Canon EOS-1D X DXOMark Sensor Scores

[funkboy]

I think there's so much noise stirred up around DXOMark (no pun intended) because most people don't take the time to read what they're measuring & what the numbers mean. Also few folks use the "screen" button (the default is "print") to see what the raw output of the camera is capable of.

Shame about Canon's consistently lower DR figures; that's the primary thing keeping Canon's scores lower than Nikon over the years.

Lucky for us, they're all great cameras though

 

[Woody]

'DxO has no credibility'.... who says? You and a couple of others here who don't like the results they publish, and just don't understand that DxO CANNOT AFFORD TO BULLSHIT...

Anyway, the 1Dx is an absolutely unbelievably good camera. It's not made to get high scores, it's made to get fantastic results in almost impossible situations, especially low light of course.

I hope you see the obvious self-contradiction in what you wrote

 

[robbymack]

Gosh just think about all the pros that are going to need to sell all their gear just to get a d800 because is scored better in some arcane test :

 

[tron]

The ratio between the 1DX's low ISO score and the 5D3's low ISO score is 1.43.
The ratio between the size of the 1DX's pixel and that of the 5D3 is 1.11.
So quite clearly Canon has better sensor technology available to them than is present in the 5D3.

Damn I must sell my new 5D3 Oh wait the price ratio is about 2

 

[infared]

'DxO has no credibility'.... who says? You and a couple of others here who don't like the results they publish, and just don't understand that DxO CANNOT AFFORD TO BULLSHIT...

Anyway, the 1Dx is an absolutely unbelievably good camera. It's not made to get high scores, it's made to get fantastic results in almost impossible situations, especially low light of course.

I hope you see the obvious self-contradiction in what you wrote

Hmmmm....seems that his comment is very similar to the results from DXO...As in: all-over-the-place...heh..heh.....

 

[verysimplejason]

At least this brings hope to 6D. Maybe, 6D has a newer sensor technology than 5D3 and 1DX. Maybe, 6D will break Canon's policy of not introducing a better sensor in their newest, cheaper and lower-tier DSLRs. I'm keeping my fingers crossed. After all, for my requirements, the announced AF of 6D is enough for me (super center AF sensitivity). I'm just waiting if their sensor DR is better than 5D3. 5D3 and 1DX can beat 6D with their superior AFs for all I care. I just need a better DR and less banding for its sensor.

 

[tron]

At least this brings hope to 6D. Maybe, 6D has a newer sensor technology than 5D3 and 1DX. Maybe, 6D will break Canon's policy of not introducing a better sensor in their newest, cheaper and lower-tier DSLRs. I'm keeping my fingers crossed. After all, for my requirements, the announced AF of 6D is enough for me (super center AF sensitivity). I'm just waiting if their sensor DR is better than 5D3. 5D3 and 1DX can beat 6D with their superior AFs for all I care. I just need a better DR and less banding for its sensor.

This is highly unlikely. Also, if it happens it will be a bad joke. The camera with the best DR and lowest noise (hypothetically speaking of course) to have the least capable autofocus, fps, etc!!!

 

[neuroanatomist]

This is highly unlikely. Also, if it happens it will be a bad joke. The camera with the best DR and lowest noise (hypothetically speaking of course) to have the least capable autofocus, fps, etc!!!

Right. Because we were nowhere close to that with the 5D Mark II. :-X

 

[tron]

This is highly unlikely. Also, if it happens it will be a bad joke. The camera with the best DR and lowest noise (hypothetically speaking of course) to have the least capable autofocus, fps, etc!!!

Right. Because we were nowhere close to that with the 5D Mark II. :-X

Ooops you are correct!

 

[verysimplejason]

At least this brings hope to 6D. Maybe, 6D has a newer sensor technology than 5D3 and 1DX. Maybe, 6D will break Canon's policy of not introducing a better sensor in their newest, cheaper and lower-tier DSLRs. I'm keeping my fingers crossed. After all, for my requirements, the announced AF of 6D is enough for me (super center AF sensitivity). I'm just waiting if their sensor DR is better than 5D3. 5D3 and 1DX can beat 6D with their superior AFs for all I care. I just need a better DR and less banding for its sensor.

This is highly unlikely. Also, if it happens it will be a bad joke. The camera with the best DR and lowest noise (hypothetically speaking of course) to have the least capable autofocus, fps, etc!!!

Well, if it happens, it will not be the first. Not everybody requires that magnanimous, amazing and spectacular AF of 5D3 and 1DX. You know that if this happens, all canon owners will be benefited if not now then in the future because at least you know that Canon is continually improving their sensor technology. For me, even if I'm an owner of 1DX (only in my dreams), if they introduce a cheaper camera but with a better sensor, I'll not be bitter because I know eventually I'll be able to get that sensor technology soon.

 

[verysimplejason]

This is highly unlikely. Also, if it happens it will be a bad joke. The camera with the best DR and lowest noise (hypothetically speaking of course) to have the least capable autofocus, fps, etc!!!

Right. Because we were nowhere close to that with the 5D Mark II. :-X

Ooops you are correct!

 

[tron]

At least this brings hope to 6D. Maybe, 6D has a newer sensor technology than 5D3 and 1DX. Maybe, 6D will break Canon's policy of not introducing a better sensor in their newest, cheaper and lower-tier DSLRs. I'm keeping my fingers crossed. After all, for my requirements, the announced AF of 6D is enough for me (super center AF sensitivity). I'm just waiting if their sensor DR is better than 5D3. 5D3 and 1DX can beat 6D with their superior AFs for all I care. I just need a better DR and less banding for its sensor.

This is highly unlikely. Also, if it happens it will be a bad joke. The camera with the best DR and lowest noise (hypothetically speaking of course) to have the least capable autofocus, fps, etc!!!

Well, if it happens, it will not be the first. Not everybody requires that magnanimous, amazing and spectacular AF of 5D3 and 1DX. You know that if this happens, all canon owners will be benefited if not now then in the future because at least you know that Canon is continually improving their sensor technology. For me, even if I'm an owner of 1DX (only in my dreams), if they introduce a cheaper camera but with a better sensor, I'll not be bitter because I know eventually I'll be able to get that sensor technology soon.

That is correct. I believe however that for the moment (hmmm year or two?) the 1Dx at least will not be surpassed in high ISO performance.

 

[GuyF]

DXOMark is all very well but not everything that can be measured matters and not everything that matters can be measured (to quote some patent office clerk).

The question should really be - how many would trade their DSLR with all their bells and whistles and go back to shooting film or slide?

 

[Fishnose]

'DxO has no credibility'.... who says? You and a couple of others here who don't like the results they publish, and just don't understand that DxO CANNOT AFFORD TO BULLSHIT...

Anyway, the 1Dx is an absolutely unbelievably good camera. It's not made to get high scores, it's made to get fantastic results in almost impossible situations, especially low light of course.

I hope you see the obvious self-contradiction in what you wrote

Wow, you don't have a clue, do you. I write that the 1Dx is "not made to get high scores, it's made to get fantastic results in almost impossible situations".
In what way does that contradict anything else I wrote?

I'll write it again, to make sure you get it this time: Canon did not make the 1Dx to score one way or the other in any test, Canon made it to be an incredibly good camera at what it does. And Canon succeeded.

 

[verysimplejason]

DXOMark is all very well but not everything that can be measured matters and not everything that matters can be measured (to quote some patent office clerk).

The question should really be - how many would trade their DSLR with all their bells and whistles and go back to shooting film or slide?

Most of us knows that's true but if for example, I'm going to buy my first FF, of course I want the best bang for my bucks and requirements and thus some measurements are needed for comparisons. It's not only measurements btw but also reviews from users and photographers.

As for shooting film or slide, I'd go back as soon as I have more money and time to spend. As of now, I can't forego the comfort of shooting digital (just like most of us here). I am a programmer during weekdays, hobby photographer during weekends. Besides photography, I also want to spend time with my family. I've also got other hobbies besides photography. I hope that explains it.

 

[Viggo]

DxO can't tell me anything at all about the 1d X i don't already know. It's so far ahead in every way compared to any of the cameras I have ever tried. The mk4 was tons better than the 1d3, but there were still lots of things not perfect with it. The 1d X lacks the f8 focusing and the superlow light af lock and red lit up points. Those things doesn't matter to me, and everything else it just doesn't do better than anything else, it does it to perfection. A real tool I can trust for 100% of my pictures. Only eyes will capture a moment better..

 

[nightbreath]

... The 1d X lacks the f8 focusing and the superlow light af lock and red lit up points. Those things doesn't matter to me, and everything else it just doesn't do better than anything else, it does it to perfection. A real tool I can trust for 100% of my pictures. Only eyes will capture a moment better..

Unless the camera is in the high-speed mode

 

[Viggo]

... The 1d X lacks the f8 focusing and the superlow light af lock and red lit up points. Those things doesn't matter to me, and everything else it just doesn't do better than anything else, it does it to perfection. A real tool I can trust for 100% of my pictures. Only eyes will capture a moment better..

Unless the camera is in the high-speed mode

That is true. I was thinking about IQ..

 

[Larry]

'DxO has no credibility'.... who says? You and a couple of others here who don't like the results they publish, and just don't understand that DxO CANNOT AFFORD TO BULLSHIT...

Anyway, the 1Dx is an absolutely unbelievably good camera. It's not made to get high scores, it's made to get fantastic results in almost impossible situations, especially low light of course.

I hope you see the obvious self-contradiction in what you wrote

Wow, you don't have a clue, do you. I write that the 1Dx is "not made to get high scores, it's made to get fantastic results in almost impossible situations".
In what way does that contradict anything else I wrote?

I'll write it again, to make sure you get it this time: Canon did not make the 1Dx to score one way or the other in any test, Canon made it to be an incredibly good camera at what it does. And Canon succeeded.

+1 No contradiction!

 

[Woody]

'DxO has no credibility'.... who says? You and a couple of others here who don't like the results they publish, and just don't understand that DxO CANNOT AFFORD TO BULLSHIT...

Anyway, the 1Dx is an absolutely unbelievably good camera. It's not made to get high scores, it's made to get fantastic results in almost impossible situations, especially low light of course.

I hope you see the obvious self-contradiction in what you wrote

Wow, you don't have a clue, do you. I write that the 1Dx is "not made to get high scores, it's made to get fantastic results in almost impossible situations".
In what way does that contradict anything else I wrote?

I'll write it again, to make sure you get it this time: Canon did not make the 1Dx to score one way or the other in any test, Canon made it to be an incredibly good camera at what it does. And Canon succeeded.

So, according to you, (i) DXOMark results are accurate (ii) Canon 1DX produces fantastic results REGARDLESS of its DXOMark scores.

This means whatever DXOMark measures is USELESS since their results have no correlation to real world results. Correct?