DXO claim 1DX2 new class leader

[ahsanford]

Taken from the CR homepage...

DXOMark has completed their review of the Canon EOS-1D X Mark II and has given the camera a sensor score of 88. This is the highest score ever for a Canon DSLR.

The thing is though, they haven't completed their review of the 1DX Mark II. They've completed their review of the sensor inside the 1DX Mark II. There's a big difference, and unfortunately an alarming number of people don't understand the difference (not saying CR doesn't, they obviously do). Some think that if the sensor inside of a camera is rated highly it MUST be a better camera than a lower scoring camera (sensor). Really unfortunate that some people are so sheep-ish.

Go to DXO's homepage: http://www.dxomark.com/

In the top right, they offer CAMERAS and LENSES. Click on CAMERAS and all you get are sensor reviews.

That is all you need to know about DXO.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

If curious, here are some head to head overall scores:

D5500: 84
760D: 70
750D: 71

D7200: 87
80D: 79

D500: 83
7D2: 70

D610: 94
6D: 82

D810: 97
5D3: 80
5DS: 87
5DSR: 86

D5: 88
1DX2: 88

In the roughly head-to-head segments listed above, this is the first time Canon has matched Nikon's score since... what, the 1Ds3 in 2007?

Rejoice! We're as good as someone else in a nonsensical metric!

- A

 

[RGF]

Amazing. Canon and Nikon are tied at 88 each (1Dx M2 and D5)

Looking at the details

Portrait (color depth):
- Canon 1Dx M2 24.1(bits)
- Nikon D5 25.1

Landscape (DR)
- Canon 1Dx m2 13.5 Evs
- Nikon D5 12.3

Sports (Low-Light ISO)
- Canon 1Dx M2 3207 ISO
- Nikon D5 2324 ISO

Maybe the 1 point difference in color depth equall everything else
Amazing Low-Light result

These are top line record.

If you look by ISO, at higher ISO the D5 tops the 1Dx M2 which accounts for the tie,

 

[RGF]

Of course, trying to understand DXO's overall score metric is tantamount to hitting oneself in the head with a hammer.

#ibuprofenplease

- A

I have no doubt that there is no formula.

I've seen an approximation:

DxOMark_Sensor_Score = 59 + 4.3*(ColorDepth-21.1) + 3.4*(DynamicRange-11.3) + 4.4*log2(ISO/663) -0.2

That is at a single ISO setting. What about across the range. How high will they go? They can not penalize too much for having ridiculously high ISO (D5 at 3MM) otherwise the D5 score would have been in the very low.

 

[ritholtz]

Surprising thing is, How close it is with D5 DR even at high ISO. It is only behind by 1/2 stop at iso 12800 and 25600.

 

[ahsanford]

That is at a single ISO setting. What about across the range. How high will they go? They can not penalize too much for having ridiculously high ISO (D5 at 3MM) otherwise the D5 score would have been in the very low.

Yet DXO had no trouble whatsoever declaring the Sigma 35 Art sharper than the 35L II -- because the Canon stopped down to f/22 and that pulled down its average compared to the Sigma, which only stops down to f/16.

#dxo #fairandbalanced

- A

 

[jebrady03]

That is at a single ISO setting. What about across the range. How high will they go? They can not penalize too much for having ridiculously high ISO (D5 at 3MM) otherwise the D5 score would have been in the very low.

Yet DXO had no trouble whatsoever declaring the Sigma 35 Art sharper than the 35L II -- because the Canon stopped down to f/22 and that pulled down its average compared to the Sigma, which only stops down to f/16.

#dxo #fairandbalanced

- A

That's actually not the case. I wrote them about those 2 lenses and they said that the scores are based on the best performing aperture, not some kind of (weighted) average across all apertures.

I know... Surprised me too.

 

[ahsanford]

That is at a single ISO setting. What about across the range. How high will they go? They can not penalize too much for having ridiculously high ISO (D5 at 3MM) otherwise the D5 score would have been in the very low.

Yet DXO had no trouble whatsoever declaring the Sigma 35 Art sharper than the 35L II -- because the Canon stopped down to f/22 and that pulled down its average compared to the Sigma, which only stops down to f/16.

#dxo #fairandbalanced

- A

That's actually not the case. I wrote them about those 2 lenses and they said that the scores are based on the best performing aperture, not some kind of (weighted) average across all apertures.

I know... Surprised me too.

Ugh. DXO claims the best aperture for just about every lens they test is wide open, which we all know is lovely for transmission but is an unqualified s---show for vignetting, sharpness, etc.

- A

 

[Marauder]

DXO Mark hates it. DXO Mark loves it. Who cares! It's DXO Mark! I'd call this meaningless...but that would be an affront to meaninglessness! :

Note: Not dissing the 1DX II -- I'm sure it's a superb camera and I've read some very impressive reviews. I just don't give a furry rat's @$$ about DXO Mark's opinion on the matter, one way or the other. *shrugs*

 

[Loswr]

Of course, trying to understand DXO's overall score metric is tantamount to hitting oneself in the head with a hammer.

#ibuprofenplease

- A

I have no doubt that there is no formula.

I've seen an approximation:

DxOMark_Sensor_Score = 59 + 4.3*(ColorDepth-21.1) + 3.4*(DynamicRange-11.3) + 4.4*log2(ISO/663) -0.2

That is at a single ISO setting. What about across the range. How high will they go? They can not penalize too much for having ridiculously high ISO (D5 at 3MM) otherwise the D5 score would have been in the very low.

Across the range is irrelevant. DR and color depth only matter at base ISO. DxO = Biased Scores = BS.

 

[Zv]

This is terrible news ..... What will we argue over now?

 

[ritholtz]

This is terrible news ..... What will we argue over now?

Over at DPR, they've already moved onto Hassy vs Sony, prior to the DXO results...

If Nikon would hurry up and do a MF mirrorless themselves, which is rumored, that lovefest will go 3-way, IE X1D vs A7RII vs Nikon thingy.

DPR praised D5 which is a Nikon DSLR. I guess once Nikon makes mirrorless, they will throw everything into that. Same DR thing they used to bash 7d2, used as advantage to D5 because they prioritized high ISO performance. D5 is labelled as setting standards and 1DX2 is considered as catching up. Looks like DXO did not get the memo. They declared 1DX2 new class leader.

 

[Loswr]

This is terrible news ..... What will we argue over now?

So because DxO publishes a good review of a Canon camera/sensor, whinging will stop?

Effectively what you're saying is that because DxO have been publishing bad scores & reviews of Canon cameras you've been hating on DxO but now that they've published a good one, you want to stop.

Doesn't it occur to anyone that the hating should have been directed at Canon and not DxO?

Hey dilbert, I think you missed something in Zv's post. I edited it to make it easier for you to apprehend, if that's even possible.

 

[Orangutan]

This is terrible news ..... What will we argue over now?

So because DxO publishes a good review of a Canon camera/sensor, whinging will stop?

Effectively what you're saying is that because DxO have been publishing bad scores & reviews of Canon cameras you've been hating on DxO but now that they've published a good one, you want to stop.

Doesn't it occur to anyone that the hating should have been directed at Canon and not DxO?

Hey dilbert, I think you missed something in Zv's post. I edited it to make it easier for you to apprehend, if that's even possible.

Gotta hand it to you: at least you don't have an impenetrably dry sense of humor.

 

[brianftpc]

"Canon cameras are known for high ISO noise performance, and the Mark II surpasses both the Nikon and Sony by nearly +0.5EV"

Then why the hell cant I see it...is mine broke????? Have I missed a firmware update?

 

[aceflibble]

LOL @ people trying to assign bizarre conspiracies, fictional biases, and persecutions to a technical test of a single piece of hardware inside a product.

New product is technically better than previous version. Shocking. Clearly, this kind of revelation is utter madness, and could only be the work of a shady, back-alley deal to advertise/slander. It's so obvious that only a hateful, bias, clueless, paid-off site would say that the new version of a product is quite good.

Careful, now, your tinfoil hats are slipping.

 

[Woody]

Sports (Low-Light ISO)
- Canon 1Dx M2 3207 ISO
- Nikon D5 2324 ISO

How to explain this:
"Although the 1D-X II shows significant increase in dynamic range at low ISOs in our dynamic range tests, high ISO Raw performance remains fairly similar to its predecessor, which is actually impressive considering the 1D-X II gains dual-pixel architecture for decisive video AF. Noise performance falls slightly behind the Nikon D5 (and even the Sony a7R II when normalized) at very high ISOs."
- http://www.dpreview.com/news/8090146652/canon-eos-1d-x-mark-ii-studio-tests/2

Wow, who is smoking what?

Or is that a side effect of Brexit (DPReview wrote the above before Brexit, while DXOMark gave their review after Brexit)?

 

[unfocused]

This is good news, but I do sort of wonder where they got a 1Dx II with a 24 mp APS-C sensor.

The Canon EOS-1D X Mark II is available now and will set you back $6,299 (USD).

• 24.2-Mpix APS-C CMOS sensor

Seriously, I've never been a DXO lover or hater. I'm glad a camera I just shelled out a lot of money for is highly rated, but honestly, I've never understood why people make such a big deal out of scores that usually vary by only one or two points anyway and by graphs that show only tiny differences between models.

 

[Pompo]

Re: why comparing to Sony 7II?

I wonder why the Sony A7II was chosen to be compared instead of a7sII? Is it for its resolution maybe?

 

[ahsanford]

Re: why comparing to Sony 7II?

I wonder why the Sony A7II was chosen to be compared instead of a7sII? Is it for its resolution maybe?

I guess the A7 II's 24 MP is 'close' to the 20-ish MP of the gripped rigs.

Honestly, the 1DX II should be compared to its predecessor and the Nikon and they should be done with it. This is a two horse market.

- A