MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => Photography Equipment => Cameras / Lenses => Topic started by: vonkara on November 17, 2008, 16:24
-
Interesting website where you can compare all camera brands and models by DXoMark? But also with color depth, dynamic range and low light iso.
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/DxOMark-Sensor
It seem very professional to me and without brands favouritism
-
hey.. vonkara, thx..
you are right, most reviews are slanted towards a certain brand. for that reason, i don't like to look at their reviews, because i already know what they are going to say . will check this one out. merci,
-
Excellent work Vonkara. Thanks.
-
Very Cool!
Thanks Vonkara,
AVAVA
-
EOS 50D has lower sensor score than 40D. I knew it. man! :'(
-
According to their website, the Canon's suck.
For cameras > $2500, both the Nikon D3 and Nikon D700 beat the Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III.
For cameras between $1000 and $2500, the Nikon D90 beats the Canon 5D.
For cameras between $500 and $1000, the Pentax K10D, Pentax K20D, Sony Alpha 350, Nikon D200, and Nikon D40X all beat the Canon 40D.
Makes me wonder how "unbiased" they actually are!
-
I'm not sure how good the site is in terms of anything. Nikon has the edge in everythign except colours for sensors. Its weird that Canon would have such sub-par sensors.
As well, its just a test doesn't incorporate anything else with the camera. The lens could be an issue in this test, as well as other stuff. Its such a difficult thing to compare. And it makes it so much harder to choose a system.
-
According to their website, the Canon's suck.
For cameras > $2500, both the Nikon D3 and Nikon D700 beat the Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III.
For cameras between $1000 and $2500, the Nikon D90 beats the Canon 5D.
For cameras between $500 and $1000, the Pentax K10D, Pentax K20D, Sony Alpha 350, Nikon D200, and Nikon D40X all beat the Canon 40D.
Makes me wonder how "unbiased" they actually are!
Why Nikon is in front could be that they have 12mpx on full frame sensors. That's make it easier to achieve high performance. For example the D200 is sometimes better than my D300. Normal because the D200 have a better pixel/frame ratio than the D300 (10mpx vs 12mpx on the same sensor size). It could also explain why the 50D have a lower score than the 40D (15mpx vs 10mpx on the same sensor size). Less pixels on a same area mean better performance in everything, but it doesn't make the other camera that worst. I noticed that my D200 was a bit better at high ISO, but I don't shoot at high ISO.
-
Also No lenses was used http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/DxOMark-Sensor/DxOMark-metrics
All the metrics are extracted from camera RAW-sensor data. Clearly, the image sensor is the camera body’s key component in determining image quality, so it is vital to provide an intrinsic assessment of the sensor’s RAW output quality independent from the camera’s optics, image signal processing, and RAW converter.
-
i think it's better without the lense. as like you said, the camera is relying on the efficiency of the sensor not the lense.
canon may have the best lenses in the market, at least i was told during the 35mm days. but now, with digital, it could be still true, but canon do a lot of noise reduction in their processing. you can see it with your own eyes if you shoot with both canon, pentax, nikon,
i like them all,as i used to owe all 3. so i am not angry if they tell me canon performs worst.
-
Also No lenses was used [url]http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/DxOMark-Sensor/DxOMark-metrics[/url]
All the metrics are extracted from camera RAW-sensor data. Clearly, the image sensor is the camera body’s key component in determining image quality, so it is vital to provide an intrinsic assessment of the sensor’s RAW output quality independent from the camera’s optics, image signal processing, and RAW converter.
Is that a quote or your assertion? Obviously the sensor plays an important role in overall image quality, but in my humble opinion, so does the lens. If you've ever done a comparison between an image taken with a kit lens, and one taken with professional optics, they're a long way apart in terms of color rendition, sharpness, vignetting, CA and flare.
RAW processing is also a very big factor - to simply apply equal raw conversion doesn't make any sense either - some sensors are geared towards shadow detail, others to protect highlights. Some are optimist at ISO 200, others at 100. Most of these scientific tests to tell you which camera is better are pretty useless - for every variable that they control, there are a dozen others that will make the results meaningless.
-
Also No lenses was used [url]http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/DxOMark-Sensor/DxOMark-metrics[/url]
All the metrics are extracted from camera RAW-sensor data. Clearly, the image sensor is the camera body’s key component in determining image quality, so it is vital to provide an intrinsic assessment of the sensor’s RAW output quality independent from the camera’s optics, image signal processing, and RAW converter.
Is that a quote or your assertion? Obviously the sensor plays an important role in overall image quality, but in my humble opinion, so does the lens. If you've ever done a comparison between an image taken with a kit lens, and one taken with professional optics, they're a long way apart in terms of color rendition, sharpness, vignetting, CA and flare.
RAW processing is also a very big factor - to simply apply equal raw conversion doesn't make any sense either - some sensors are geared towards shadow detail, others to protect highlights. Some are optimist at ISO 200, others at 100. Most of these scientific tests to tell you which camera is better are pretty useless - for every variable that they control, there are a dozen others that will make the results meaningless.
It's a quote from the link. I know lenses play a lot. But here we compare cameras. More specifically, camera sensors. These tests from what I know only give accurate information on a specific subjects. It's giving sensor performance result and not a complete review at all.
-
The optics!!!! its all about glass. Cameras come and go but the glass can be with you for a lifetime.
I remember fashion photographer David Bailey with a massive 8x10 inch viewcamera, his assistant had put on a Rodenstock lens but Oh! no Baliley wanted same focal length but a Schneider. This was a shoot down in Brighton. Bailey ordered a cab to drive up to London and all the way back to Brighton just to get his Schneider optics.
Ofcourse the sensors and your PP both in Raw and PS are important but great optics are the foundation of quality shots.
BTW. the new Nikons, 14-24 and 24-70, FX optics are true bona-fide quality. among the best Ive purchased after the Hassle SWC with the 38 mil Biogon.
-
I'm not sure how good the site is in terms of anything. Nikon has the edge in everythign except colours for sensors. Its weird that Canon would have such sub-par sensors.
As well, its just a test doesn't incorporate anything else with the camera. The lens could be an issue in this test, as well as other stuff. Its such a difficult thing to compare. And it makes it so much harder to choose a system.
well I find that very strange indeed, overwhelming majority would argue that its exactly the colors thats the hallmark of Nikon, wins all the time.
-
Also No lenses was used [url]http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/DxOMark-Sensor/DxOMark-metrics[/url]
That webpage doesn't state anything about lenses. How did you come to the conclusion that they didn't use lenses?
Also, how would you take a photo without a lens?
-
This is the third paragraph of the page linked
All the metrics are extracted from camera RAW-sensor data. Clearly, the image sensor is the camera body’s key component in determining image quality, so it is vital to provide an intrinsic assessment of the sensor’s RAW output quality independent from the camera’s optics image signal processing, and RAW converter.
I can't say that I exactly know how they didn't used lenses, but there must be a way to test the sensors before they put them in the camera. Only speculation
-
But some of their own photos of the testing process show a camera with a lens attached:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Technologies/Testing-protocols/Color-Sensitivity-protocol
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Technologies/Testing-protocols/Noise-protocol
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Technologies
-
Yeah it's right... But it doesn't look like regular Canon lenses. Maybe they used generic ones. But I'm not the one who tested this??? Sorry I can't answer
-
Without really going into exactly how and what they are testing, it seems that having more pixels hurts the test results. Perhaps a full frame 100 pixel camera could ace the tests, but what good would it be?
Still, it is nice to see someone trying to come up with some sort of testing standards.
-
this site caused some interest in the pentax forums as they rate k10d sensor better than k20d and I am yet to come across a single person who agrees (and who has used both)
Peter: dpreview also say canon 50d isnt as good for image quality as canon 40d but then with both sites you get down to tiny details... hmm but so do reviewers :)