Dpreview - fact, or fiction?

[anthony_d.]

<p>So you're annoyed they didn't gush over your camera. How about me? They never even reviewed the camera I use. Bast**rdos! <br>

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.</p>

[dan_elkins]

<p>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)!</p>

<p>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.</p>

[munim]

<p>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!.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>For everything else, the D90 is better than the 40D so again no issues here.</p>

<p>Use the best tool for the job. BTW I use all of Windows, Mac and Linux.</p>

[allardk]

<p>To Daniel Lee Taylor:<br>

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.</p>

<p>To De Lenzer:<br>

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.</p>

[naturetrek]

<p>What is think it's BS in the review is the conclusion statement:</p>

 

<ul>

<li>40D: Highly Recommended</li>

<li>50D: Highly Recommended (<strong>Just</strong> )</li>

</ul>

<p>which implies 50D is better than 40D.</p>

<p>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.<br>

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."</p>

<p>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.</p>

[gerrymorgan]

<p>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.</p>

<p>What is the value of a thread comparing the quality of images made with two cameras, but lacking side-by-side comparisons?</p>

<p> </p>

[mt4x4]

<blockquote>

<p>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.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Totally agree with you Josh.</p>

<p>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.</p>

[paul_aylett1]

<p>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.</p>

[tom_worster]

<p>I just wish dpreview would be a bit less wordy.</p>

[mwaks]

<p>"I just wish dpreview would be a bit less wordy."<br>

===========================================================<br>

That's like saying Mozart uses too many notes.</p>

[daniel flather]

<p>Who cares? Buy what you like.</p>

[saskphotog]

<p>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.<br>

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. <br>

You believe the information you got from them does not match your experience. Why on earth does that matter to you?</p>

[w_t1]

<p>Larry, mega-dittos.<em> 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?</em><br>

<em></em><br>

Except for Ken Rockwell. Thanks.</p>

<p> </p>

[keith reeder]

<blockquote>

<p>Who cares? Buy what you like.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>And the "<strong>Jerk Of The Thread</strong> " award goes to...</p>

<p>Tell me, Daniel - how <em>exactly</em> are people supposed to know what they "like" until they've bought it?</p>

<p>And how can they make an informed decision about what to buy without the kind of information that sites like DPR make available?</p>

<p>Why not go for the Gold Medal? Where's the equally smart-arsed and irrelevant "<strong>Shut up and take some pictures</strong> "?</p>

[ryanjoseph]

<p>Keith don't you think you over reacted a little to Daniel's comment?</p>

[seragram]

<p>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.<br>

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.</p>