06-25-2020, 08:12 AM
(This post was last modified: 06-25-2020, 08:39 AM by Brightcolours.)
DXO is writing nonsense again, what else is new?
You seem to misunderstand what DXO is saying. The native ISO setting on both cameras is the same: ISO 100. That is the same for both cameras. DXO claims that they "measured" ISO 63 at ISO 100 for the mkII and that they "measured" ISO 136 at ISO 100 for the mkIII.
They claim that they "measure" a different ISO than what the manufacturer does. This means that they do not understand ISO very well, and they should reread how ISO settings are defined.
And they mess up things even more. The mkIII has an ISO range that starts at ISO 100. It expands down to ISO 50. Yet, somehow, DXO labels manufacturer ISO 100 as ISO 50 and manufacturer ISO 200 as ISO 100, and so on. In their graphs, they put manufacturer ISO 50 (according to them) next to ISO 200 from the mk II and for instance the Nikon D5.
Things are not right in their measurements and I do not know how exactly they got them messed up, but they are not correct. And as always, they do not really look at what is wrong, but come with some nonsense explanation.
If you are interested in RAW DR of the Canon EOS 1D X mkIII compared to the Canon EOS 1D X mkII, Nikon D6 and Sony A9 II:
https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/P...20ILCE-9M2
You seem to misunderstand what DXO is saying. The native ISO setting on both cameras is the same: ISO 100. That is the same for both cameras. DXO claims that they "measured" ISO 63 at ISO 100 for the mkII and that they "measured" ISO 136 at ISO 100 for the mkIII.
They claim that they "measure" a different ISO than what the manufacturer does. This means that they do not understand ISO very well, and they should reread how ISO settings are defined.
And they mess up things even more. The mkIII has an ISO range that starts at ISO 100. It expands down to ISO 50. Yet, somehow, DXO labels manufacturer ISO 100 as ISO 50 and manufacturer ISO 200 as ISO 100, and so on. In their graphs, they put manufacturer ISO 50 (according to them) next to ISO 200 from the mk II and for instance the Nikon D5.
Things are not right in their measurements and I do not know how exactly they got them messed up, but they are not correct. And as always, they do not really look at what is wrong, but come with some nonsense explanation.
If you are interested in RAW DR of the Canon EOS 1D X mkIII compared to the Canon EOS 1D X mkII, Nikon D6 and Sony A9 II:
https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/P...20ILCE-9M2