DXO Review of the 80D. It's progress... but it's no Nikon.

[ahsanford]

http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-80D-sensor-review-Dynamic-performer

Highest ever DR reported by DXO for a Canon camera of any sensor size.

Still 8 points lower 'Overall Score' to Nikon's roughly similar D7200, which DXO rates better than many Canon FF sensors. :

- A

 

[ahsanford]

Snapshot of the results, go to the link above for the actual tests and such.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

And they reported the DR with the base ISO of the 80D as ISO 64.

- A

 

[ashmadux]

Snapshot of the results, go to the link above for the actual tests and such.

- A

I tried some night photography with a 7d2 some time ago - color depth was abysmal. Low on color noise, but with those kind of results, who cares.

The 7d just has a miserable sensor history altogether, yet is still one of the greatest handling camera that has ever graced my hands, 5d3 notwithstanding.

"It's a trap!" - A. Ackbhar

 

[awinphoto]

Not another DXO/DR thread... this is why i steer clear from these forums when i can... not good for my blood pressure. lol

 

[AlanF]

The 80D sensor is rated far higher than that of the 7D II. But, for my purposes - iso usually set at 640 or more - the 7DII has better DR and slightly better S/N, and so would have a better DxO score for me.

 

[Refurb7]

I don't care about Nikon or DxO. Canon gets my work done.

 

[ahsanford]

The 80D sensor is rated far higher than that of the 7D II. But, for my purposes - iso usually set at 640 or more - the 7DII has better DR and slightly better S/N, and so would have a better DxO score for me.

Silly AlanF... DXO scores aren't for you.

- A

 

[ritholtz]

How does one interpret effect of base iso difference (64 vs 100) in their day to day use. 80d snr chart is almost same as d7200 and a6300. But they have close to 1 stop DR advantage even at high ISO compared to 80d. d7200 and a6300 are pretty good. They do have measured ISO close to 64 instead of 100.

 

[StudentOfLight]

The 80D is slightly behind the 6D in their overall image quality assessment, so their relative score appears to line up with real world use.

The D7200 has a very good sensor. In DXO terms 5pts equates to about a third of a stop advantage, so 8 points equates to about a 0.53-stop advantage. When looking at the measurements the total appears to make sense.

The D7200:
Colour depth (0.9bit more = almost double the available color discrimination)
Dynamic range (1.4Ev more = more than 1 stop cleaner shadows)
Sport/ISO (14% higher ISO performance = barely noticeable)

I am disappointed that the 80D overstates its ISO like the Nikon D5 does. The flipside of the argument though is that ISO64 is good for flash when battling full sun, especially since the camera can sync at 1/250s. This is 2/3 stop better than the 5D-III and a full stop better than the 6D when you factor in their respective measured native ISO and dynamic range. It is time to finally let go of my 60D...

p.s. I wonder if the D500 and 1DX-II are also overstating the native ISO sensitivities.

 

[Refurb7]

Not another DXO/DR thread... this is why i steer clear from these forums when i can... not good for my blood pressure. lol

#dxosucks

 

[Refurb7]

... they're, still, class-trailing performance on sensor readout, and, what DXO doesn't say, in CPU performance per watt and throughput.

Doesn't affect my photography one way or another. I just look at the pictures and they're good.

 

[Aglet]

... they're, still, class-trailing performance on sensor readout, and, what DXO doesn't say, in CPU performance per watt and throughput.

Doesn't affect my photography one way or another. I just look at the pictures and they're good.

Agreed, I still generate the best pictures with the Canon platform, in spite of the sensor.

In the grand scheme of things, the former, IE optics, metering, AF, UI implementation, color rendition matter more, but, Canon is a first class imaging company... I hold them to a higher standard than, "oh well, they're in the DXO crapper, again", I get a bit upset as it's a direct result of them dragging their feet with fab upgrades, which I understand the huge, huge cost associated with fab transitions, but still, common, I have high expectations from Canon. Nobodies perfect, and that sensor upgrade, which doesn't matter much, comes at a huge price/profit competitive advantage.

*sigh* Had to vent.

Edit:

I am happy to see them making progress; 24mp APS-C sensor, and better DR means they've moved to newer fab processes. It's a matter of time at this point for catchup.

This is great news. Glad to see the test results. Canon users finally have a crop body that can deliver much improved raw files... almost as good as the Nikon d5100 from 2011 and about the same as the D3200 from 2012 where the 80D actually trounces it at high ISO... by about 0.1EV @ ~ 8000 iso.

Ketchup they might, eventually.

a sort of glee mixed with sarcasm, can't help it. still glad I switched to mostly ABC in 2012

 

[Woody]

Hey, there's no mention of the Nikon D5! ;D

 

[ahsanford]

Hey, there's no mention of the Nikon D5! ;D

It'll be the D500 that gets compared against it; D5 is a FF, would be unfair to compare the two. DXO hasn't benchmarked the D500 yet or else they would've compared it.

BTW, I'll be very interested in the D500's performance as it (probably) represents Nikon's newest APS-C tech.

D500 just got posted today:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=30104.0

(Spoiler: doesn't quite make it to ISO 1.6M...)

- A