yeah i forgot the 70-200 test the found the version 1 better lol when everyone clearly knows how much of an improvement the version 2 is DXO sucks balls lol
Upvote
0
Why so much trust in DXO.
- Thread starter altenae
- Start date
- Status
Can any one tell me why we are having this discussion? I don't visit DXO for their test results. How about you?
Upvote
0
Astro said:
Canon-F1 said:
Astro said:
I would love to see how they perform the tests in Techradar cause apparently if you'd give 5 monkeys 5 crayons and a paper they would definitely get less random results(and given enough time they would get them right
. for those who havent checked the graphs in the link, here are some exquisite findings:- d700 & 5dII have the same snr @ 6400iso as @ 200iso
- you want the best DR out of a D700 or a 5DII jpeg? shoot @3200
- 5DIII jpegs has the same DR @ iso 50 & iso 25600
- 5DII raws have the same DR all the way from 100 to 6400iso
Its not the first time either, i seem to remember some olympus-related paranoid results some time ago that didnt had any relation with reality either
Upvote
0
victorwol said:
+ 10000000000000
Indeed this is what photography is all about.
Couldn't have said this better.
Upvote
0
DxO labs have their methods and their procedures. Some have said in the past they weighed more into their high ISO scores and now are weighing more into DR... I dont know how true any of it is... If you take it at face value, nikon has always bested canon in these tests for the last decade or there abouts... Quite frankly i'd be quite shocked if any Canon camera started testing higher than nikon in the foreseeable future, but it is what it is. Personally i take all these tests into consideration when it comes into purchasing decisions, but I weigh most my decisions on my eye test and usability. I had no issues whatsoever with the 5d2 sensor, but it's handling never sat well with me so i opted for the 7D for the longest time because I knew I could always get the shot with the 7D over the 5d2. IQ on the 7D was marginally acceptable to it worked for me and my clients have always praised my work. I dont need 14 stops of DR to make my clients happy nor do I wish to undertake extra post processing just to get extra pop. In the end, the 5d3 is the best of both worlds for me... Yes there are room to improve, there always is, but as long as the camera doesn't slow me down, i'm cool.
Upvote
0
My conspiracy theory:
I wonder if DxO is purposely picking the 8MP downsize option to boost Nikon scores. All nikon cameras that receive great scores have all had multiples of 8MP as the sensor output resolution. The 16MP D7000, 16MP D4, and 36MP D800. Since the DR calculation that Dxo uses is not based solely on the ratio of light to dark but only those values where a signal to noise ratio is below 0dB. I wonder if by perfectly dividing those numbers they are able to achieve a lower noise floor in the shadows enabling larger dynamic range numbers on paper. Notice the random Pentax K5 extremely awesome DR rating also contains a 16MP sensor. I also find it interesting that the $800 16MP Nikon D5100 has an equal DR to the Phase One...hmmmmmm. The Sony NEX-7 with its 24MP sensor (multiple of 8) and the 24MP D3x, 24MP Sony A580, also have top spots to both $40,000 medium format cameras known their dynamic range and all Canon bodies.
Can it really be a coincidence that EVERY top body in DR happens to have a MP count that is a multiple of the 8MP that DxO mysteriously uses for all of its calculations????
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Ratings/(type)/usecase_landscape
I wonder if DxO is purposely picking the 8MP downsize option to boost Nikon scores. All nikon cameras that receive great scores have all had multiples of 8MP as the sensor output resolution. The 16MP D7000, 16MP D4, and 36MP D800. Since the DR calculation that Dxo uses is not based solely on the ratio of light to dark but only those values where a signal to noise ratio is below 0dB. I wonder if by perfectly dividing those numbers they are able to achieve a lower noise floor in the shadows enabling larger dynamic range numbers on paper. Notice the random Pentax K5 extremely awesome DR rating also contains a 16MP sensor. I also find it interesting that the $800 16MP Nikon D5100 has an equal DR to the Phase One...hmmmmmm. The Sony NEX-7 with its 24MP sensor (multiple of 8) and the 24MP D3x, 24MP Sony A580, also have top spots to both $40,000 medium format cameras known their dynamic range and all Canon bodies.
Can it really be a coincidence that EVERY top body in DR happens to have a MP count that is a multiple of the 8MP that DxO mysteriously uses for all of its calculations????
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Ratings/(type)/usecase_landscape
Upvote
0
This is certainly not a conspiracy, but DXO is simply performing their tests to give you the end results shown. You cannot expect them to spend a lot of effort in testing without a solid business reason being involved somewhere.
Upvote
0
C
Canon-F1
Guest
fman said:
the nikon fanboy who works for DXO is hand selecting bad canon lenses.
it´s hard to find a bad exemplar but maybe he dropped it a few times.
Upvote
0
Canon-F1 said:fman said:
the nikon fanboy who works for DXO is hand selecting bad canon lenses.
it´s hard to find a bad exemplar but maybe he dropped it a few times.
I KNEW it! I say lets start a petition to require craig to sit in on the tests to verify the results are accurate! haha.
Upvote
0
Isn't the sensor just a small part of the whole package? Even IF the Nikon/ Sony sensor is lab tested better, who cares?
So the Nikon sensor is better. I like Canon's design, ergonomics, lenses, etc...
If you don't like the modern day sensors, go buy an EOS 1V with an interchangeable sensor (fuji, kodak & ilford have been making some nice ones for generations)- That camera is a beast!
I have a 5D mkii on the way & couldn't be more excited. I'm gonna take pictures with that camera, and I will have the lens cap off and I won't be shooting test charts or brick walls.
So the Nikon sensor is better. I like Canon's design, ergonomics, lenses, etc...
If you don't like the modern day sensors, go buy an EOS 1V with an interchangeable sensor (fuji, kodak & ilford have been making some nice ones for generations)- That camera is a beast!
I have a 5D mkii on the way & couldn't be more excited. I'm gonna take pictures with that camera, and I will have the lens cap off and I won't be shooting test charts or brick walls.
Upvote
0
N
nitsujwalker
Guest
dswatson83 said:
My math may be wrong (never has been my strongest point), but I don't think 36 is a multiple of 8... Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Upvote
0
Quite frankly I don't trust any claim by DXO that certain sensors or lenses are better than others. It looks to me like their results are fabricated more than they are measured. It does not help that their results do not compare well with other published test results or the reality found by many photographers. I also have severe doubts to their claims of being trustworthy. They are a company out to make money. This has nothing to do with providing trustworthy tests, better examples of which can be found at DPReview.
Upvote
0
N
nitsujwalker
Guest
Canon-F1 said:nitsujwalker said:
oh it is... 4.5 x 8 = 36
Oh silly me... Here I was thinking 'multiple' meant 'whole number multiple'
Upvote
0
AmbientLight said:
Actually, I find their charts to be very informative and definitely give me a good sense of what to expect from the copy of lens or body I receive when I buy.
Now the distilled numbers (the so called DxOMarks) are a different story...they really have no practical value beyond generating a bunch of buzz and chatter. Mission accomplished in the case of D800 vs 5D3.
Upvote
0
dswatson83 said:
Not flawed, just frequently misinterpreted. DxO's conclusions (i.e. overall and use case scores) are based on normalizationto an 8 MP image, and when you do that, you increase DR and decrease noise in proportion to the amount of downsampling. Thus, a 36 MP image (4.5-fold downsampled) will fare better than a 22 MP image (2.75-fold downsampled).
DxO's measurements, when you look at the non-normalized data, correspond more closely to your statement above, although perhaps the tipping point is closer to ISO 1000 or 1250, but here's what I mean:
Attachments
Upvote
0
skitron said:
Well for lenses not.
Glad I did buy the 70-200 version II instead of the better tested 70-200 version I.
Upvote
0
If you have ever dealt with French Companies, you might understand. They are good people, but they have a different culture and different way of looking at things than we are used to. We had to require some we worked with to use standard US test methods since theirs gave a answer that made their product look better than the US competition.
France, Germany and Europe setup the ISO standards, the whole world belongs, but its over balanced in favor of Europe because there are many small countries each getting a vote.
For example, Rumania has 693 Technical committee members while the USA has only 623,(France, Germany, and China have over 700) and its a similar number for the many small countries in Europe where members can often drive from home to attend meetings. Its due to cost and the USA keeping to SAE and ANSI standards. Small companies cannot afford to send committee members to Europe for a week or two of meetings when they are outnumbered 100-1 by european countries who want rules that heavily favor European Trade. Its very Political. I sent one of my engineers to represent our large aerospace company in a small technical field once, but its a losing effort, and mostly a education into how Europe use the ISO satandards for trade advantages.
France, Germany and Europe setup the ISO standards, the whole world belongs, but its over balanced in favor of Europe because there are many small countries each getting a vote.
For example, Rumania has 693 Technical committee members while the USA has only 623,(France, Germany, and China have over 700) and its a similar number for the many small countries in Europe where members can often drive from home to attend meetings. Its due to cost and the USA keeping to SAE and ANSI standards. Small companies cannot afford to send committee members to Europe for a week or two of meetings when they are outnumbered 100-1 by european countries who want rules that heavily favor European Trade. Its very Political. I sent one of my engineers to represent our large aerospace company in a small technical field once, but its a losing effort, and mostly a education into how Europe use the ISO satandards for trade advantages.
Upvote
0
+1 for the comment about French companies. They do have a distinct business culture as does any other country here in Europe.
Upvote
0
A
Astro
Guest
well if the USA or the UK had to decide over standards we had some crazy S___ standards no engineer with the right mind would want to use.
so i say.... thank good for the ISO committee!!
Mouthful about 1⁄2 fluid ounce (oz.)
Pony = Mouthful × 2 = 1 oz.
so i say.... thank good for the ISO committee!!
Mouthful about 1⁄2 fluid ounce (oz.)
Pony = Mouthful × 2 = 1 oz.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
