JeffreyG wrote in post #17247782
DxO objectively measures certain performance parameters of camera sensors and their objective measurements are quite reliable. The problem is, what they are measuring may or may not be of interest to you for what you shoot.
First off, note that DxO does not have an effective way to normalize their ratings between sensors of different sizes, or of different pixel densities. So the less alike any two sensors you compare the less comparable the ratings will be.
Well, yes, actually they do.
The measurements generally have two different categories, "print" and "screen". The latter is the pixel-peeper measurement that will be highly dependent on sensor resolution and size. The former is the "normalized" value you're looking for, and is really what you want to be using when comparing two different sensors, as it reflects what happens when you size the image to a fixed target (8 megapixels is what DxO uses).
There is even more detail to this if you are really interested, but I don't know how much of a digression you want here. But take this as an example. Canon and Nikon (Sony) sensors have about the same DR at high ISO levels. So if you shoot action in low light as I do, the sensors have about the same DR. But at low ISO, the Sony sensor has a much broader DR than the Canon sensor. So a landscape photographer would regard the Sony sensor as a lot better for DR and would see that reflected in the DxO rating. A sports shooter would find no real difference and would wonder why the ratings were not the same.
This is exactly why you want to be looking at the actual measurements, and not just the scores. The scores reflect someone else's view of the importance of the various measurements. But each person has their own set of priorities. The only way they can accurately use DxO's findings is to examine the measurements for themselves.