Nikon D5 Sensor Score from DXOMark

[ahsanford]

Found the conclusion most humorous.
Did not realize the 1DX MII is considered old now.

"Conclusion

Moving from a 16-Mpix to a 20.8-Mpix sensor is quite significant for professionals, and the improvements in high ISO DR are useful in a camera like this. In terms of sensor resolution, the Nikon D5 now matches the admittedly aging Canon EOS 1Ds Mk II, a camera still widely used for magazine features (think double-page spreads) as well as commercial photography. While it’s true that models such as the Nikon D810 (and the Canon EOS 5DS and SR) are arguably more suited now for that kind of work, the Nikon D5 nonetheless represents a tipping point in all-around capability. With its excellent sensor performance, phenomenal AF system, impressive burst rate and durable build, the Nikon D5 is clearly optimized to appeal to those targeted by the company’s marketing department, yet its capabilities should also entice other kinds of photographers, whether they own a Nikon D810 or not."

Um... 's' and 'X' are not the same letter.

This comment from DXO confused the hell out of people. I believe they meant the 1Ds Mark III, aka 1Ds3, which predated the 1DX, and it (like many Canon FF sensors) sat around 21 MP. I think that's the comparison they were trying to make.

1Ds Mark II, aka 1Ds2, only had 16-17 MP if I recall. So it's an older reference and they got the model wrong / had a typo.

#dxo #welledited #knowstheircanons

- A

 

[ritholtz]

Found the conclusion most humorous.
Did not realize the 1DX MII is considered old now.

"Conclusion

Moving from a 16-Mpix to a 20.8-Mpix sensor is quite significant for professionals, and the improvements in high ISO DR are useful in a camera like this. In terms of sensor resolution, the Nikon D5 now matches the admittedly aging Canon EOS 1Ds Mk II, a camera still widely used for magazine features (think double-page spreads) as well as commercial photography. While it’s true that models such as the Nikon D810 (and the Canon EOS 5DS and SR) are arguably more suited now for that kind of work, the Nikon D5 nonetheless represents a tipping point in all-around capability. With its excellent sensor performance, phenomenal AF system, impressive burst rate and durable build, the Nikon D5 is clearly optimized to appeal to those targeted by the company’s marketing department, yet its capabilities should also entice other kinds of photographers, whether they own a Nikon D810 or not."

I expect they meant the 1Ds Mk III, which has a 21.1 MP sensor and was launched in 2008.

(Because, you know, comparing the new 20 MP FF D5 to an 8 year old 21 MP FF 1-series camera makes so much more sense than comparing it to a the new 20 MP FF 1-series body...)

They both, just keep picking the context which suits their argument and showers praise. When I checked their SNR graph, D5 is behind 1dx in per pixel view. Surprisingly it is also behind in 8MP view. So they don't want to compare with 1dx. If SNR graph represents noise, how did D5 shows lower noise in studio screen.

 

[privatebydesign]

Found the conclusion most humorous.
Did not realize the 1DX MII is considered old now.

"Conclusion

Moving from a 16-Mpix to a 20.8-Mpix sensor is quite significant for professionals, and the improvements in high ISO DR are useful in a camera like this. In terms of sensor resolution, the Nikon D5 now matches the admittedly aging Canon EOS 1Ds Mk II, a camera still widely used for magazine features (think double-page spreads) as well as commercial photography. While it’s true that models such as the Nikon D810 (and the Canon EOS 5DS and SR) are arguably more suited now for that kind of work, the Nikon D5 nonetheless represents a tipping point in all-around capability. With its excellent sensor performance, phenomenal AF system, impressive burst rate and durable build, the Nikon D5 is clearly optimized to appeal to those targeted by the company’s marketing department, yet its capabilities should also entice other kinds of photographers, whether they own a Nikon D810 or not."

I expect they meant the 1Ds Mk III, which has a 21.1 MP sensor and was launched in 2008.

(Because, you know, comparing the new 20 MP FF D5 to an 8 year old 21 MP FF 1-series camera makes so much more sense than comparing it to a the new 20 MP FF 1-series body...)

They both, just keep picking the context which suits their argument and showers praise. When I checked their SNR graph, D5 is behind 1dx in per pixel view. Surprisingly it is also behind in 8MP view. So they don't want to compare with 1dx. If SNR graph represents noise, how did D5 shows lower noise in studio screen.

Don't worry, Rishi will be along shortly to say we are all fools with tin foil hats for even dreaming DPReview are biased, it all makes sense we just don't understand because we are too dumb :

 

[ahsanford]

They both, just keep picking the context which suits their argument and showers praise. When I checked their SNR graph, D5 is behind 1dx in per pixel view. Surprisingly it is also behind in 8MP view. So they don't want to compare with 1dx. If SNR graph represents noise, how did D5 shows lower noise in studio screen.

You're looking at a detail level when a superficial review tells you that they are cooking the books...

- A

 

[Mancubus]

For the first time on a new camera release I do not envy Nikon. Actually I'm quite glad I didn't switch.

There is no excuse for the camera to suck on all 3 measurements. And when I say "suck" I mean anything that isn't an improvement or at least on par with the previous bodies.

At this price range and at only 20mp it should perform AT LEAST as good as the d810 for Dynamic range and color depth. And at least as good as the D4S for high ISO.

I haven't tried a 1dx2 yet but I'm quite sure it will be better than the 1dx in all 3 aspects. I'm hoping that the 5d4 shows the same improvements.

 

[ahsanford]

For the first time on a new camera release I do not envy Nikon. Actually I'm quite glad I didn't switch.

There is no excuse for the camera to suck on all 3 measurements. And when I say "suck" I mean anything that isn't an improvement or at least on par with the previous bodies.

At this price range and at only 20mp it should perform AT LEAST as good as the d810 for Dynamic range and color depth. And at least as good as the D4S for high ISO.

I haven't tried a 1dx2 yet but I'm quite sure it will be better than the 1dx in all 3 aspects. I'm hoping that the 5d4 shows the same improvements.

Could you imagine if the 5DS outperformed the 1DX2 in each metric -- noise, DR and color? That's basically what a two year D810 has just done at half the price to the D5. (I fully appreciate the D5 can do backflips on so many other fronts, but at an IQ level, the testing says quite a bit.)

Yes, the DXO metrics are flawed / opaque / highly questionable. But someone else will pull a Bryan Carnathan and thoroughly beat up the D5 and stack it up against prior Nikon rigs with some kind of reproducible method and it's possible that they broadly/directionally back up DXO's findings.

You could read such a finding two ways: Nikon laid an egg or that D810 sensor is a one-off legendary advancement. I'm leaning more towards the former as Sony has followed up the D810 sensor with another solid offering in the A7R II.

- A

 

[Sporgon]

But DPR also sings a very pretty song about the AF in the D5/D500 so maybe that makes up for it when money is on the line ... I think people are going to miss that extra stop off ISO more tho.

What about the all important extra half stop of DR ?

 

[Skatol]

Found the conclusion most humorous.
Did not realize the 1DX MII is considered old now.

"Conclusion

Moving from a 16-Mpix to a 20.8-Mpix sensor is quite significant for professionals, and the improvements in high ISO DR are useful in a camera like this. In terms of sensor resolution, the Nikon D5 now matches the admittedly aging Canon EOS 1Ds Mk II, a camera still widely used for magazine features (think double-page spreads) as well as commercial photography. While it’s true that models such as the Nikon D810 (and the Canon EOS 5DS and SR) are arguably more suited now for that kind of work, the Nikon D5 nonetheless represents a tipping point in all-around capability. With its excellent sensor performance, phenomenal AF system, impressive burst rate and durable build, the Nikon D5 is clearly optimized to appeal to those targeted by the company’s marketing department, yet its capabilities should also entice other kinds of photographers, whether they own a Nikon D810 or not."

Um... 's' and 'X' are not the same letter.

This comment from DXO confused the hell out of people. I believe they meant the 1Ds Mark III, aka 1Ds3, which predated the 1DX, and it (like many Canon FF sensors) sat around 21 MP. I think that's the comparison they were trying to make.

1Ds Mark II, aka 1Ds2, only had 16-17 MP if I recall. So it's an older reference and they got the model wrong / had a typo.

#dxo #welledited #knowstheircanons

- A

You are correct, I read too quickly and clicked the link. The link in the article takes you to the 1DX MII Test and Review page. I'll be more careful to proof read next time.

 

[ritholtz]

They both, just keep picking the context which suits their argument and showers praise. When I checked their SNR graph, D5 is behind 1dx in per pixel view. Surprisingly it is also behind in 8MP view. So they don't want to compare with 1dx. If SNR graph represents noise, how did D5 shows lower noise in studio screen.

You're looking at a detail level when a superficial review tells you that they are cooking the books...

- A

It is like them trying too hard to justify the camera based on the their test methodology against their own numbers. Based on DXO sensor score, it is behind previous 2 generations D4 and D4s. They still praise it saying it is a worthy successor. When rebels score same, they titled it as "New ‘EOS for Beginners’ flagship DSLR offers no improvement in sensor scores". It is like they don't care their own score. Then Why bother calculating and printing it.

They compare with one camera in one sentence and switch to some other camera. They mentioned D4, D4s, D3s, IDX2, 1DX and Lieca. Then they threw in Canon EOS 1Ds Mk II to prove superiority of D5 and start talking about some magazines and print industry.

 

[Random Orbits]

But DPR also sings a very pretty song about the AF in the D5/D500 so maybe that makes up for it when money is on the line ... I think people are going to miss that extra stop off ISO more tho.

What about the all important extra half stop of DR ?

Well if you happily own a Canon camera then you wouldn't care about that extra half stop of DR, would you? if all you care about is AF accuracy and the D5/D500 is king of AF then what would stop you switching brand?

LOL, lenses!

 

[J.R.]

But DPR also sings a very pretty song about the AF in the D5/D500 so maybe that makes up for it when money is on the line ... I think people are going to miss that extra stop off ISO more tho.

What about the all important extra half stop of DR ?

Well if you happily own a Canon camera then you wouldn't care about that extra half stop of DR, would you? if all you care about is AF accuracy and the D5/D500 is king of AF then what would stop you switching brand?

LOL, lenses!

+1 ... The camera body is only one part of the equation.

BTW, king of AF? yeah I read it on the internet and so it MUST be true!

 

[3kramd5]

Well if you happily own a Canon camera then you wouldn't care about that extra half stop of DR, would you?

??

Care to share your reasoning?

 

[StudentOfLight]

I called it... like waaaaay back:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=28799.msg575560#msg575560

just saying

 

[ritholtz]

But DPR also sings a very pretty song about the AF in the D5/D500 so maybe that makes up for it when money is on the line ... I think people are going to miss that extra stop off ISO more tho.

What about the all important extra half stop of DR ?

Well if you happily own a Canon camera then you wouldn't care about that extra half stop of DR, would you? if all you care about is AF accuracy and the D5/D500 is king of AF then what would stop you switching brand?

LOL, lenses!

+1 ... The camera body is only one part of the equation.

BTW, king of AF? yeah I read it on the internet and so it MUST be true!

I checked out DPR autofocus bicycle test. Those pictures posted are not really that much better than 80d.
They make so much noise about 3d focus. When it comes to bicycle AF test, they wrote that it is not possible to use it. Trying to understand when can we use 3d/iTR focussing. Don't know why Canon is not aggressively pushing this functionality to lower models.

 

[J.R.]

But DPR also sings a very pretty song about the AF in the D5/D500 so maybe that makes up for it when money is on the line ... I think people are going to miss that extra stop off ISO more tho.

What about the all important extra half stop of DR ?

Well if you happily own a Canon camera then you wouldn't care about that extra half stop of DR, would you? if all you care about is AF accuracy and the D5/D500 is king of AF then what would stop you switching brand?

LOL, lenses!

+1 ... The camera body is only one part of the equation.

BTW, king of AF? yeah I read it on the internet and so it MUST be true!

I checked out DPR autofocus bicycle test. Those pictures posted are not really that much better than 80d.
They make so much noise about 3d focus. When it comes to bicycle AF test, they wrote that it is not possible to use it. Trying to understand when can we use 3d/iTR focussing. Don't know why Canon is not aggressively pushing this functionality to lower models.

I have NOT read DPR and don't intend to do so. That being said, from what I remember, they are unusual in testing AF and their conclusions don't match user experience. In one review, the reviewer was clueless as to how Canon's AF worked and gave a negative review that the camera does not focus well at all.

AF has so may variables that it's really difficult to tell which one is the "king". I buy something I can either (a) try myself and be comfortable with; or (b) learn from actual user experience by corresponding those who take good photos with the camera under consideration.

DPR's statements such as "king of AF" isn't something I would trust to make a buying decision, leave alone a switching decision.

 

[quod]

A worthy successor...with less low ISO DR than the APS-C sensor in Canon's 80D.

By whose measurement? Yours? Canon's? Where is the 80D review in DxO? Oh yeah, they don't have one.

 

[J.R.]

A worthy successor...with less low ISO DR than the APS-C sensor in Canon's 80D.

By whose measurement? Yours? Canon's? Where is the 80D review in DxO? Oh yeah, they don't have one.

Bill Claff has measured so. Check out the chart generated from his website.

 

[neuroanatomist]

A worthy successor...with less low ISO DR than the APS-C sensor in Canon's 80D.

By whose measurement? Yours? Canon's? Where is the 80D review in DxO? Oh yeah, they don't have one.

Bill Claff.

DxO is scheduled to support the 80D RAW format next month, so they'll have the data in DxOMark sometime after that. I doubt their 80D review will compare it to the D5, but time will tell.

 

[quod]

A worthy successor...with less low ISO DR than the APS-C sensor in Canon's 80D.

By whose measurement? Yours? Canon's? Where is the 80D review in DxO? Oh yeah, they don't have one.

Bill Claff.

DxO is scheduled to support the 80D RAW format next month, so they'll have the data in DxOMark sometime after that. I doubt their 80D review will compare it to the D5, but time will tell.

Per DxO, the D5 DR smokes the 1DX DR. I guess the 80D is better than the 1DX? Is that what we should conclude?

 

[IglooEater]

A worthy successor...with less low ISO DR than the APS-C sensor in Canon's 80D.

By whose measurement? Yours? Canon's? Where is the 80D review in DxO? Oh yeah, they don't have one.

Bill Claff has measured so. Check out the chart generated from his website.

Perhaps- but I'd rather the D5's performance from these charts. I don't need more dr at ISO100 (sure it could be nice, but I don't need it). I want more DR at ISO 6400-that's where I'm limited.