03-25-2018, 09:39 PM
No, I don't know how it is, sir.
MS is an enthusiast and self-funding, I think, and is to be highly commended and encouraged.
I trust him reasonably, something I find increasingly tough to do with that dx ooo mark site, which is why photozone.de is so needed!
I love Nikon but to equate the sensor performance from a low to mid range Nikon half-frame dSLR with a top-of-the-range full-frame Canon dSLR is just bonkers as per dx ooo mark.
As to lens testing, even if we disregard the dx ooo mark number (which as they state gives a bonus for fast optics) and go for their "sharpness" number, we get absurdities like the Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 200mm f/4D ED-IF, which is fantastically sharp, ranked only #111 well below some twelve zooms.
They provide lots of mumbo-jumbo but ever since I saw them rate two P&S cameras' sensors 20 apart, and they both used exactly the same sensor and circuitry, I viewed dx ooo mark more as an entertainment site a la Rockwell.
MS is an enthusiast and self-funding, I think, and is to be highly commended and encouraged.
I trust him reasonably, something I find increasingly tough to do with that dx ooo mark site, which is why photozone.de is so needed!
I love Nikon but to equate the sensor performance from a low to mid range Nikon half-frame dSLR with a top-of-the-range full-frame Canon dSLR is just bonkers as per dx ooo mark.
As to lens testing, even if we disregard the dx ooo mark number (which as they state gives a bonus for fast optics) and go for their "sharpness" number, we get absurdities like the Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 200mm f/4D ED-IF, which is fantastically sharp, ranked only #111 well below some twelve zooms.
They provide lots of mumbo-jumbo but ever since I saw them rate two P&S cameras' sensors 20 apart, and they both used exactly the same sensor and circuitry, I viewed dx ooo mark more as an entertainment site a la Rockwell.