For what its worth

idkdc wrote in post #17268642
I'm a bigger fan of Robert Cicala's (on LensRental.com's blog) cross-platform comparisons of lenses from different companies where he'll take the sensor completely out of the equation. Rental guy dealing with all sorts of equipment seems to have less bias than a testing company whose services are only hired by Sony or Nikon and not Canon.

But DXO has tests specific for the sensor. Their ratings of the different cameras might be biased, but their detailed tests are just pure data.

I also like Roger's ( not Robert ) tests, but I take in multiple sites before making any conclusions for myself. I also quite often rent before buying either a new camera or a new lens. Nothing like testing things out for yourself using the equipment under the conditions you shoot.

Hogloff wrote in post #17268386
Why does it seem to bother so many of you if some people choose to use other cameras than Canon? Rather than trying to learn about these other cameras, their strengths and weaknesses, you get defensive and resort to childish behavior.

Do not. You're mean and I'm taking my ball and going home.

I agree with what you say though. I don't care what you use as long as you are out taking photos. That's all that matters.

Hogloff wrote in post #17268649
But DXO has tests specific for the sensor. Their ratings of the different cameras might be biased, but their detailed tests are just pure data.

I also like Roger's ( not Robert ) tests, but I take in multiple sites before making any conclusions for myself. I also quite often rent before buying either a new camera or a new lens. Nothing like testing things out for yourself using the equipment under the conditions you shoot.

Yeah, Roger, whoops. Good call, trying is the best way to see for yourself. Completely agree on that.

I haven't really looked into their data too much recently (looked a long while back), but I think that a few people including Thom Hogan pointed out that they don't document their methodology. Haven't looked into it myself in detail, but I heard that sensorgen.info is a website that just displays the raw data, but then again, depends on methodology (if they're using just their own algorithms, those algorithms are tailored for the camera companies that hire DXO to test their sensors). Someone brought up Samsung as an example of a company that tailors its hardware to cheat specific benchmark tests, i.e. ramp up performance in bursts only when the test software is detected or something like that, I can't remember it exactly.

So it might be "raw data," but that the real-world application of that data and the conclusions you can draw from it might be undermined by how that data is exactly obtained, which so far from my reading seems like something that DXOMark doesn't explicitly outline like in an academic research paper that has to document methodology or else draw flak from colleagues.

Let's face it, people here are dismissive of DXO due to Canon sensors not scoring well. Once a Canon sensor starts scoring better and surpassing the competition than people will start accepting the science and validity of their tests. Until then people here will continue to shoot them down.

Come on, let's be real. Assigning an arbitrary score to anything is, as Hogan writes, pointless, just like ranking colleges, except in this case, how they get their results aren't documented (if it is, do explain to me how), whereas US News and Ranking will explain their methodology in depth (i.e. we'll rank USC higher this year b.c. we're weighting endowment more heavily this year). Even if one could argue that the data is there and at least they're measuring it, the score itself oversimplifies things in the same way a dpreview score will. Lenstips.com and places without scores that just do pros vs cons are more useful to a consumer than a score, even if they show MTF charts, spectrometer measurements, etc.

When it comes down to it, both bodies allow the user to make great photographs.

Get out and shoot. I have lots of fun with my lowly 7d classic and old 100-400L.
See my sig for pics.

CanonVsNikon wrote in post #17268690
Let's face it, people here are dismissive of DXO due to Canon sensors not scoring well. Once a Canon sensor starts scoring better and surpassing the competition than people will start accepting the science and validity of their tests. Until then people here will continue to shoot them down.

Or people just don't care and go with what they like. I'll be honest, I don't think I have ever been on that site more than once. I don't care that one may or not be better than the other. Canon is my choice because it feels good to me and in my hands and allows me to do what I need it to do. If the Nikon felt better then that would be my choice and so on and so on.

Go out and shoot whether you are using a 3rd hand 400d or a brand new Nikon D4s or you splurged and dropped $50k on a Hasselblad. Just get out and take photos.

The important thing to remember about DXO is the reason that they are doing these tests. The tests that DXO perform are designed to provide data for developing their post processing software. This is what drives their testing methodology, so they only do tests that support that end. Of course someone at DXO realised that they have a lot of data, and maybe the company can make some money from it. Either directly from selling it, or indirectly by giving it away to raise the company profile to sell more software.

The sensor tests if looked at individually provide some useful data, but the actual results are better looked at rather than the scores, even at this level.

DXO's lens tests though really give no data that can be used to measure the comparative quality of lenses from different manufacturers. All DXO lens test are carried out with the lens mounted to a camera body, so you would expect that the body with the sensor with the highest linear resolution would provide the winning lens. This though is not the case, because to assist the generally much lower resolution FF sensors the results are "normalised" by taking the total resolution of the sensor into account. 'X Line Pairs per Image Height' is a completely useless measure of a lenses resolution, and one in which in concurrent sensor generations the FF sensor will always win because it is so much bigger. What is useful to know about lens resolution is the actual resolution, in Line Pairs per unit length. The problem is that this can only be measured independantly on a propper optical test bench. This though is of no benefit to DXO's software development. There are several other things that only an optical test bench can measure, such as field curvature and decentering. These though are measurements that are of more use to a manufacturer or repairer of lenses. It is therefore unsurprising that Lens Rentals have recently invested the not inconsiderable funds in one. It will be interesting to see how lenses from different manufacturers compare when test on the test bench. This used to be the way that some of the better photography magazines used to test (or have tested) lenses as far back at least as the 1970's.

Alan

People like things simplified for better direct comparison. It´s much easier to say : "my camera has better Dxo ratings than saying " than "my camera has better this and this under these particular conditions, etc.."

For me, there is only one way : "two pure RAW shots from two cameras i want to see differences under same conditions, same FOV"

If 100% clients won´t notice the difference on images, it means it doesn´t matter.

the flying moose wrote in post #17268875
Or people just don't care and go with what they like. I'll be honest, I don't think I have ever been on that site more than once. I don't care that one may or not be better than the other. Canon is my choice because it feels good to me and in my hands and allows me to do what I need it to do. If the Nikon felt better then that would be my choice and so on and so on.

Go out and shoot whether you are using a 3rd hand 400d or a brand new Nikon D4s or you splurged and dropped $50k on a Hasselblad. Just get out and take photos.

But they do, DxO thread are the most active on POTN.

If people didn't care, we would have 2-3 responses than it would slowly die.

^^ They're most active because people question the value of what DxO provides, and the CanonVsNikonVsSony people always want to get their jabs in.

Déjà vu.

Nethawked wrote in post #17269819
^^ They're most active because people question the value of what DxO provides, and the CanonVsNikonVsSony people always want to get their jabs in.

Déjà vu.

The real question is would these same people be questioning the value of DXO if they ranked Canon cameras up high? I think I know that answer.

Sometimes, people look for sites that validate themselves or the equipment they choose, and ignore sites that challenge those choices ...

Personally, I read whatever reviews and testing tell me, then go out and test what I buy to see if it serves the purpose for which I buy it well. If it does, then I care less what others say about it - at least as a general statement.

Hogloff wrote in post #17269937
The real question is would these same people be questioning the value of DXO if they ranked Canon cameras up high? I think I know that answer.

monkey44 wrote in post #17269956
Sometimes, people look for sites that validate themselves or the equipment they choose, and ignore sites that challenge those choices ...

Personally, I read whatever reviews and testing tell me, then go out and test what I buy to see if it serves the purpose for which I buy it well. If it does, then I care less what others say about it - at least as a general statement.

To both of these responses, then Nikon users would be up in arms, and the Canon consumers who are easily persuaded / not technically aware or astute people would be happy, but the point is not what is being said and who is reacting to it, the problem is the opaque (nontransparent) methodology and arbitrary assigning of total scores. Should you immediately trust whatever medical study comes out (News at 11, studies show that chocolate/alcohol/toba​cco from this brand will extend your lifespan) without knowing how exactly the study is implemented (chocolate/alcohol/tob​acco pays company to test their products)? The chocolate or wine company might actually make great products, but not because DXOMarkChocolate/Wine/​Alcohol software tells you so. As far as I'm concerned, DXOMark is a black box unless you dig into their source code. That is an opaque testing platform, and one that wouldn't stand up to the requirements for academic research.

CanonVsNikon wrote in post #17269375
But they do, DxO thread are the most active on POTN.

If people didn't care, we would have 2-3 responses than it would slowly die.

POTN members represent a very small group of the camera buying public. I meant in general. When was the last time you were in a camera store and heard someone say, "I'd stay away from that camera if I were you, its dxo rating is not very good."

The general public just doesn't care enough to let that dictate their buying decision.