One of the most common search results I get when comparing DSLR\'s is a website called Snapsort, which uses data collected by DxOMark to compare specs. I\'m wondering if these specs are actually meaningful in the real world.
Right now I\'m looking at the comparison chart for both of the newest entry-level DSLR\'s from Canon and Nikon (the 600D and D5100, respectively). According to Snapsort, the Nikon D5100 has:
\"More than 20% better image quality\"
\"Distinguishes more than 2.5x more colors\"
\"Has 2.1 f-stops more dynamic range\"
These claims seems a little odd, considering that both of these cameras are in the same class and released around the same time. Claiming that the Nikon has \"20% better image quality\" is pretty bold. Is it accurate through? Also, since I\'m primarily a landscape photographer, having 2.1 f-stops of more dynamic range seems pretty significant. That means if I shoot a scene with a large amount of dynamic range, I\'m going to get noticeably better results with the Nikon compared to the Canon. Or am I?
By the way, I\'ve read that the Nikon inherits the same sensor from the D7000, while the Canon inherits the same (or almost the same) sensor as the 7D. While I\'ve read that the D7000 has better low-light performance, the only measurement that really sparks my interest is the dynamic range.
One of the most common search results I get when comparing DSLR\'s is a website called Snapsort, which uses data collected by DxOMark to compare specs. I\'m wondering if these specs are actually meaningful in the real world.
Right now I\'m looking at the comparison chart for both of the newest entry-level DSLR\'s from Canon and Nikon (the 600D and D5100, respectively). According to Snapsort, the Nikon D5100 has:
\"More than 20% better image quality\"
\"Distinguishes more than 2.5x more colors\"
\"Has 2.1 f-stops more dynamic range\"
These claims seems a little odd, considering that both of these cameras are in the same class and released around the same time. Claiming that the Nikon has \"20% better image quality\" is pretty bold. Is it accurate through? Also, since I\'m primarily a landscape photographer, having 2.1 f-stops of more dynamic range seems pretty significant. That means if I shoot a scene with a large amount of dynamic range, I\'m going to get noticeably better results with the Nikon compared to the Canon. Or am I?
By the way, I\'ve read that the Nikon inherits the same sensor from the D7000, while the Canon inherits the same (or almost the same) sensor as the 7D. While I\'ve read that the D7000 has better low-light performance, the only measurement that really sparks my interest is the dynamic range.
Apr 23, 2011 at 01:19 PM
Previous versions of fd9_'s message #9523569 « DxOMark - Is it relevant? »
