The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

More fuel for the 'D800 as good as MF' fire

Stefan Steib

Active member
I just wonder what the reputation of DXO would be around here if there were only MF backs infront of their measurements.....
and maybe it helps to read what they write about their methodology.

DxOMark - Pushed ISO: Let's make it clear

As long as the camera makers do not state this more precisely I would say: thanks for the good work and may somebody be wiser and do better....

Regards
Stefan
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
I do not really care for DXO tests at all and also stopped really believing Dpreview.

I only belief what I see myself when I test a cameras and lenses. Anything else can just be a bit of steering, but the final judgement I have to make up for my own needs and senses and feel.

I have been so often mislead by all those dance tests :mad:
 

MaxKißler

New member
The problem I have with DXOs tests is probably the fact that they use words like dynamic range in a completely misleading context (maybe to sound more scientific? I don't know). I would describe dynamic range as a ratio of contrast, while the DXO site puts this in relation to ISO sensitivity which imho has nothing to do with it. Why should a sensor with amplified signals be unable to capture the exact same contrast ratio than with unamplified signals (e.g. at base ISO)? And I'm not talking about A/D conversion, though it has an effect on contrast but that's another story. Then again, who am I to question their credibility...

The experiance I've made is CCDs in any DB have 12 f stops DR. Period. Even though Phase claims the P40+, P65+ and IQ series to have 12,5 f-stops but I doubt that. Why? Half a stop is not really measurable (especially when you already have an incredible range of 12 stops...). The IQ180s sensor is the exact same as in Leafs Aptus II 12 and Leaf doesn't claim that it's got 12,5 stops... The sensors in 35mm cameras appear to have about 7 f-stops DR. What's interesting is the fact that 35mm cameras that utilize a CCD sensor also only got 7 stops DR (for example Nikon D200/D80). At least that's how I experianced it..
 

vieri

Well-known member
A Minority meant those that actually will use or need ALL of the features, vast lens and accessories systems or multiple light CLS techniques of a 35mm DSLR. ...
But that is not the point, is it? The point is not those (given, very few) users who need ALL the features, the point is what this announcement will do for these users (a lot, actually) who need SOME of the features that 35mm offers and DMF doesn't, and that now can found these features together with a high-res sensor competitive (though not comparable) with DMF. I am quite sure many will be pondering wether the advantage in IQ that DMF offers will be enough to offset the other features that they need and that DMF doesn't provide, and I think some/a few/many will act accordingly.
So, I am pretty sure this new round of 35mm bodies will cost DMF quite a bit of users. You think it won't, fine... at the end, we live in very good times, there is great gear for everyone :D
 

Shashin

Well-known member
I once witnessed a shooter with D3 and tripod, shooting a lighthouse in full auto machine-gun mode. I wonder what the heck he was going to do with all of those files.
In-camera dupes for all the stock agencies he works for...some habits die hard.
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
I am quite sure many will be pondering wether the advantage in IQ that DMF offers will be enough to offset the other features that they need and that DMF doesn't provide, and I think some/a few/many will act accordingly.

So, I am pretty sure this new round of 35mm bodies will cost DMF quite a bit of users. You think it won't, fine... at the end, we live in very good times, there is great gear for everyone :D
I'm sure that the biggest impact will be on those who were considering the change to DMF as a step in terms of resolution support and colour fidelity or look. I would expect that a significant number of those folks have probably already reassessed whether they want to step up a format or go with the comfort of their existing 35mm DSLR platform. These new cameras, and whatever Sony & Canon will no doubt follow along with, most likely would encourage DSLR users to stay with 35mm. What I do know is that Nikon dealers are having a pre-order bonanza for the D800/E.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Okay all the MF folks give up you Nikon D800 camera's are going to kick our butts royally . Its a given, we just simply give up. Now all you MF folks lets start calling our dealers and see what kind of real deals we can get. Lets just give in, its a hell of a lot easier and heck we may get bargain pricing to unload these crappy 60 and 80 mpx camera. Phase and Hassy Im sure would just love to help us out.

I may have to change the title to Nikon / Canon Wars episode 2000367891 A
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
Yup, anyone with a crappy SK 110 LS or 150 LS that wants to offload their junk can give me an email and I'll take it off your hands in a week or so. That'll help you with that dirty feeling of needing to get rid of your over-hyped medium format stuff. :D
 

jonoslack

Active member
Okay all the MF folks give up you Nikon D800 camera's are going to kick our butts royally . Its a given, we just simply give up. Now all you MF folks lets start calling our dealers and see what kind of real deals we can get. Lets just give in, its a hell of a lot easier and heck we may get bargain pricing to unload these crappy 60 and 80 mpx camera. Phase and Hassy Im sure would just love to help us out.

I may have to change the title to Nikon / Canon Wars episode 2000367891 A
:ROTFL:
However - it's you MF folks who seem to be ordering the D800 (you,jack,bob,tim,graham,vieri just off the tip of my mind). Us sad old 35mm crew are holding back to see what's what.

Personally, I don't think I want to swap 18mp with Leica lenses or 24 with Zeiss for 36 with Nikon lenses, at least, not without having a very good look.
Sounds to me like more processing for equivalent results. . . . and if I really want that resolution then I'd be much better either to get into MF or an S2, or wait for the Sony equivalent with focus peaking and use it with my nice Leica R lenses :p You're all :loco:
 

Lars

Active member
Forget the D800 - the new threat to MF is Nokia's upcoming 41 Mpx camera phone presented today. Yikes. :loco:
 

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
:ROTFL:
However - it's you MF folks who seem to be ordering the D800 (you,jack,bob,tim,graham,vieri just off the tip of my mind). Us sad old 35mm crew are holding back to see what's what.
Jono,

The point is, once you've paid up for MF gear, everything else seems like a screaming bargain. Add a Nikon kit? Can do that for the cost of a 28 Rodie! :ROTFL:

--Matt
 

Shashin

Well-known member
Horses for courses - I'm looking forward to getting back in to 35mm DSLR territory so that I can shoot night images of star fields and trails and for general smaller travel system use. The Nikon D series cameras do a great job with these kinds of images. All of my experiments with MFDBs have sucked badly with star shooting for night shots. (I'm sure that if I had an equatorial mount and stacked images it would be fabulous but ... ).

For everything else I still like the look of medium format.
Graham, you seem to be backing the wrong horse. :poke: When you come to Maine, I will show you what a real camera can do. :grin:

Pentax 645D and 35mm.
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
Jono,

The point is, once you've paid up for MF gear, everything else seems like a screaming bargain. Add a Nikon kit? Can do that for the cost of a 28 Rodie! :ROTFL:

--Matt
You are sooo right: I got told today that with a CF and Analyse Technical I might get a few mm shift out of my sk35 so might not need the HR 32 I was planning on spending nearly $10,000 on. If that turns out to be true, I've got a 'free' bagful of good glass for my D800e... Though of course, if Canon comes out with something exciting this week, all bets are off. Again.
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
I believe what DxO says to the extent that I think they do their best to give an accurate report of what they've measured.

I don't, however, believe that most of what they measure has much relevance to photography. Worse, I think the little that may be relevant is measured (and/or presented) in a way that makes that relevance difficult to understand and the data difficult to use.

That means (at best) most of the data probably only means anything in a relative sense, not an absolute one. When they say camera A has 12.2 stops of dynamic range and camera B has 12.7 stops, that probably means camera B has a little more dynamic range than camera A -- but not much more than that.

Even that, however, may be somewhat suspect -- nothing I've seen about their test procedures gives a solid assurance that their controls are tight enough to make a half-stop difference statistically significant. That's not to say it's necessarily meaningless, only that we don't know enough to be sure that it means anything (and even then, the relevance problem means we probably don't know what it means in terms of real pictures).
If you only use the summary information from the DxO tests ..you are missing some real insights . When you get down to the next level of detail and compare cameras using the full charts..there is plenty to be gained .

For example when you follow the signal to noise chart using the Leica M9 you can see the drop right around 1250 that most of the m9 users well know . If you plot another camera against something you know (in my case the M9) I know exactly what to expect . Example the fuji x100 has an insignificant advantage up to about the 1250 ..but then noise increases only slowly at 1600 and 3200 . Its a gradual fall off unlike the M9 which falls off a cliff. So I know “don’t expect miracles in high ISO but you can get another EV or maybe 2...with careful technique. “

Now go over to the color saturation as another example ..what exactly does that mean. On the detail graph ....go to the right side ...the curser will move the line across the image showing the impact at different levels . So it gives you a example of what a number means . It also bands the chart with an acceptable range . Take your camera and use your file at different ISO s . Works for me . I can see exactly what I see in my M9 file after 640 I am giving up color ..ok for some subjects but I sure want to avoid it if I can. It also shows that at 160 I get a bump in color saturation not seen at 320 ...but using the right side of the chart I can also see this difference would be pretty hard to see that in a group of images . I would come to this conclusion surely by testing my own equipment ..but what should I expect from the new Sony..point being “compared to what” .

Now when I compare cameras to something I use frequently ...I know what to expect . Just as the charts show a D3s produces some pretty great ISO performance with a gradual fall off in the high ISO progression (like most CMOS sensors). I can also see that a D3X DR is superb at ISO100 but as you increase the ISO its essentially the same as the D3S . I think if you look at the graphs you would see the D3X is has a low ISO bias ..don t expect great stuff at ISO400 .

Point being the detailed information is there to use and my experience is that its darn accurate as a benchmark . I think they lose people by presenting the final results into a meaningless ranking . But don t throw out some excellent analytical work based on the front page ..there is plenty to learn by digging in.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Jono,

The point is, once you've paid up for MF gear, everything else seems like a screaming bargain. Add a Nikon kit? Can do that for the cost of a 28 Rodie! :ROTFL:

--Matt
HI Matt
Although I understand what you mean . . . with my 10 modern Leica M lenses and 4 classic R lenses the D800 looks like a bargain to me as well!

You are sooo right: I got told today that with a CF and Analyse Technical I might get a few mm shift out of my sk35 so might not need the HR 32 I was planning on spending nearly $10,000 on. If that turns out to be true, I've got a 'free' bagful of good glass for my D800e... Though of course, if Canon comes out with something exciting this week, all bets are off. Again.
:ROTFL: These kind of remarks don't make me feel like rushing to MF . . if you bought that lens for that amount I wonder how much it would cost per image over the time you have it?

I'm just slightly amused by the rush to buy a D800 by exactly those people who seem to be saying that it's not going to be any good!
 

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
:ROTFL: These kind of remarks don't make me feel like rushing to MF . . if you bought that lens for that amount I wonder how much it would cost per image over the time you have it?
I suppose that's why Noctilux owners use theirs so much - lowers the cost per image. :rolleyes:

--Matt
 

jonoslack

Active member
I suppose that's why Noctilux owners use theirs so much - lowers the cost per image. :rolleyes:

--Matt
I got one of them . . . I use it a lot - I'd guess I'm down to about £2 an image by now .. must use it more :ROTFL:

. . . . I don't want to think how much my 24 'lux is costing though:wtf:
 
Top