1st, 2nd, 3rd to Nikon in RAW image quality performance,

Seems Canon is no longer top doggie when it comes to RAW image quality, though the 1Ds Mk II and 5D Mk II put in good performances. Top spots go to D3x, D3, D700 Click

We've discussed this all over before, DxO does not actually rate the sensors based on ISO 12232:2006 standards for outputs in RAW formats. That means you should take it with a bathtub of salt and look at real world examples instead. In real world tests, 1dsmkiii squarely beats all three by a narrow margin, 5dmkII kicks the D3 and D700 out of the arena, and looks better than the D3x for anything above iso 400 (below that it's more or less a tie)

dxo = don't care.

jacobsen1 wrote in post #7084735
dxo = don't care.

Ditto. Gimme a D700 with an EF mount anyday, but not because of this dxo crap.

My favorites are that the D90 and A900 are better than the 1D Mark III.

Don't drink dxo's Kool Aid...remember Canon has its own sensor division.

condyk wrote in post #7084232
Seems Canon is no longer top doggie when it comes to RAW image quality, though the 1Ds Mk II and 5D Mk II put in good performances. Top spots go to D3x, D3, D700 Click

perryge wrote in post #7084788
Ditto. Gimme a D700 with an EF mount anyday, but not because of this dxo crap.

Where do I send you the bill for my replacement keyboard? I've just ruined mine with all the drool I made thinking about that..

basroil wrote in post #7084685
We've discussed this all over before, DxO does not actually rate the sensors based on ISO 12232:2006 standards for outputs in RAW formats. That means you should take it with a bathtub of salt and look at real world examples instead. In real world tests, 1dsmkiii squarely beats all three by a narrow margin, 5dmkII kicks the D3 and D700 out of the arena, and looks better than the D3x for anything above iso 400 (below that it's more or less a tie)

And "real world" examples conform to ISO 12232:2006?

AdamJL wrote in post #7085006
Where do I send you the bill for my replacement keyboard? I've just ruined mine with all the drool I made thinking about that..

AGREED!!

perryge wrote in post #7084788
Ditto. Gimme a D700 with an EF mount anyday, but not because of this dxo crap.

hahaha, youre killing me!!

condyk wrote in post #7084232
Seems Canon is no longer top doggie when it comes to RAW image quality, though the 1Ds Mk II and 5D Mk II put in good performances. Top spots go to D3x, D3, D700 Click

Why in the world would you waste the time and effort to post this. You know the response your going to get. God could say he uses Nikon, and the same crowd would then cry he is a false god. I am willing to bet in a blind test none of these people could pick out a Nikon or Canon image when printed.

Croasdail - I could not agree more.....

They also placed the 30D at #35, while the 20D is #26.
They just aren't testing correctly or something.

condyk wrote in post #7084232
Seems Canon is no longer top doggie when it comes to RAW image quality, though the 1Ds Mk II and 5D Mk II put in good performances. Top spots go to D3x, D3, D700 Click

yayy... at least my investment into D3 pay off due to this test.

seriously, who really care? There are plenty photographers that i know in Sol Cal area charging $4000/ wedding and still using D300 or Canon 5D. I guess we just have TOO MUCH time on our hand to do pay attention to this stuff.

Croasdail wrote in post #7085879
Why in the world would you waste the time and effort to post this. You know the response your going to get. God could say he uses Nikon, and the same crowd would then cry he is a false god. I am willing to bet in a blind test none of these people could pick out a Nikon or Canon image when printed.

I find the link humorous as I knew the Canon measurebators would be out to defend their cameras since the results from DxO were not in their favor.