DxO Mark Rankings

[whizkid]

Reviewing the rankings presented by DxO Mark on raw, Nikon's newest offerings have come through shining. I 'm having trouble understanding how the D90 got such high marks and bested some full size sensor offerings such as the 5D. By comparison the Canon 50d seemed pitifully ranked. Any comments or insights ?

[KeithB]

From the luminous Landscape:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/quality-vs-value.shtml

From that article:
"Before going further I should mention that I also have a serious beef with DxOMark in that it does not take resolution into account. This seriously skews the results, because a relatively low resolution camera with high image quality (such as the Nikon D90) scores very well, though it only has 12MP. If you only make small prints, then that's fine, but if largish prints or layouts are your thing then you have to take absolute resolution into account, and for this purpose 12MP is likely not enough, even if the image quality of those pixels is high."

For example:  Olympus has declared that 12 MP is enough.

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/03/olympus-declares-12-megapixels-is-enough.html

It is conceivable that they could steadily climb in the DxO rankings with improvements to dynamic range and High ISO performance, eventually being right next to the big boys, a 12 MP sensor next to 50-60 MP!

[whizkid]

DxO makes it clear that resolution is not factored in and they suggest a buyer consider resolution needs when comparing. They do say something about 8Mp printed to 8”x12” at 300dpi resolution to be fair for evaluatiing. Clearly Nikon is on to something as they have made a strong comeback with their lastest trio.  If DxO is correct then the D90's 12mp Apsc size sensor, sitting between the 40d and 50d in resolution, is having a field day.

[mike_tee_vee]

I'm not sure how much I trust DxO.  The image quality of most modern day DSLRs is quite good.  Assigning a strict numerical value for image quality can be extremely misleading, as evident by the marks awarded to Hasselblad, Mamiya, and Phase One.  Comparing a 40D to a 300D results in an 8.2% gain in "DxO sensor" marks.  I find it difficult to distinguish between most shots with these two cameras when viewed on a 24" monitor. 

[KeithB]

Luminous Landscape recently released a spreadsheet that allows you to set your own ranking:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/camera-metrics.shtml

[Bob Atkins]

Don't forget that rankings (even ones based on accurate data), tend only to be relevant for the performance limits of the camera.

For typical work, say ISO 100-400 and for typical print sizes (say up to 11x14), you're really not going to see much diifference even between the lowest and highest ranked current DSLRs.


If you're shooting high contrast scenes in low light at ISO 3200, making 36x48" prints and viewing them from a distance of 24", then the ranking can be more significant.