Dxomark rubbish

The only thing I find their site useful for is comparing the sharpness scores of different lenses on the same bodys to give me a rough idea on how they compare.
 
DSLRS with their multitude of sensors and other measuring devices has created a different type of photographer camera owner. He is the type of man they type who enjoys measuring, comparing things and using creating test charts, this to a certain type of man id more important than taking using the camera for its intended purpose.
websites like DXO allows this genre of mankind to enjoy test charts, graphs and formulae to their hearts content so their is some value in the DXO site.
I have never visited or used the contents of the DXO website but I can see and understand why some people enjoy this site.
 
If it's not accurate which there's good evidence to suggest it's not then it's pointless, more like another way of making money for themselves and useless to everyone else, I do justify this.by the fact I've had/got very sharp lenses which they regard as average for sharpness:-D so they either have bad copies or talk rubbish, more likely the latter.
 
Last edited:
He is good, to the point and amusing at the same time
 
DXO Mark what a massive bore fest great if you like test charts and numbers and especially if you buy into the sharpness is everything school thought sadly it just isn't as much fun as taking photographs with my limited dynamic range, crummy AF and soft lenses ;-)
 
It's good to see a Nikon user slagging them off, when it's normally Canon because they score so low. Still, if we believe all this, it does cast doubt on the differences between Canon and Nikon scores!

If the lens scores are to be believed, it raises serious doubt about using high megapixel cameras - either full frame or APS-C, because they indicate that many modern lenses can't resolve to these levels.
 
They're so inaccurate I wonder if they actually test anything
 
Oh
Brachytron said:
It's good to see a Nikon user slagging them off, when it's normally Canon because they score so low. Still, if we believe all this, it does cast doubt on the differences between Canon and Nikon scores!

If the lens scores are to be believed, it raises serious doubt about using high megapixel cameras - either full frame or APS-C, because they indicate that many modern lenses can't resolve to these levels.
Click to expand...
The proofs in the pudding having Been with canon many years, now I have nikon simply because for stills they are better imo, it's not a massive margin by any means and if i was into video I'd have stuck with canon.Both are great at both just one does one thing slightly better than the other.
Though the 7d mk II may have changed that but it's too expensive imo, though that doesn't change the better lenses of nikon at reasonable prices which I feel they have the better options.You see things for yourself, you don't need dxo.
 
Last edited:
They're sweepingly inaccurate with too many of their tests
 
Phal said:
The only thing I find their site useful for is comparing the sharpness scores of different lenses on the same bodys to give me a rough idea on how they compare.
Click to expand...
I don't trust their comparisons of lens sharpness - I have had three nikon 85 1.4G lenses and the third is the one I currently own and compared to a sigma 35 1.4 art at 1.4 there's no comparison!

The nikon 85 1.8G is sharper at f/1.8 than the 85 1.4g at f/1.8
 
I don't think the staff at DXO have shot anything other than test charts, lines and circles.

I bet they get confused when they look in magazines and see all these odd pictures of people, pretty things and landscapes...
 
As with any tool you need to know its strengths and limitations before it can be useful. Dxomark certainty isn't rubbish, but it's no the be all and end all but the real useful stuff comes when you drill down into the measurements beyond the headline figure which is some strange perceptual megapixel thingy for lenses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top