11-06-2010, 04:37 PM
[quote name='Kunzite' timestamp='1289052925' post='4000']
Hard to accept, isn't it? <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':lol:' />
jenbenn, you're correct - this is revolutionary. But what one should do is to double and triple check; not just rejecting the result he doesn't like. I already did it, and the K-5 is showing it's impressive DR.
Brightcolors, and how would a slight NR applied at ISO 3200+ affect the DR at ISO80?
[/quote]
This has nothing to do with acceptance. Rather with logic and critical interpretation. If you believe this test, because you want to beleive it, its fine. Its like religion, you can believe anything you want without reason. For my part, I dont like a religious attidude when it comes to scientific tests. If a test procedure has shwon in the past, that its results differ from the real life capapbilities of camera/lens, I have to conclude that the method used is inadequat or flawed.
As I have pointed out on the example of the Canon 16-35 lens Dxo results contradict photzone's test of the same lens,not by marginal difference, but by claiming the lens to have a complete differnt characteristic. (According to DXo sharpness of the lens DEcreases when stopping it down while photozone, slrgear, lenstip and all other testers including myself have found that the Sharpness INcrease when stopping it down) It makes me wonder that Dxo didnt bother to check their results after they have found such an extraorinary behaviour of the lens. I have yet not heard of any lens that looses sharpness when stopping down (the exception beeing that the camera/lens combination is difraction limited at the widest aperture, of course)
They also try to tell me that the canon 40D produces better raw files then the 50D. No it doesnt. If you open the files from each camera in the same raw converter, print them the same size and look at the prints, you#ll find the 50D to be slightly better or equal, depending on the subject).
This leads me to conclude that their test are either unreliable and flawed or has no significane for practical photography.
I would be very happy if the pentax had this high a dR. It actaully may well have. Its just that DXO is incompetent to tell. When imaging resource, dpreview and maybe photozone had a look at the cam we may know more. Until then noone can tell.
Hard to accept, isn't it? <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':lol:' />
jenbenn, you're correct - this is revolutionary. But what one should do is to double and triple check; not just rejecting the result he doesn't like. I already did it, and the K-5 is showing it's impressive DR.
Brightcolors, and how would a slight NR applied at ISO 3200+ affect the DR at ISO80?
[/quote]
This has nothing to do with acceptance. Rather with logic and critical interpretation. If you believe this test, because you want to beleive it, its fine. Its like religion, you can believe anything you want without reason. For my part, I dont like a religious attidude when it comes to scientific tests. If a test procedure has shwon in the past, that its results differ from the real life capapbilities of camera/lens, I have to conclude that the method used is inadequat or flawed.
As I have pointed out on the example of the Canon 16-35 lens Dxo results contradict photzone's test of the same lens,not by marginal difference, but by claiming the lens to have a complete differnt characteristic. (According to DXo sharpness of the lens DEcreases when stopping it down while photozone, slrgear, lenstip and all other testers including myself have found that the Sharpness INcrease when stopping it down) It makes me wonder that Dxo didnt bother to check their results after they have found such an extraorinary behaviour of the lens. I have yet not heard of any lens that looses sharpness when stopping down (the exception beeing that the camera/lens combination is difraction limited at the widest aperture, of course)
They also try to tell me that the canon 40D produces better raw files then the 50D. No it doesnt. If you open the files from each camera in the same raw converter, print them the same size and look at the prints, you#ll find the 50D to be slightly better or equal, depending on the subject).
This leads me to conclude that their test are either unreliable and flawed or has no significane for practical photography.
I would be very happy if the pentax had this high a dR. It actaully may well have. Its just that DXO is incompetent to tell. When imaging resource, dpreview and maybe photozone had a look at the cam we may know more. Until then noone can tell.