An inside look at DxO Mark testing

[zafar1]

<p>We, in this forum, are not really happy with DxOMark for thrashing our beloved 5D Mark III and for being part of SoNikon conspiracy.</p>

<p>Many have questioned their testing methods. FWIW, here is an inside look at their testing labs.<br>

http://news.cnet.com/8301-11386_3-57415777-76/how-dxo-labs-tests-hot-cameras-like-canons-latest-slr/</p>

<p> </p>

[craigd]

<p>I think it's silly to talk about a "conspiracy" (I assume you were kidding), and I don't mind if someone thinks Camera A is better than Camera B provided they can intelligently explain what factors they are taking into account and why, such that their final assessment has a proper context. However, I think it's just idiotic to reduce all the test results to a single score and say that Camera A scores 89 while Camera B scores 86. All that accomplishes is to project the illusion of an objective one-dimensional scale where no such thing exists. What methodology is behind the score hardly matters, because the final result is so radically oversimplified as to be meaningless.</p>

<p>Ultimately, my impression of DxO, which is only confirmed by some of the quotes in the article, is that they're technical wonks with no clue about photography or what matters to photographers.</p>

[frank_skomial]

<p>there are there few things there to make one think... e.g. DOF difference for different color components...</p>

[JosvanEekelen]

<p>Clearly some cameras are made for a high DxO ranking, others are made for taking great pictures :-)</p>

[philip_wilson]

Interesting but I was interested by their dynamic range tests for film. If I believe their 20 dab approach then film ( as the

article says) has negligible dynamic range. What surprises me is that when I print my film shots have similar (slide),

slightly more (colour print) or more (B&W). Indeed all those print I have made over the years should have only shown 13-

4 stops of dynamic range - somehow no one ever noticed. I guess I should get an NEX7 or K5 rather than the inferior but

(3-5 times the price) 5DIII.

 

It is a miracle that anyone ever managed to get a shot with film and I suspect that my digital Leica performs worse than a

camera phone!

[museebfoto]

<blockquote>

<p>Clearly some cameras are made for a high DxO ranking, others are made for taking great pictures :-)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Interesting point of view, really I like it.</p>

[colin carron]

<p>Well, I've just bought a new Canon 5D MkII so I think DxO are fantastic:-)</p>

[craig_meddaugh]

<p>Unless they have withdrawn their initial results, who cares about their methodology. They reported a dynamic range over 14 EV for a camera with a 14 bit ADC. Even assuming that everything is absolutely perfect, the best dynamic range you can get with a 14 bit ADC is exactly 14 EV, no if ands or buts. </p>

<p>Maybe Nikon gamed the test, but if DxO wants to be taken seriously, they should look at their results prior to publishing them. </p>