650D Results on DxOMark

[elflord]

Hahaha ... nothing like hard cold numbers to shine some light on the emporers new clothes.

Yes, a company whose testing methodology places APS-C cameras ahead of medium format digital backs is a problem. Have you ever compared prints from the two?

What about prints at ISO 3200 ?

This is a simple case of the limitations of using a single number. Modern APS-C DSLRs are better at high ISO than medium format backs which don't go above ISO 1600 and are optimised for ISO 100 or lower.

But the medium format backs crush APS-C cameras on all measurements except high ISO performance. Anyway, this is all a bit of a red herring and a bit of a slimy attempt at ad-hominem -- going after the source with a shoddy half baked attempt at ridicule, instead of attempting to address the substance (that Canon's sensors haven't really improved a great deal)

Outclassed by 4/3 cams 

Yes, it appears DxO is for the clueless.

APS-C sensors are not that much larger than micro 4/3, based on sensor size alone you'd expect about 1/2 a stop difference in performance. So it's not terribly surprising that cutting edge micro 4/3 sensors (e.g. Oly OM-D which uses a Sony sensor) are better performers than the laggards (e.g. Canon)

[neuroanatomist]

... but at some point people should open their eyes to the fact that Nikon has basically dominated Canon for the past few releases.
...but for the rest of the world, it's pretty obvious Nikon is killing them.

Dominating and killing them how, exactly?  By losing dSLR market share to Canon for several years?  By consistently selling fewer dSLRs and lenses than Canon, year after year, for the past several years?

Canon sells cameras, not sensors, and they sell more of them than Nikon.

[heptagon]

... but at some point people should open their eyes to the fact that Nikon has basically dominated Canon for the past few releases.
...but for the rest of the world, it's pretty obvious Nikon is killing them.

Dominating and killing them how, exactly?  By losing dSLR market share to Canon for several years?  By consistently selling fewer dSLRs and lenses than Canon, year after year, for the past several years?

Canon sells cameras, not sensors, and they sell more of them than Nikon.

Where do you actually pull these numbers from?

[PeterJ]

"Nikon and Canon are as good as each other"

-- © 2006-2012 KenRockwell.com

[birtembuk]

Outclassed by 4/3 cams 

Yes, it appears DxO is for the clueless.

Right ! And how about all these data from cam-phones they have accumulated over the years? They said that the producers did not want the data published for now. Tell me, there couldn't be anything fishy, could it?

[Ivan Muller]

...the problem i have with 'jumping ship' so to speak is that who can afford that luxury ??...so imo nikon makes better sensors now, and the d800 and d800e are probably at the top of the heap...does that make my 5d2 bad ? no I dont think so, it just means that there are better cameras out there now...how much better though? One cannot quantify it...Canon also makes a superb 24ts lens, I just got one, it also makes a pancake, I also just got one, sure the new nikons look great, but so do the Sony's...so what to do? buy a whole new system everytime the competition comes out with something better? just doesn't make sense to me...so for now I am spending my money on lenses, the ones I have always wanted...buying any new camera now is not going to change my photography or put money in my bank...a new lens like the shift will, but not any new camera...so one day when the new megapixel canon comes or maybe the 5dIV then I will reconsider but for now I just cannot see how any of the latest 'male jewelery' offerings out there can replace what I have got...its simply good enough...not the best but 'good enough'...not one of my clients have ever complained about image quality or focus...yes perhaps my vision but that's not any camera's fault..personally I feel all the brands are good enough now to produce top class results,  what a great time to be a photographer! Some of my work can be seen here at...http://www.ivanmuller.co.za/blog

[dtaylor]

Did you notice that the Nikon D3200 scored an 81(the same as a 5DIII at roughly 4x times it's cost)?

Did you notice that the D3200 scored an 81, 3 points higher than a Hasselblad H3DII 50?

Do you know how stupid DxOMark looks for this? Do you know how stupid they look claiming the D3200 has better overall IQ and better DR?

Do you know how stupid people look when they cite DxOMark scores given the above?

You're telling me to trust a testing company that tests a Honda Civic and a Corvette ZR-1 and reports that the Civic is faster with more HP. Please...

While I don't take these sensor tests as the end all be all, I do think they give a decent idea of DR, ISO range, and overall sensor performance.

Say that after you've compared 24x36" prints from the D3200 and H3DII.

but at some point people should open their eyes to the fact that Nikon has basically dominated Canon for the past few releases.

Apparently they dominate $40,000 medium format systems as well 

I recently sold my 5DC and 24-105 and bought a D700 and 24-70. The image quality is significantly better, the bokeh better, low light is 3x better, and the AF is literally night and day, not to mention the overall user experience(after becoming accustomed to the change,) is much better, it is absolutely incomparable.

You're seriously comparing a 2005 camera to a 2008 one, and an f/4 lens to an f/2.8 lens? (High ISO is about 1 stop better, btw.)

If you're happy with Canon that's great, but for the rest of the world, it's pretty obvious Nikon is killing them.

I wish Canon would introduce a 50 MP FF body for $1,000 with 20 stops of DR and perfectly clean ISO 25,600 images. Not so much because I would enjoy that camera, but because it would send the Nikon trolls back to their forums 

[ankorwatt]

... but at some point people should open their eyes to the fact that Nikon has basically dominated Canon for the past few releases.
...but for the rest of the world, it's pretty obvious Nikon is killing them.

Dominating and killing them how, exactly?  By losing dSLR market share to Canon for several years?  By consistently selling fewer dSLRs and lenses than Canon, year after year, for the past several years?

Canon sells cameras, not sensors, and they sell more of them than Nikon.

Nikon, Sony  are increasing their shares while  Canon goes back.

[ankorwatt]

I would guess that a lot of the target market for the 650D are going to use incamera jpegs rather than RAWS.

For the remainder who shoot RAW, I'm sure they are confident enough with DPP or ACR to squeeze the best images out of the RAW data.

In practise, unprocessed RAWs have little relevance.  DXO mark seems like reviewing a car with the gearbox removed.

I know there are some on here who love to take photographs of charts, I personally don't.

I also have a bag of lenses which I don't wish to change, so I'll stick with canon.  My current cameras serve me well.  I understand RAW and how to get the best from them.  I have about 3x the resolution I really need.

No rush to switch or change.

For myself, I'll take DxO's essentially objective and quantitative results over random individuals' perception of reality any day.

-- show signature --

[Maui5150]

For myself, I'll take DxO's essentially objective and quantitative results over random individuals' perception of reality any day.

-- show signature --

Really.

So if you had a choice between 3 camera... The Nikon D3X, the Nikon D4 and the Nikon D600 which is the best camera of the lot?

According the DxOMark, the D600 is the best camera out of the lot.

Funny, but I would gather that if I selected 1000 Professional Photographers who shot Nikon and asked them to rank their choices, I am confident that very few would rank the D600 as the top camera of the lot. 

A test may be quantitative, but that does not necessarily mean it is accurate or relevant. 

[Canon-F1]

For myself, I'll take DxO's essentially objective and quantitative results over random individuals' perception of reality any day.

-- show signature --

Really.

So if you had a choice between 3 camera... The Nikon D3X, the Nikon D4 and the Nikon D600 which is the best camera of the lot?

According the DxOMark, the D600 is the best camera out of the lot.

well you don´t get what the DXOmark is about.
the best SENSOR.. not the best camera.


not that im saying the DXOmark makes sense to me in real life all the time.
especially when i look at the medium format cameras.

[neuroanatomist]

... but at some point people should open their eyes to the fact that Nikon has basically dominated Canon for the past few releases.
...but for the rest of the world, it's pretty obvious Nikon is killing them.

Dominating and killing them how, exactly?  By losing dSLR market share to Canon for several years?  By consistently selling fewer dSLRs and lenses than Canon, year after year, for the past several years?

Canon sells cameras, not sensors, and they sell more of them than Nikon.

Where do you actually pull these numbers from?

I'm basing my conclusions on DxOMark's Market Share Score.  The score is accurately measured, then normalized to the area of an average dSLR production factory floor, and the normalization results in Canon annual earnings that exceed the GDP of Japan.  While DxOMark's Overall and Landscape Sensor Scores are based on flawed analytical methods, their Market Share Score is fine, because it shows Canon is better.

[neuroanatomist]

Where do you actually pull these numbers from?

Oh wait, you wanted an answer that has actual real-world meaning, and not a DxOMark Score?    

See this linked thread for the data (and supporting links).

For myself, I'll take DxO's essentially objective and quantitative results over random individuals' perception of reality any day.

And yet, here you give us your random perception of reality:

Nikon, Sony  are increasing their shares while  Canon goes back.

And real reality shows a different picture than your reality.  See the linked thread above for the numbers.

[paul13walnut5]

@dtaylor

You're telling me to trust a testing company that tests a Honda Civic and a Corvette ZR-1 and reports that the Civic is faster with more HP. Please...

I would take a honda civic over a corvette anyday.  In fact strike that.  I'd take the Corvette and sell it and buy two honda Civics.

Here in Europe we like cars that can go round corners.

Give me a nice British B-road with a Honda Civic Type-R and a corvette, and see which car is 'faster'.

Of course on a race track with long straights there is no competition.

It's not all about HP or MP.

@ankorwatt

For myself, I'll take DxO's essentially objective and quantitative results over random individuals' perception of reality any day.

This could get really heavy.  How do you know any of this isn't just a cats dream? 

For myself, I'm quite happy with what I'm using.  I'm glad you are happy with what you perceive works well for you.  Great when it all works out like that, isn't it?

[dtaylor]

@dtaylor

You're telling me to trust a testing company that tests a Honda Civic and a Corvette ZR-1 and reports that the Civic is faster with more HP. Please...

I would take a honda civic over a corvette anyday.  In fact strike that.  I'd take the Corvette and sell it and buy two honda Civics.

Here in Europe we like cars that can go round corners.

If you think a Civic can out corner a ZR-1, you're on some really good drugs man