Dpreview - fact, or fiction?

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by mageproductions, Feb 13, 2009.

  1. The overall theme of the site is as a schrine - holier than thou but seeming to welcome a fellow traveler (on the digital photo path) at the same time. The psycology, intended or not, worked on me. The fact that these guys have London as a place to shoot sample photos doesn't diminish their efforts. The graphs, etc, that appear on their site are to be found nowhere else (of which I am aware).
    Someone said, "All that glitters, aint gold."
    After reading their review of the 50D, their credibility in my mind has suffered greatly, to say the least. Now, to be fair, maybe their technology was having a bad bit day when they processed the 50D; mayhaps their machines - whatever they use to come up with the data on those graphs - were in a state of unrest. And maybe, just maybe they received a poor copy of the 50D... though how Canon could allow that to happen is beyond me!
    I hate it when I'm a chump. And I am, because I always took every character on that site as truth. After all, what do I know? What CAN I know? I've never even seen a lot of those cams... It must be the same, with you?
    Now many people have a 50D and, thereby, positive proof of the fallibility, of Dpreview. (Or, would that be the fallibility of their "techno" approach to reviewing a camera? Or does it matter?) As I have proven in the past few days - beginning from a neutral and inquiring position - the 50D is significantly better than the 40D in terms of picture quality and about the same, in terms of noise. I must assume that the rest of the people who bought a 50D have done the same (country-boy) research, and arrived at the same conclusion.
    So now the question is, what is the proper manner in which to reguard what is to be found, on Dpreview? I seldom execute a man - or even a web site (lol) - for a single mistake. Just a good, old-fashioned flogging... But then I have no way to be aware of other mistakes they may have made, as I do not buy every cam that becomes available! In other words, the 50D fiasco is the only one, of which I am aware. Were there more?
    Dpreview certainly has fallen, but perhaps not from grace?
    Where does Dpreview stand, now, in your perception?
  2. their 'review' is just an opinion and should be treated as such; I find it much more valuable to read actual user reviews instead and Photo.net is a great place to get them (I mean the forums); there are other user review sites and dpreview has them as well in addition to their technical review. cb
  3. I find Dpreview.com most useful for comparisons between the bewildering array of offerings in the digital camera market.It helps to sift the wheat from the chaff in as painless a way as possible by providing such things as the camera specifications side by side. So I see it as a reasonably neutral provider of information. Sites such as Photozone.de and Fredmiranda are maybe the places to look for more discriminating and partial reviews.
    The review seem carfeul and considered and in many cases reflect what I find if I then buy the product. I would rate it as 'Recommended',
  4. It's an opinion... something to listen to and push off of if needed.
    I don't always follow advice when I have good/clear reasons for my choices. My Dad warned me against Jeeps. I have two of them in the driveway. After he rode in one, he loved it.
    I'll look at the material available to me, decide for myself what meets my needs, and seldom have I felt any buyer's remorse (cognitive dissonance).
  5. Could you explain a little better "the 50D fiasco" you refer to?

    DPReview listed 30 "pros" on its 50D "Conclusion" page compared to only 7 "cons."

    The conclusion they reached at dpreview - ("We're by no means saying the 50Ds image quality is bad but it's simply not significantly better than the ten megapixel 40D. In some areas such as dynamic range and high ISO performance it's actually worse and that simply makes you wonder if the EOS 50D could have been an (even) better camera if its sensor had a slightly more moderate resolution." ) - was echoed by numerous other reviewers, almost all of whom agree that Canon really pushed the limit, and may have pushed too far, going with 15 megapixels instead of maybe 12. I know that Bryan at the-digital-picture.com - an all-Canon website - says he struggled with whether to settle on the 40D or the 50D for his crop-camera lens tests, so clearly the 50D was not an unqualified improvement for him either. Similarly, the reviewer at dcresource.com questioned whether the upgrade to the 50D was worth it, and he said in the end he decided to stay with his 40D because the 50D wasn't enough of an improvement.
    I think there's actually a widespread consensus that the 50D is a very, very good camera, but there is by no means a universal consensus that it's enough better than the 40D to make replacing the 40D with a 50D a no-brainer.
    Your mileage obviously varies from that consensus, but I don't think it's fair to single out just one site that disagrees with your personal experience and consider that website to be a "fiasco" when other reviewers disagree with you also.
  6. but there is by no means a universal consensus that it's enough better than the 40D to make replacing the 40D with a 50D a no-brainer.​
    To be fair, I think that is pretty common for camera lines that recieve regular "upgrades". The same conversations were happening with the 20D and the 30D. Most of the time, there isn't enough of a quantum shift to make the decision a no brainer.
  7. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    DPReview has a consistent and reliable testing methodology. This is in distinct contrast to the typical review posted here, which is done by someone without any training, with no real methodology, and with no real experience testing a wide range of equipment; Bob Atkins is probably the only person posting here with any real training and experience in this area. As a result, the data from dpreview can be very useful if it addresses areas you care about. The interpretation is exactly that, but, once again, it tends to be consistent. You can use it as you want or not, but it is generally far more useful as test data than anything you read here.
    On the other hand, I don't think most reviews address the things that really matter, like how something feels when it's in your hands, which probably matters far more than anything in a review.
  8. Of all the digital camera review sites, DP Review is the best. Why? They test cameras under consistent conditions and present results based on both in-camera JPGs and converted RAW files, which some sites pretty much ignore. I don't always agree with their conclusions, and I wish they'd do more to evaluate the cameras as photography tools and not just file-producing devices, but that's very subjective and hard to do. I also wish they'd do a comparison of printed files since noise characteristics vary, and affect prints differently. But, overall, I like the site.
  9. I still love DPReview. As a matter of fact, I dare-say that review was one factor that helped change things for me. As a wedding photographer, I questioned the need for more than 12MP. I was happy at 10MP. We started with the 10D and went through all the ranks thereafter (and we have beautiful 16x24 prints from the 10D). I did like the jump to the 20D, the screen of the 30D was nice, but the 40D represented a significant upgrade (14-bit Raw for one). If I were buying today, I would most definitely get a 40D over a 50D as there is nothing about the 50D that does anything for me. Each camera has the same metering and focusing system- one just has more MP which more or may not (more CF cards, more hard drive space) be a good thing. All-in-all, I think it was a pretty good review and they did give the camera a "highly recommended".
  10. DPReview has a consistent and reliable testing methodology. This is in distinct contrast to the typical review posted here, which is done by someone without any training, with no real methodology, and with no real experience testing a wide range of equipment; Bob Atkins is probably the only person posting here with any real training and experience in this area​
    Test charts and timings aren't everything, in fact some would argue that they tell you little about what the using the camera would actually be like. I'd like to think I write from the viewpoint of a skilled, trained, experienced photographer actually using a camera for photography.
  11. I like dpreview but my priorities differ than theirs. For example they assign a heavy weight to 'default' settings while I prefer 'optimal' settings. Likewise they have a heavy weight on optimal image quality while I prefer ease of producing good image quality. However, that doesn't mean the reviews are bad - you just have to read them and pick out the facts that are important to you when judging cameras.
    Do you care about the weight; absolute resolution; dr range; jpeg quality; in body is; dust removal; grip; view finder; fps; colour; wb; built in flash; type of mount; ....
  12. DPReview is the closest thing on 24x36mm sensors to the Photozone.de for 15x22mm sensors. I like the latter better, and wish they'd test on a 5D or something. More subjective reviews are nice, but some of us are the old-time readers of Modern Photography (charts, etc.) rather than Popular Photography (more charts later, especially after Keppler took over, but more subjective on the whole).
    Of course, the English (not including Wales, Scotland, or Cornwall) photo magazines consider all American magazines to be overly techie and say, in effect, "I don' need no stinking charts" and "If it isn't Nikon, it's no good". At least one English magazine consistently found 6MP Nikons (when that was all there was) to be sharper than 8 or 10MP Canons. Of course, by the end of that period, their comparisons were based on 2x3" prints, as I recall.
  13. its an opinion, like all the other reviews, the 50D was probably more aimed at the 20,30d people that thought the 40D wasn't enough of an upgrade, people will complain no matter what. I returned the 50D because I think Canon went to far and jumped over the sweet spot of 12mp for APS-C, so thats just my opinion. I think when buying a camera you would base it on all available information, not just one.
  14. I remember when the Nikon D70 originally came out that the most common negative about it in all the reviews was that the viewfinder was too dark-not too good at the best of times and more of a concern for me as I have various eye problems which make photography more difficult for me. I went to my local camera store to see for myself and was pleased to find that, for me at least, the viewfinder was 'ok' and I bought it and used it happily for 4 years. If I had just based my decision on reviews, I would have missed out on what was at the time a pretty good camera. Reviews-especially technical reviews-are just opinions with some being more informed than others but still opinions. I am always more interested in what the end users have to say than the technicians and I also go back to both Modern and Popular Photography days. I think that reviews can be useful in helping cut down on the number of cameras one should go out and hold etc. but that's it-I would never buy/not buy on the basis of reviews alone. cb :)
  15. "The crux of the bisket, is the apostrophy..." (Frank Zappa)
    I like Dpreview as well, Frank, and your point is as gold. BUT
    "We're by no means saying the 50Ds image quality is bad but it's simply not significantly better than the ten megapixel 40D." (Dpreview.com)
    Semantics - the slayer of many; the friend, of none. In your perception of the word "significantly" then, Dpreview, would you be so good as to mention a camera that does offer "significantly" better image quality? Or, does that exist?
    I'm a guy who is getting old. I have completed the warrior path; realized that everything I ever fought was a part of my self, of which I would be rid. Right and wrong are perceptions, and absolutes, most certainly not! I grant to each of you the right to perceive, as you will! I don't suppose that maybe you would reciprocate... NAH!
    When I see two images (printed, or not) one from the 40D and one from the 50D, I see a difference immediately. Ah, but just what IS that difference? You need to look very closely to see the many little things that combine, to produce the overall effect.
    Is that difference "significant?" From the point of view manned by Joe Sixpack, probably not. I have wondered, at times, why I try so hard for customers that really and truly do not see the quality I achieve. And they don't - believe me.
    So... how shall we define, "significant," being a group composed of photographers? We won't. That definition will remain a personal, and individual perception. Still I believe that, among photographers, the difference will be perceived as significant. I have yet to hear from a single 50D owner who does not perceive it in that manner. And as for the rest, how can they know?
    And how is it that I, a person who owns nary a big red L, am shooting urban images that surpass those proffered as samples on Dpreview, and had the advantage of high-dollar glass? How is it that someone credible can say "The pixel density on the 50D sensor is past the point where more pixels can be useful." Has it occurred to them that Canon found a way to re-write whatever mathematic rule they are using as their basis, for their statement?
    Finally, could it be we are seeing market research, at its finest? Canon may believe it knows how this cam should sell, having unveiled several before it. Could they have asked Dpreview to put a mild curse on the cam, just to see the extent of the effect it would have?
    I have many more questions, than answers. May it remain, ever so.
    My GUESS (and it is just that - a guess, selected from the possibilities I can perceive because it does the best job of explaining what I have observed) is that Canon a) sells a cam that is better than the one Dpreview tested or b) this entire issue is caused by one person's perception of the word "significant."
  16. DPReview has a consistent and reliable testing methodology.​
    Which doesn't necessarily make it a good methodology, David.
    Their insistence on using ACR for all their conversions "to maintain a level playing field" sometimes has the opposite effect, partly because they routinely use Beta (read: not very good ) releases of the software in order to get the review out, despite the self-evident negative impact that doing so has on IQ.
    The 50D certainly suffered from this.
    Speaking personally I am absolutely satisfied (I've tested and tested this) that ACR (and Lightroom) in any flavour does a comparatively-to-very-poor job of converting my 40D (and 50D - although I've relied on RAW files from the 'net for my tests there) files compared with Capture One and Raw Therapee.
    The difference in noise is glaring and I'm not talking about noise reduction, I'm talking about the fact (and as far as I'm concerned it is a fact) that ACR seems to create noise that the others don't.
    The point here is that - if ACR inherently "suits" files from some cameras better than others (and I fervently believe that even at default settings, it does) - then by definition it isn't a level playing field, and tests using it as the converter are still biased, and in an unquantifiable, impossible-to-adjust-for way.
    Tests - I think - should use the camera manufacturer's own conversion software: any bias caused by that approach is a known quantity, to be factored into the final conclusion as appropriate.
  17. Sorry their review did not re-enforce your purchase decision. But, I do not think they are in business to cater to every new buyers ego. However, if your happy with the camera and can see the difference then that is the important thing. Their opinion as well as anyone’s opinion should not change what you see. I do believe that you find significant improvement in the 50D, which is great and I would hope that I would see the same thing.

    Your upset because they said that the 50D is not a significant upgrade to a 40D? If so, then I could see their point in that a person who bought a 40D 8 months ago would more than likely not want to re-make that purchase 8 months latter, and it would take a very significant change in IQ for most to do that. If it had been a couple of years, then the significance of the prior purchase would be less of a factor. I was very surprised in the short time between the 40D and 50D, I think that is causing a lot of the lukewarm views of the 50D.

    IMO they are one of the better test sites around, they are pretty consistent and I look at the comparisons and make my own opinion. I do read their conclusions, but I do not take their opinion over what I see and what is important to me. Maybe you should do the same. There are other reviews out there that show their product affinities to a great extent and it is hard to separate that from the facts, but IMO dpreview is pretty neutral in this regard.
  18. I remember when the Nikon D70 originally came out that the most common negative about it in all the reviews was that the viewfinder was too dark-not too good at the best of times and more of a concern for me as I have various eye problems which make photography more difficult for me. I went to my local camera store to see for myself and was pleased to find that, for me at least, the viewfinder was 'ok' and I bought it and used it happily for 4 years. If I had just based my decision on reviews, I would have missed out on what was at the time a pretty good camera.​
    Up to 2005 I had been happily using Nikon film cameras. I then looked into buying the D70, but read reviews about moiré effect in some of the shots. I probably should have just ignored it even ( since there were many favorable opinions out) though I have been extremely happy with my 20D.
  19. I enjoy using dpreview as well, but they do have at least one out of focus studio shot. I forget which one it was but I was dissappointed when I found it because it made me question the rest of their studio photos. However I have seen far more focus issues on the other popular test sites so I still give dpreview the nod.
    I also hope they have finally settled on one studio set up and I also hope they have learned to leave it permanently set up (just with a can of air near by to blow the dust off!). I also wish they would shoot the same view of their studio set up no matter the sensor size, so that all the enlarged reproductions are the same size on screen.
  20. DPR is NOT the best review site, at least not if you are technically inclined. That'd be Imaging Resources.
    DPR (specifically, Phil) was so incensed at Canon a few years ago, that he actually posted a rant/article! In addition, they unfairly compare 21MP cameras with 12MP cameras on a *100%* crop basis.
    Many a forum post has pointed out where a Nikon camera gets high points for the same feature (or a lesser feature) and Canon gets low marks.
    I read the forums. For *camera* details, I go elsewhere...
  21. You have to look at a number of sites to really get a good review on a camera or lens. I personally use dpreview, Bob Atkins (via photo.net and his own site), and Fred Miranda. The first one because as Jeff Spirer says, they are consistent, that at least gives me a baseline to start with. bob's reviews because he mixes tech and everyday reasons. And Fred Miranda's site because the reviews are done by actual users of the equipment. Although this causes a wide variety of answers, it does gie me added insight as to how the equipment fairs in pro and serious ametuers hands...and other intangibles that "testing" doesn't reveal
  22. Most (if not all) technical reviews today are based on looking at the image on a pixel by pixel base. Personally, I do not look at my images at that scale, so I do not care about conclusions drawn at that level.
    Lets be honest about it: if we can not make good images with (bascially) any DSLR today, it is our fault, not the camera's. The truth is that technology is oving on at incredible speed, and we are trapped discussing minute and most likely insignificant differences between cameras A, B, and C. While what we should be doing is trying to improve our skill sets and hone our vision. I don't want or need to be a computer technician, I just need to see if the camera fits my purposes and if it has good handling for the commands I want to use.
  23. Amen, Paolo. Dpreview hasn't fallen one iota in my opinion. Just because they didn't do a 100% gush about a particular camera isn't their fault. You think you have problems? Imagine you'd bought an EOS 5D:
  24. Nobody has mentioned lenses -- it is easy to see that the 50D outstrips resolution (especially edge resolution) of the Canon 50/1.4, and it's hard to believe that Canon makes a higher resolution lens. To me, this dpreview.com review indicates that it's end-of-the-line for APS-C cameras.
  25. Try and take a look at www.dxomark.com , where all the sensors RAW data have been tested. Here you can see that the 50D out-performs both 40D and D300 I terms of low-light performance. But it also shows that there have been made compromises in the design. But then again, the perfect camera does not exist...
  26. Dpreview has caused me no end of grief and relief. I would never buy a camera without checking their review first. Their reviews are still the most comprehensive and objective of any I've found. However, the affect of different lenses in their tests is barely mentioned and real-world results are often different. What ticks me off most about Dpreview is some of the participants in their forums. Instead of discussing or ignoring a post, some participants slam the photographer for lack of experience. That sort of thing bugs me because everyone works at a different level and novice views can often be very revealing, despite what the pros like to profess. That said, Dpreview has galleries that rival Photo.net. Right now, I am avoiding Dpreview because of some unfriendly conversations in their forums. At least for now, I'm avoiding the place.
  27. "The fact that these guys have London as a place to shoot sample photos doesn't diminish their efforts."
    How wonderfully magnanimous of you! I'm sure that everyone else was absolutely sure that something done in New York or San Francisco would have been much better.
    The site has not given your pet camera the raves you are sure it deserves, and so you trash the site. The credibility of the site is unaffected by your reaction.
  28. Tests can be objective, if conducted right. Conclusions drawn from them are subjective. DPR never made a secret of that, and I think they do a pretty good job at explaining why they think a certain camera is good or not. You don't have to agree. At least their reviews don't suffer from as many errors as this one , as a random example.
  29. My complaint with DPReview is that they judge noise on a strictly per pixel basis. Per pixel the 50D has more noise than the 40D. In print, where 50D images are enlarged less than 40D images, the 50D shows less noise. They did the same thing with the 5D mkII review when comparing it to the D700. (Although in that case you might need to print very large to show any real differences.) They basically said the D700 was a bit cleaner, but I bet in print it's not, again due to the enlargement factor. We're admittedly talking about small differences, but at least with the 50D there were endless discussions here, and they all made me want to scream "just try some prints!"
    DxO has the same discrepancy in their tests, but they've at least acknowledged it with an article on the issue. I've seen this else where in comparisons of bodies. I think you need to keep track of per pixel issues, but also resize lower resolution images up to the highest resolution image in the test and see how things stack up when enlargement issues are involved, because enlargement counts in every single print. (Be careful with DxO scores because their tests ignore total image resolution to a greater degree than DPReview. A 6 MP camera can score higher than a 24 MP camera.)
    Along those same lines, I've seen reviews where people compare cameras without optimally processing each image. They will then declare A the winner when B really is a match. Optimum USM, for example, varies based on things like pixel density. DPReview partially addresses this in their RAW comparisons, and they seem to have a keen eye when it comes to noticing when things really are equal or would be with a little processing.
    In terms of detail the 50D is picking up a little bit more high frequency detail than the 40D, which is to be expected, but nothing that would make a user toss their 40D and run right out with a credit card. (Especially in this economy.) Feature/body wise, I think the 50D is pretty significant, but again it all depends on your finances.
    While I'm reviewing reviews, I noticed that DPReview made some comments about AF in the 5D mkII review. (I forget if they did on the 50D or not.) The only thing that bothers me here is that they have no formal test procedures to judge this, and I think we all may be subject to a little number and marketing bias here. I've seen countless threads where users agonize over getting the 50D (9 point) or D300 (51 point), complaining that Canon 'cheats' users by not putting their 45 point AF in the xxD or 5D series, with the D300 AF touted as "professional" based on point count. Where am I going with this? There was a recent thread on photo.net where a Nikon user asked about the different AF modes, and most responses from Nikon users advised him away from the full 51 point mode towards the 9 or 21 point mode! They expressed that too many points just leads to confusion whenever the AF module has to distinguish between any real clutter, and that the better your tracking skills as a photographer, the more you find fewer points to actually be more precise.
    This has been my exact experience and I use center point only 99% of the time. So for me the most professional AF module is the one which is most sensitive, especially center point, and can most quickly acquire/track the target, which depends greatly on the lens in question. But no site is doing any formal tests to determine something like that. (While I'm at it, I do think Canon needs to widen the AF area on the xxD and especially the 5D, and add a few more points. But this is primarily for the narrow situation of BiF against a blue sky. And for people who find it more convenient to choose a point when on a tripod than to focus/recompose.)
    Any way...I generally like DPReview and think they are one of the more consistent and reliable testing sites. But I thought I would take the chance to nit pick ;-)
  30. DxO has the same discrepancy in their tests, but they've at least acknowledged it with an article on the issue.
    I see that complaint a lot. It's only true if you only look at the single number that comes out of the test. If you use the 'compare cameras' feature, you can select print or screen. Look at this comparison between 40D and 50D. (Is it ok to post screenshots from DxO here?, if not let one of the moderators remove the images and viewers go here )
    The only complaint you could have about this is that they use a simple square root to get from one to the other, ignoring the correlations you get from demosaicing, but that's nitpicking indeed. Though i'd like to see a systematic study on that one (not just the single blog entry on dpreview).
  31. When one is considering a substantial investment in the hundreds or thousands of dollars then in my humble opinion it would be folly to take direction from only one source. The beauty of living in the "internet age" is that we can seek and review information on any product from a myriad of sources. Dpreiew is just one of those sources. When i am choosing equipment , I spend weeks /months on the web reading reviewa and comments from a wide range of sources and if possible i try to get my hand on the product for personal feel of what it can do. I find DP review to be unbiased and usually very accurate. But I dont rely on them exclusively, sites such as Imaging Resource, PopPhoto, Shutterbug, Photonet also inform my decision. There is no one holy grail site of Equipment review.
  32. Allard K,
    Don't those graphs illustrate the point that DxO also measures on a per pixel, or resolution normalized basis? That was my nitpick, that you have to take into account total image resolution and therefore enlargement factor.
    Again, differences will be small between the two either way. Like I said, I'm nit picking.
  33. My experience of DPreview is positive. De Lenzer, I think you're feeling a little deflated concerning their review of the 5DMk2. The negatives they talk about concern the body (lack of competitive weather sealing - a fact confirmed by the recent trip by Luminous landscape people) and the fact that 21mp are always going to generate more noise than 13. What it has revealed is that there is a bigger gap between the top prosumer Canon (5DMk2) and their full pro range...the 1Dxxxx, than say between Nikons D300/700 and the D3. But there is also a bigger price difference too.
    The 5DMk2 weaknesses have been thrashed to death here over the past week. But that gives Canon something to correct for the 5DMk3.
    We should all get less precious and work harder to produce beautiful images, regardless of camera brand. Now if Nikon could get their pro lens range broadened, then I personally will be happier.
  34. I think DP had the point, that there no reason for Canon 40D users to ditch they cameras and run to buy 50D and I agree with them. As for the ratings it's just one person opinion, 3 years ago I bought Fuji S3 PRO based on the samples from DPreview, camera was rated "above average", colors are wonderful, dynamic range unsurpassed even now, when I need speed I use Nikon D300.
    BTW, all sample pictures from new cameras looks the same to me in image quality and dynamic range no matter what brand of camera was used.
    It is just my opinion:)
  35. The reviews are in my opinion not useful after the page 5 or so.
    They have no ability to separate useful from non-useful. Or they choose not to do so. Additionally, their reviews have the stains of the reviewers. I.e. they bring their own experience and biases and they don't acknowledge this.
  36. DPReview calls them as they see 'em. Yes, they're fallible, but they're also fairly thorough and increasingly transparent about their methods and choices. (Sean, to me they only get useful after page 5 or so! --because that's where they move beyond the press releases and product shots to actual testing of performance. Every review site has "the stain of its reviewers" - in fact, almost every review site on the web is essentially the opinion of one person - but DPReview publishes more bylines thanks to its larger staff, so it's easy to think their reviews are more "subjective" and less "objective.")
    Back to the original point of this thread, the 50D: Because they didn't say the 50D was head-and-shoulders above the 40D, DPR's really-very-positive review of the 50D (it had 30 "pros" and only 7 "cons," as I noted above) only encouraged the conspiracy theorists who think DPR has a built-in anti-Canon bias. But it's pretty hard to argue that after yesterday's glowing review of the 5DII!
    To the one poster above who avoids DPReview because their forums are so stupid: you're only hurting yourself if you stay away from the entire site because of the forums. From news to glossary/learning to reviews, most of the site is well worth at least an occasional visit. DPReview forums , on the other hand, are essentially the punchline of the online photographic community; many photographers (including me) take one look at the ridiculousness in the forums and never go back to those forums again.
    But to discount the entire site because of the one part that isn't generated by the site's employees would be like discontinuing a subscription to a newspaper or magazine because it publishes letters to the editor that you disagree with.
    There are plenty of other good forums out there, including this one!
  37. "Test charts and timings aren't everything, in fact some would argue that they tell you little about what the using the camera would actually be like. I'd like to think I write from the viewpoint of a skilled, trained, experienced photographer actually using a camera for photography."
    This is just nonsense. Test charts are the only evidence based way to assess the sensor, and test charts are what are used at Canon when they design the camera.
    I read this prejudice against test charts whenever a problem with Canon is demonstrated, such as their problems with autofocus. Every time someone writes in about an AF problem, the Canon worshippers come out with the usual nonsense:
    • user error
    • test charts are meaningless
    • try taking the UV filter off the camera
    Like it or not, Canon are falling behind. Two years ago no-one was even close to them. Now they've made the mistake of preferring more pixels to better ISO performance (which needs less tightly packed pixels). Bad move.
    The AF problem is a biggie, and far too many people are finding Canon autofocus unreliable.
  38. Dxomark would seem to find similar conclusions, that the pixel for pixel quality of the 50D is not significantly better than it's predessor the 40D.
    But there is one BIG difference in that the 50D has 50% more pixels. That seems to me to be a significant improvement overall. Plus the 50D goes forther at the high iso end.
  39. DPReview has built and maintained a solid reputation for providing consistent, balanced and fair testing for the various makes and models of all manufacturers. Simply because your brand of choice doesn't recieve a warm and fuzzy love-in is irrelevant and in no way reflects on the staff or reputation of DPReview. I work in an event staging/management company where in addition to shooting video (on a variety of Sony products), still photography is an important component of many jobs. There are three of us in-house with different camera gear, the dslr bodies include 1 X Pentax istD, 1 X Pentax K100D Super, 2 X Pentax K20D's and (recently) 1 X Sony A700. For each of these platforms we have found DPReview to provide a fair analysis of each body, its performance and limitations. As a Pentax shooter I found the recent DPReview conclusions of the new KM somewhat disappointing but fair and well founded. I personally and professionally don't feel that any inference that DPReview is inaccurate, biased or unfair is either warranted or deserved.
  40. I usually take a quick glance at DPR every day just to see what's new or newsworthy. While I've found the reviews to generally be helpful for someone not totally familiar with a brand or technology (consumer) who may be looking for a new camera, for those who are already entrenched in a system, I find the reviews to be mostly just technical exercises, since I've pretty much already made up my mind with regard to what I might need from my system anyway. I know this is a Canon forum and I'm a Nikon guy, but I've also found that the DPR site is pretty Canon-centric as well, although the Nikon reviews more recently have been pretty spot on. Take any review for what its worth - I first look at the last page and then delve into any of the tests which I may feel are important to me, and then move on to the next site. Caveat emptor - more info is better than less....... --Rich
  41. DP Review: A Fact
    I have a 40D and then I bought a 50D, but I was not satisfied with the overall quality in most situation what was I getting from 50D. Moroever, there was additional requirement on hardware in terms of processing time and storage. I thought, there is something wrong with my copy of 50D. Then I came to know about DP Review on 50D. I wish I would have read it earlier (any way I returned my 50D and replaced it with a used 40D). DPR is quite upto par in its conclusion (in fact, 50D should have just been "recommended," not more than that); and reason is quite simple. There is some rule of physics that marketing people (who pushed for 15mp in 50D) can not just wish them out. As many said, given the size of the sensor, 12MP is the limit. Beyond that, there are more negative outcome than the positive. But marketing people know the weakness and lack of knowledge of a dominant majority of consumers; and they succeeded in alluring many consumers to buy a diminishing quality product, 50D, comapred to 40D. Consumers who believe that every new toy is better than the old one; and they have no money constraint.
  42. Well, what an outflowing! Many of the replies are cogent, in the extreme, while relatively few are trying to pick a fight. That speaks well, indeed, of the crowd here.
    The waters have been stirred. Now they are all but opaque, owing to all the different points of view and the different conclusions, they have caused.
    Allow me to gently, and politely try to return to the original point, which was that Dpreview told me not to trade my 40D for 50D, because the image quality would not be "significantly" better.
    When I did make that trade I found the quality of the images to be not only significantly, but thrillingly better. In another post I included this image:
    I mentioned the complete lack of fringing where the sky shows through the branches - a consistent and very phony-looking problem I had with every cam since the 20D - and that the overall detail was so very much better. I did not mention how the detail makes the image look far more real...
    You are seeing this image resized, to fit in this forum. Right click on it and take it home. Look it over. There's nothing special about it - every image I get looks this good! (This one is using a 70-300 IS at about 300 feet away).
    I am not cheauvanistic. I did not participate in the development of this cam - lol. If I did not like it I was going to sell it on ebay. The auction contains a 40D, instead.
    After all the smoke clears, Dpreview told me wrong.
  43. "After all the smoke clears, Dpreview told me wrong." not really-what is 'significant' to one person may not be to another. It is just the reviewer's opinion-you can be guided by it but you shouldn't base your final decision on it. What was a problem with the viewfinder in the Nikon D70 reviews was not a problem for me so I bought it and used it happily for 4 years. A review is a guideline and nothing more. cb
  44. (1) DP review (or that matter, any other publication) is not in the business to tell an individual what to do.
    (2) The view of a photo on screen does not tell much, unless you have reasonable size prints.
    (3) Massive consumerism (because I have money --actually borrowed from Chinese and Arabs-- and there is a new toy to play with) has created this global financial and economic crisis. Still we did not learn, and waiting when Canon will introduce 60D with even higher MP on the same size sensor.
  45. Being new to digital I found DPR a useful site because they showed enough pictures to allow you to get an idea of what kind of image the camera produced. While I didn't understand all the technical analysis I was able to use the site because it contained enough images for me to form an option. They also have images that you can print from which I found very useful. The only thing I had to watch out for was that the tests did not always use the kit lens and outher better lenses were used for testing.
  46. I wish people can be a little more objective (scientific) and fair.
    De Lenzer stated: "When I did make that trade I found the quality of the images to be not only significantly, but thrillingly better. In another post I included this image: I mentioned the complete lack of fringing where the sky shows through the branches - a consistent and very phony-looking problem ..."
    First of all, if you want to show that 50D is better than 40D, you should show the same image captured by both under the same conditions in order to demonstrate that the 50D is "thrillingly better."
    The major issues that DPreview raised about the 50D are the increase of high ISO noise and reduction in dynamic range when compared to the 40D. Do you have any evidence that the 50D in fact does better than the 40D in these two areas?
  47. There is no one stop resource for info..at least for me.. I gather info from many sources. Take what you like and leave the rest :)
  48. What DPReview actually says:
    "Looking at the specification differences between the EOS 40D and our test candidate it appears you pay quite a premium for the 50D's extra megapixels and as we've found out during this review you don't get an awful lot of extra image quality for your money. The Canon EOS 50D still earns itself our highest reward but considering its price point and our slight concerns about its pixel-packed sensor, it only does so by a whisker."
    I really cannot see why you have interpreted this as a negative review of the 50D. These remarks are not highly negative. To the contrary, they acknowledge the superiority of the 50D over the 40D. They simply raise the question as to whether or not the improvement is worth the extra money. That is for the buyer to decide, and I think that Phil Askey et al. are to be congratulated for raising the kinds of questions that we have come to expect from them.
  49. Reminds me of the Canon G3 vs. G5 war. Every disgruntled G3 owner was bashing the G5 just because it wasn't the "upgrade" they were waiting for, but nonetheless, was "just enough" better to piss them off :)
  50. So you're annoyed they didn't gush over your camera. How about me? They never even reviewed the camera I use. Bast**rdos!
    Even so, I still think DPreview is the best source of information when it comes to digital cameras ...and the sample pics are extremely helpful. The gallery photos for the Sigma DP1 were enough to convince me to purchase the SD14.
  51. I think if you understand the DPreview style of reviewing and rating of cameras then you will find their information useful. Keep in mind that the Pros and Cons along with the ratings (on a scale of 1 to 10) are based of what they think is a 10 – and no body gets a ten. Most are comparisons against recent competitive models – if anyone tries to perform a comparison test (other than photographs) they cannot. It would be like trying to recall how the pedal and steering compared in the car you are driving today to your previous car (unless it was a huge upgrade). I like the site and think it offers positive information, but it isn't the Holy Digital Grail, yet more like advice from my father (I sometimes was skeptical)!
    If I hadn't bought a 40d I probably would have got the 50d, though I was a bit disappointed that canon didn't give us the 50d instead of the 40d.
  52. I use a Nikon D90 but only Canon makes the 400 mm f/5.6. I need the Canon 50D for bird photography. I may have to wait for 7 years!.
    I'd choose the 50D because it has more megapixels, and I would crop a lot. DP is right to do pixel level comparisons. 50D only starts to show diffraction-caused softness at f/7 or smaller, so the weakness vs 40D is irrelevant.
    For everything else, the D90 is better than the 40D so again no issues here.
    Use the best tool for the job. BTW I use all of Windows, Mac and Linux.
  53. To Daniel Lee Taylor:
    Look more closely at the graphs. The top one is a per-pixel comparison, where the 40D comes on top. The bottom one is a "print" comparison, where the 50D comes on top. The 'print' comparison is actually the SNR calculated back to an 8MP image via the formula presented in the article you linked. I guess this makes sense because I would not know how to measure quantitatively the noise in an actual print.
    To De Lenzer:
    Could you stop linking 15MP images directly into your posts? Just post a link, or a downscaled image and a link. This huge image slows down my (and presumably many others') browser quite a bit.
  54. What is think it's BS in the review is the conclusion statement:
    • 40D: Highly Recommended
    • 50D: Highly Recommended (Just )
    which implies 50D is better than 40D.
    If someone is to decide on one camera, and reads this, will think that it will be a mistake to get the 50D. The review shouldn't be for people that own the 40D, it should be for someone that is looking into getting a new camera.
    There should be a line there saying "If you own a 40D, think twice about upgrading because you might get dissapointed. Your used camera will sell for less than retail, and the 50D does not have enough improvements to make the upgrade worth."
    Back in the days I felt stupid for buying the Powershot G5, after reading the DP review comparing it with the G3. Only after comparing them side by side I realized I made the right decision. I knew not to rely on it again, so I went for the 50D instead, and guess what, comparing them side by side, only the LCD itself I think it's worth the extra money. The above graphs show how little the difference is, and in what conditions. That doesn't make 50D a worse camera.
  55. As Eric mentioned further up this thread, we need to see similar images from each camera made under similar conditions (same subject, same lens, similar light, same f/stop, same ISO, both on a tripod, tripod in same position, focused on the same point, preferably both shot in RAW and both with the same, minimal postprocessing). That's the only way to determine what is fact and what is fiction. It would also allow each of us to decide whether any differences are significant.
    What is the value of a thread comparing the quality of images made with two cameras, but lacking side-by-side comparisons?
  56. Test charts and timings aren't everything, in fact some would argue that they tell you little about what the using the camera would actually be like. I'd like to think I write from the viewpoint of a skilled, trained, experienced photographer actually using a camera for photography.​
    Totally agree with you Josh.
    It seems that people forget that "using" a camera comes down to more than how the camera scores on a test chart. This is why I went with a new D200 rather than a new D90, even though they were very similarly priced and the D90 has an advantage with the newer technology.
  57. You have to bear in mind that the rating DPReview gives is really only valid around the time the review is conducted. Things move quickly in the digital world. What they don't do is go back and change the reviews as things improve so what may have been 'good' 18 months ago may now only be 'average'. Someone new to the site may not understand this.
  58. I just wish dpreview would be a bit less wordy.
  59. "I just wish dpreview would be a bit less wordy."
    That's like saying Mozart uses too many notes.
  60. Who cares? Buy what you like.
  61. I have never read a review of anything by anyone with which I completely agree. I have never read two reviews of anything by anyone that were completely identical in their comments, methodology, or emphasis. There is no reviewer of anything that is as reliable as God or as honest.
    Read reviews to HELP you decide something, not as a replacement for your own judgement, preferences, or just plain biases. Use your own head to make your choices in life, and take responsibility for them yourself. DPR is a really good source of information. That's it ... information.
    You believe the information you got from them does not match your experience. Why on earth does that matter to you?
  62. Larry, mega-dittos. There is no reviewer of anything that is as reliable as God or as honest. You believe the information you got from them does not match your experience. Why on earth does that matter to you?

    Except for Ken Rockwell. Thanks.
  63. Who cares? Buy what you like.​
    And the "Jerk Of The Thread " award goes to...
    Tell me, Daniel - how exactly are people supposed to know what they "like" until they've bought it?
    And how can they make an informed decision about what to buy without the kind of information that sites like DPR make available?
    Why not go for the Gold Medal? Where's the equally smart-arsed and irrelevant "Shut up and take some pictures "?
  64. Keith don't you think you over reacted a little to Daniel's comment?
  65. Sean Garrick got it right, reviewers bring their bias into their riviews. "And they certanly don't acknowledge this." That is why they praise one brand for the same thing they find fault in another. I personally find Photo.net a better site to get real world information. And dpr forum good for entretainmet not to be taken too serious.
    What I find funny about all the pixel peeping that goes on that site is that if you were to put four 16"x20" prints in front of them taken with top of the line lens and they probably cant tell Pentax, Olympus, Nikon or Canon apart.

Share This Page