BennyR wrote:
Dang, gotta trade my 5D2 for a D7000. It scored higher you know.
Don't worry; according to DXO, photographers should be dumping their Nikon D3s in favor of the Pentax K5 too. The world has been turned upside down. Or maybe it's just DXO that's upside down...
Look pretty sweet, can't wait to see more reviews.
I understand not instantly believing everything you read, but let's not instantly disbelieve it because it's not Canon. Rumor has it, technology gets better every year...even Nikons.
It's real - looks like they have read noise at base ISO down to very low levels normally achieved at higher ISOs. This has been the reason that dynamic range is limited at low ISO (in particular, the 7D and 5D2 are affected by relatively low dynamic range at low ISO) for most DSLR sensors so far, and well, when you can push a RAW by 9 stops and get a noisy but usable picture, it's pretty revolutionary.
stargazer78 wrote:
Don't worry; according to DXO, photographers should be dumping their Nikon D3s in favor of the Pentax K5 too. The world has been turned upside down. Or maybe it's just DXO that's upside down...
Have you seen the output from the K5 because it looks very good at high ISO. Full sized samples were posted a while back @ ISO 12800 and I was amazed.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Have you seen the output from the K5 because it looks very good at high ISO. Full sized samples were posted a while back @ ISO 12800 and I was amazed.
The D7000 and K5 do appear to have amazing ISO100 and 200 DR, better than even the FF canons.
The SNR looks good too, although not as good as a FF canon.
The color sensitivity looks much better than the canon APS-C cameras.
But yeah the low ISO DR and the all ISOs color sensitivity appear to be breakthroughs for small DSLR sensors.
evilr00t wrote:
It's real - looks like they have read noise at base ISO down to very low levels normally achieved at higher ISOs. This has been the reason that dynamic range is limited at low ISO (in particular, the 7D and 5D2 are affected by relatively low dynamic range at low ISO) for most DSLR sensors so far, and well, when you can push a RAW by 9 stops and get a noisy but usable picture, it's pretty revolutionary.
lol, if you guys hop over to the Nikon forums everyone is raving nothing but excitement about how well the D7000 did on dxo. Here on the Canon forums is a whole different reaction. https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/953490
I think I've said this when DXO comes up and I'll say it again. I can appreciate the value of the graphs they generate. I am uncomfortable with the way in which they come up with a single number so summarize each graph but can deal with it. However the way in which they then come up a single number to represent the quality of a sensor is (without using four letter expletives) retarded. Whatever respect they have engendered in me by their precise methods of measurement have been dashed by their continued insistence to distilling that information into a single number.
The ridiculousness is exemplified when you compare the D700 to the D7000 (which has the bonus not getting emotions from brand loyalty involved) both of which end up getting the same overall score but which when you look at their graphs one would have a great advantage over the other depending on use.
All this said, what this does show is that the competition is making great strides in dynamic range at low ISOs and I hope Canon follows suit in their future bodies.
thedigitalbean wrote:
I think I've said this when DXO comes up and I'll say it again. I can appreciate the value of the graphs they generate. I am uncomfortable with the way in which they come up with a single number so summarize each graph but can deal with it. However the way in which they then come up a single number to represent the quality of a sensor is (without using four letter expletives) retarded. Whatever respect they have engendered in me by their precise methods of measurement have been dashed by their continued insistence to distilling that information into a single number.
The ridiculousness is exemplified when you compare the D700 to the D7000 (which has the bonus not getting emotions from brand loyalty involved) both of which end up getting the same overall score but which when you look at their graphs one would have a great advantage over the other depending on use.
All this said, what this does show is that the competition is making great strides in dynamic range at low ISOs and I hope Canon follows suit in their future bodies....Show more →
+infinity
DxO makes money off of pseudoscientific presentation of data in a way that grossly oversimplifies what quantitative analysis they do perform. Even assuming their collection methodology is correct, and their models are correct, their conclusions are worthless garbage. Any real scientist will tell you that.
I tried to buy some DXO software (boxed) here in the UK recently, and gave up in the end. Couldn't find anyone on the UK web who carried it. In the unlikely event that anyone from DXO ever reads this thread they might want to have a look at their distribution over here.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Have you seen the output from the K5 because it looks very good at high ISO. Full sized samples were posted a while back @ ISO 12800 and I was amazed.
That's no surprise, the K5 and D7000 use the same sensor.
