of DPReview, and everyone else who hates Canon. It's old news. Everyone knows Canon sensors have ugly read noise. The thing of it is...that noise only exists in the bottom 0.05% of the signal, so unless you stuff the entire exposure into that 0.05%, or avoid ETTR when it could resolve the issue...like you've purposely been doing...no one will EVER experience the kind of noise issues you are trying to "prove" exist to the degree you seem to think they do.

No one has disputed that Canon sensors are noisier than Exmor. For that matter, no would would dispute that Nikon sensors are noisier than Exmor, or that all MFD sensors are noiser than Exmore. Every bleeding sensor on the face of the planet except Exmor is worse than Exmor. There isn't any ground-breaking news there, Mikael. You seem to think you've "discovered" something astounding. You have not. Your just repeatedly regurgitating the same old junk, over and over, like a spewed on broken record.

You've also entirely missed the point of my arguments...again from day one. I'll admit I'm not one to be particularly eloquent most of the time, but I don't believe my arguments were particularly obscure. You seem  to think I've been arguing that the D800 is not better than the 5D II, or 5D III, or 1D X, or any mashup of any number of new Nikon and Canon cameras released this year. I've never once argued that point. The point I've been arguing in general is that Canon cameras are not nearly as bad as the likes of you try to make them out to be. The point I've been arguing specifically in relation to DXOMark is that downscaling provides zero "benefit" in the grand scheme of things, thereby making an inflated "print dynamic range" or "landscape" score very misleading, and dangerously so (as it has and will continue to cause many gullible saps to dump their kit and jump ship when they have no need to.)

Neuro put it rather succinctly:

My point is there is more to a good image than broad dynamic range.  Does it help, for certain scenes? Yes. Is it necessary for every scene?  No.  Is it meaningless in some scenes? Yes.  Would I like it if Canon sensors had more DR?  Yes.

That is the collective point of CR members. If you refuse to accept that is our point, that's your problem. Don't go demanding we accept your ridiculous test images and insane shadow lifting as anything remotely resembling realistic on the side, though.



If you want some more respect, Mikael, your going about getting it all wrong. For one, you don't simply demand it. Respect is earned. Second, learn how to write. You come off like a three year old, language barrier or no. Respectfully, if you are a reasonably intelligent person who truly is interested in being respected, it isn't that difficult to really READ other people's posts and learn from them. You should be able to correct your own grammar and spelling mistakes by now (especially given how many posts you make on DPReview.) Finally, if you want to be given respect, show some respect yourself. You've been a jackass from the day you showed up on this forum, hand-in-hand with another jackass, TheSuede, your bosom buddy. You two need to learn a little respect before you'll be given any respect. Stop dissing everyone, stop ridiculing everyone, stop belittling everyone, show some respect by being attentive to people's need to read proper grammar and spelling (bad spelling and grammar just require that readers work harder to figure out what the heck it is you are trying to say).

To be frank, I don't like you. You came off and continue to come off as a raging jerk, lacking even a shred of respect for anyone else around you (while concurrently demanding respect from everyone else...) I am a debater, I debate hard, but that doesn't mean I disrespect everyone around me. I just like to debate when I think a point merits it. You, and TheSuede, both come off as plain and simply mean at times. So to be clear...I don't really like you. You could change my opinion of you...but the ball is in your court. Oh, and don't simply respond to this with something inane, like "Only the facts! Give me facts!"...it wouldn't be a win for you if you did...

jrista

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4814
  • EOL
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #364 on: October 19, 2012, 10:07:18 PM »
vem orkar läsa allt detta? vi kan ta det på svenska ,  god natt.

I love Chrome's "Translate to English" feature! :D

In English: who bothered to read all this? we can take it in Swedish, good night.

Nice evasion, Mikael. As I said, if you want respect, earn it. Evading that debate won't earn you anything. If you want to switch to Swedish, feel free...I have my trusty full-page translator at the ready.  8)

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4062
    • View Profile
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #365 on: October 19, 2012, 10:40:03 PM »
I'd rather correct information presented in broken grammar than misleading information wonderfully presented with perfect grammar and spelling.... don't judge a book by its cover.

Aglet

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1088
    • View Profile
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #366 on: October 19, 2012, 10:42:13 PM »
I'm just gonna repeat myself in this thread and say I went out last night to shoot night-city-skylines with a D5100 and D800 and used those lovely clean 100 ISO raw files to produce images that absolutely can not be done with the same single shot technique using a Canon body without the Canon produced image showing FPN that would completely wreck the shot.

Until DxO comes up with a way to publish Fixed Pattern Noise in a meaningfully comparable way this battle's likely to wrage on until Canon develops a better imaging system.

FPN is more the issue than absolute DR, is it not?
Yes, they're inter-related but I'll take a 10 stop DR camera with random noise over an 11 or 12 stop DR camera WITH FPN.

Since I happen to have a 13 stop DR camera WITHOUT FPN, and it's dark outside, I SHOULD go play with it! :)

canon rumors FORUM

Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #366 on: October 19, 2012, 10:42:13 PM »

bdunbar79

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2606
    • View Profile
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #367 on: October 19, 2012, 10:43:26 PM »
I'd rather correct information presented in broken grammar than misleading information wonderfully presented with perfect grammar and spelling.... don't judge a book by its cover.

Uh, NEWS FLASH!  We're way, way beyond the cover.
2 x 1DX
Big Ten, GLIAC, NCAC

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4062
    • View Profile
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #368 on: October 19, 2012, 10:59:27 PM »
I'd rather correct information presented in broken grammar than misleading information wonderfully presented with perfect grammar and spelling.... don't judge a book by its cover.

Uh, NEWS FLASH!  We're way, way beyond the cover.

30 pages may as well be the cover when the book has (by the time it will be all written and finished it seems) 30,000 pages  ;)

rpt

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2288
    • View Profile
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #369 on: October 19, 2012, 11:07:18 PM »
vem orkar läsa allt detta? vi kan ta det på svenska ,  god natt.
Bahai Bhai Mikael thanda dimaak thi vichaar kar. Asa raghla tar kasa chalel? Aapko Kya ham sub se itnee nafrat kyun hai? Tumi khoob beshee korcho.

 :)

Fyi, there are 4 languages there.

Kshama karen, mai ne galat likha tha. O aame theek korechi.
« Last Edit: October 20, 2012, 12:25:54 AM by rpt »

rpt

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2288
    • View Profile
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #370 on: October 19, 2012, 11:11:03 PM »
I'd rather correct information presented in broken grammar than misleading information wonderfully presented with perfect grammar and spelling.... don't judge a book by its cover.

Uh, NEWS FLASH!  We're way, way beyond the cover.

30 pages may as well be the cover when the book has (by the time it will be all written and finished it seems) 30,000 pages  ;)

:)

Imagination_landB

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 100
    • View Profile
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #371 on: October 19, 2012, 11:26:03 PM »
Michael risedal is SOOO over us because he knows another language than english. Sérieusement tu tappe sur les nerfs de tout le monde tu devrais aller jouer avec ton kodak et arrêter de déblaterer , c'est un forum pas une bataille sur qui a raison ou tort. T'es vraiment n'importe quoi. I think everyone here is getting tired of you and your useless arguments.
6D, Gripped 60D. 120-300 2.8 OS, 50 1.8, 8-16, 24-70 VC.

rpt

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2288
    • View Profile
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #372 on: October 19, 2012, 11:31:34 PM »
Michael risedal is SOOO over us because he knows another language than english. Sérieusement tu tappe sur les nerfs de tout le monde tu devrais aller jouer avec ton kodak et arrêter de déblaterer , c'est un forum pas une bataille sur qui a raison ou tort. T'es vraiment n'importe quoi. I think everyone here is getting tired of you and your useless arguments.
And we're on! Yes, I gave a sample of 4. So we now shift fron DR to LR (language range)  :)

canon rumors FORUM

Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #372 on: October 19, 2012, 11:31:34 PM »

Imagination_landB

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 100
    • View Profile
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #373 on: October 19, 2012, 11:31:43 PM »
Aaaaaaand for the topic, I can't wait to see if they can overcome their canon ''hate'' for once. I think we all know Nikon new cameras are great! but their numbers are a little offroad
6D, Gripped 60D. 120-300 2.8 OS, 50 1.8, 8-16, 24-70 VC.

Imagination_landB

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 100
    • View Profile
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #374 on: October 19, 2012, 11:33:25 PM »
Ha! looks like it's a game for him so why don't we all play to it  ;D
« Last Edit: October 19, 2012, 11:39:09 PM by Imagination_landB »
6D, Gripped 60D. 120-300 2.8 OS, 50 1.8, 8-16, 24-70 VC.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #374 on: October 19, 2012, 11:33:25 PM »