Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


DXOmark review on Nikon D800 – 95, Canon 5D Mark III – 81


JackAllTog e2
5 3.7k 58 United Kingdom
19 Apr 2012 3:41PM
Now i can't get on DXOmark's web site at the moment (too busy i guess) but Nikon Rumours say's its way better with it dynamic range.

http://nikonrumors.com/2012/04/19/dxomark-verdict-nikon-d800-95-canon-5d-mark-iii-81.aspx

This DR rating seems like disappointment for what i assumed would be Canon's reason for bigger photosites (less mega pixels).
So whilst its ISO is still great, it not what i expected.

I'm more interested in why with smaller photo sites Nikon still gets great Dynamic Range rather than the Canon vs Nikon debate.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Nikon-D800-Review/Sensor-performance

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

ikett 4 352 England
19 Apr 2012 5:07PM
I don't know, but I think it would be one hell of a good photographer to make use the difference in the real world.

Oh it isn't me Wink
ikett 4 352 England
19 Apr 2012 5:13PM
Some thing I found earlier today, talk about splitting hairs?
rogerfry e2
9 509 United Kingdom
19 Apr 2012 5:24PM
I think these are probably moe useful for "real life" comparisons.
strawman 10 22.0k 16 United Kingdom
19 Apr 2012 5:36PM
I have seen a number of articles raising concerns on what the actual DXO results tell you, a few years back some medium format users raised concerns as they had equipment that to the human eye delivered inferior results getting better scores. And if you look at these scores the D800 is outperforming medium format kit, but is it true?

This sort of comment has been used to explain why MF cameras are often rated worse (From DXO Site) as an example

Quote:Medium-format cameras are designed to perform best in particular use cases—specifically, they are mostly used in a studio environment where light level is not a problem, and in landscape photography, where they are most often used with tripods to facilitate long exposure times. In light of their specific uses, medium-format cameras are optimized for low ISO performance, and so do not feature a wide “analog” ISO latitude, meaning that they show some limitations at high ISO speed. Consequently, medium-format cameras end up with lower Low-Light ISO rankings compared to DSLRs, and this affects their DxOMark Sensor Overall Score.


I would love to have a play with some of these cameras to see which performs best at taking pictures Smile

Perhaps if I give a parallel, car 0-60 figures are often misleading, we had to buy a small engined car recently and picked the car with the slower 0-60 because it felt faster. ! The reason being the slower car had better low rpm performance/broader torque but in 0-60 sprint the higher reving car had one gear change less, but round town the performance difference was reversed.

Sounds like the D800 sensor is very interesting. And I bet both are far better than what I use Smile
19 Apr 2012 6:23PM
Here is a video of the d800 against a 40mega pixel hassey.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UBTE4xpvpk
Steppenwolf 3 971
19 Apr 2012 6:33PM

Quote:Perhaps if I give a parallel, car 0-60 figures are often misleading, we had to buy a small engined car recently and picked the car with the slower 0-60 because it felt faster. ! The reason being the slower car had better low rpm performance/broader torque but in 0-60 sprint the higher reving car had one gear change less, but round town the performance difference was reversed.



That's why diesels are a lot quicker in their "real world" performance than their standing start acceleration times would indicate. It's the sheer low rpm torque that they can deliver that makes them fast in gear but their standing start figures tend to be blunted by the limited rev range, meaning more gear changes. Still, if you get a double clutch auto 4wd diesel this is not a problem - lightning fast away from the lights and overtaking.

But I'm not sure if this is a very relevant analogy, Strawman - although interesting. My own opinion is that the advantages of "big pixels" have been over-sold and that "small pixels" have been given a bum rap for many years.
strawman 10 22.0k 16 United Kingdom
19 Apr 2012 11:42PM

Quote:My own opinion is that the advantages of "big pixels" have been over-sold and that "small pixels" have been given a bum rap for many years.
I would say the converse, there has been too much attention paid to number of pixels and there have been occasions where camera manufacturers have produced cameras where the new model has areas of performance that are worse than its larger pixel predecessor.

What often gets forgotten is that for a give technology there is a "sweet spot" and as you improve technology that spot moves also. Is the D800 not using the pixel size equivalent to @16mp crop sensor camera? (I think I read DX mode 15.3MP somewhere). That is not far off the current sweet spot. So your intended use and the available technology will set the correct answer and the answer will vary over time. And sometimes you reach the point of more gives you sod all extra in the real world, go work on some other parameters.

I look forward to seeing more cameras in the future (especially at the entry level) where extra pixels are used for data capture and processed to remove lens defects and reducing noise before producing a better quality lower resolution image.

The diesel analogy is good as the torque spread over normal use engine speed range is often a better for an ordinary car, not BHP. And so in cameras the real world image quality the pixel count is not the definitive answer. Mind you with EU6 coming for many users and cars its time to switch back to petrol. we are probably in the start of the decline of the diesel in passenger cars for Europe as the two engines start to converge.
Carabosse e2
11 39.5k 269 England
20 Apr 2012 12:29AM

Quote:The diesel analogy is good as the torque spread over normal use engine speed range is often a better for an ordinary car, not BHP


Yes but the range of revs for max torque is usually very narrow in a diesel and is, in any event, dependent on turbocharging. In contrast a turbo'd petrol car will produce its max torque over a much greater rev range.

What were we talking about? Oh, yes............... megapixellage! Grin I have seen the Olympus OM-D described as a "Canon 5D Mk II in a smaller package". As an ex-5D II owner awaiting delivery of an OM-D, I look forward to checking that out!
strawman 10 22.0k 16 United Kingdom
20 Apr 2012 11:27AM

Quote:Yes but the range of revs for max torque is usually very narrow in a diesel and is, in any event, dependent on turbocharging. In contrast a turbo'd petrol car will produce its max torque over a much greater rev range.
But the turbot diesel being a fashionable fish produces its power at the normal power range so normally these day you will cruise @ 2,000 to 3,000 rpm so having peak torque in that range means the power is there by just pressing the pedal whilst the petrol normally requires a change down to get to higher rpm, so with decent 6 speed gearboxes and a power range of 1,500 to 4,000 rpm the modern diesel power band is just fine. I remember a journalist discovering on a country road a 2ltr VW Diesel was next to impossible to pass in a 911 as the VW would just lurch out of the corners with solid through the gears acceleration Tongue

Mind you the new petrol engines coming out, down-sized but turbocharged for torque and featuring direct injection are starting to look like Petrol Diesel hybrids so I expect to see lots of people return to petrol, especially as the diesel on-cost keeps on rising.

Now what were we talking about, yes pixels, sounds like some good stuff would love to see some large prints from the new cameras (including the OM-D) just to see what real world, rather than test labs torturing text images look like. How good are these new cameras.
Carabosse e2
11 39.5k 269 England
20 Apr 2012 11:08PM

Quote:so with decent 6 speed gearboxes and a power range of 1,500 to 4,000 rpm the modern diesel power band is just fine.


With a decent sized turbo petrol engine the gearbox becomes verges on redundancy! With (say) 500Nm+ of torque from 1300-5000 rpm all you need is forward and reverse. Lol! Wink

Anyway when we are all driving electric cars with max torque from zero revs it really will be just F & R.


Quote:would love to see some large prints from the new cameras (including the OM-D) just to see what real world, rather than test labs torturing text images look like. How good are these new cameras.


Hoping EPZ will do some tests of the latest CSCs against APS-C and maybe even FF DSLRs.
Steppenwolf 3 971
21 Apr 2012 8:38AM

Quote:
Anyway when we are all driving electric cars with max torque from zero revs it really will be just F & R.



Electric cars are a dead end. They only appear cheaper because a) people forget to factor in the cost of replacing the batteries every 3 or 4 years (several thousand pounds) and b) petrol and diesel are taxed at over 60% but electricity is taxed at 5%. This favoured tax status wouldn't last long if lots of people switched to electric cars.


Quote:Hoping EPZ will do some tests of the latest CSCs against APS-C and maybe even FF DSLRs.


They'd just find that the images are basically indistinguishable except for DOF, and the bigger sensors can run higher ISOs.
21 Apr 2012 9:22AM

Quote:Now i can't get on DXO mark's web site at the moment (too busy i guess) but Nikon Rumours say's its way better with it dynamic range.


It can be wise to review the reliability of the review site (eg Ken v DXO) and the relevance of the review to your tppe of photography.
14.4 stops DR is very good - but only to a point.
The average lap top and no print can display 14.4 stops DR - you need to shoot RAW and post process to get the best out of 14.4 stops - accepting probably less than 2% of scenes have 14.4 stops DR in the first place.
The D4 does not score as high as the D800 using the DXO rating basis. For a pro sports photographer shooting jpeg (for quick transmission) at an English football match in low light the D800 is unlikely to be a first choice body.
DXO produces interesting information. For me a question is how much relevance does this information have to my type of photography.
Carabosse e2
11 39.5k 269 England
21 Apr 2012 2:55PM

Quote:DXO produces interesting information. For me a question is how much relevance does this information have to my type of photography.


Judging by comments elsewhere on the web, a lot of photographers have a very low opinion of DxO testing, which they feel have little relevance to real-world results.
Carabosse e2
11 39.5k 269 England
21 Apr 2012 3:08PM

Quote:Electric cars are a dead end.


Pure electric cars perhaps but hybrids are taking off quite well and there may come a time when most cars are electrically driven, with plug-in motors, but with the petrol/diesel motor as well. Firms, such as BMW, are producing concepts: a production version of their i8 is expected to be on sale next year. 0-62mph in 4.8 sec and 75mpg and a 430mile range. Smile

i8.jpg




Quote:They'd just find that the images are basically indistinguishable except for DOF, and the bigger sensors can run higher ISOs.


Indeed and the smaller sensors can run pretty high ISOs these days too.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.