Angry Photographer: P-Megapixels: Yeah, NO, thats not right. Nope, thats not true
Angry Photographer: P-Megapixels: Yeah, NO, thats not right. Nope, thats not true
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/sharpness.htm
https://www.flickr.com/photos/riverbum-mn/24605449481/in/pool-nikon18-55/
https://www.flickr.com/groups/zeissotus55/pool/with/23728435943/
DXOMark sensor ratings only “measure” 3 aspects of the sensor Dynamic range, ISO, and Color
DXOMARK HAS ABSOLUTELY NO WAY of measuring the actual output of any sensor itself!! Only the resultant end-product after it has passed thru the AD-converters, and the all-important SNR algorithms which DRASTICALLY affect final output. This is akin to someone saying a sensor makes curd or butter, when in fact the sensor only produces "X" grade of milk.
DXOMARK HAS ABSOLUTELY NO WAY to test micro-contrast, color saturation.
DXO mark sates that certain lenses dont exploit a high MP sensor, this is total bullshit.
Such as mentioned in the VIDEO that the cheapo 18-55 nikkor kit lens only “exploits half the potential detail of a 24MP sensor, since it only registers 9 “perceptual megapixels”, but this is TOTAL NONSENSE……..he says at 5:30 in the video the 18-55 is “incredibly unsharp”……TOTAL LIE
DXOMark cannot and does not measure for firmware SNR compression algorithms, which have a huge bearing on dynamic range, ISO rating, and color saturation, thereby making the DXOMark ratings IRRELAVANT.
DXOMark does not measure any camera for countless other variables: FPS, Focusing accuracy, Buffer performance, Low light focusing, Moire, Battery life, Live view, Construction, Jpeg and video quality, menu systems, ergonomics, Ease of use, size and weight, connectivity, wifi, Overall worth and value, weather proofing, LCD quality, interface, lens compatibility, reliability. SNR firmware. There ARE COUNTLESS MORE SUCH EXAMPLES!
DXO Scores are nominalized for 8MP sensors, which makes all their conclusions 100% irrelevant. They are not measured against the actual resolution of ANY camera sensor!
DXOMark has a very strong motive and agenda, which is the sales of its software. Nobody with such motives and agendas can or should be trusted.
The entire premise of DXOMark is a logical fallacy of argumentum ad ignorantiam (an appeal to ignorance). Since DXOMark keeps and admits its testing methods and quanta are SECRET, its supporters like to tell those skeptical of DXOMark “prove they’re wrong”. There are two people on youtube famous for this reply. To which you must state that DXOMark testing quanta and algorithm’s are secret, therefore proving a negative is impossible and a logical fallacy. This very same position is no different than any who profess Angels are real, and ask you to “prove they don’t exist”. This is a fallacy since proving a negative is a logical fallacy.
The DXOMark ISO TESTING is a benchmark of their own creation as set to a certain noise threshold of dynamic range and color. RAW ISO data scoring ignoring Jpeg noise, SNR, and video ISO performances.
DXOMark scores the flagship Canon 1DX ($6800) with a rating of 83. Whereas the entry level Nikon D3300 ($500) scores a 82 !!! This is absolutely 100% INSANE & IMPOSSIBLE. There are also 14 other Nikon cameras that score higher than Canon’s flagship 1DX
DXOMark does NOT provide any photographic data or examples, or empirical PROOF OF ANY KIND AT ANY TIME OF ANY VARIETY to substantiate its claims. Of those people who support DXOMark’s absurd conclusion and protest “prove it (that DXOMark is wrong)”…, remind them of the fact that those who make the claim MUST FIRST PRESENT THE EVIDENCE, not the person or persons who protest and contest the CLAIM of the former. This is a fallacy!
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/sharpness.htm
https://www.flickr.com/photos/riverbum-mn/24605449481/in/pool-nikon18-55/
https://www.flickr.com/groups/zeissotus55/pool/with/23728435943/
DXOMark sensor ratings only “measure” 3 aspects of the sensor Dynamic range, ISO, and Color
DXOMARK HAS ABSOLUTELY NO WAY of measuring the actual output of any sensor itself!! Only the resultant end-product after it has passed thru the AD-converters, and the all-important SNR algorithms which DRASTICALLY affect final output. This is akin to someone saying a sensor makes curd or butter, when in fact the sensor only produces "X" grade of milk.
DXOMARK HAS ABSOLUTELY NO WAY to test micro-contrast, color saturation.
DXO mark sates that certain lenses dont exploit a high MP sensor, this is total bullshit.
Such as mentioned in the VIDEO that the cheapo 18-55 nikkor kit lens only “exploits half the potential detail of a 24MP sensor, since it only registers 9 “perceptual megapixels”, but this is TOTAL NONSENSE……..he says at 5:30 in the video the 18-55 is “incredibly unsharp”……TOTAL LIE
DXOMark cannot and does not measure for firmware SNR compression algorithms, which have a huge bearing on dynamic range, ISO rating, and color saturation, thereby making the DXOMark ratings IRRELAVANT.
DXOMark does not measure any camera for countless other variables: FPS, Focusing accuracy, Buffer performance, Low light focusing, Moire, Battery life, Live view, Construction, Jpeg and video quality, menu systems, ergonomics, Ease of use, size and weight, connectivity, wifi, Overall worth and value, weather proofing, LCD quality, interface, lens compatibility, reliability. SNR firmware. There ARE COUNTLESS MORE SUCH EXAMPLES!
DXO Scores are nominalized for 8MP sensors, which makes all their conclusions 100% irrelevant. They are not measured against the actual resolution of ANY camera sensor!
DXOMark has a very strong motive and agenda, which is the sales of its software. Nobody with such motives and agendas can or should be trusted.
The entire premise of DXOMark is a logical fallacy of argumentum ad ignorantiam (an appeal to ignorance). Since DXOMark keeps and admits its testing methods and quanta are SECRET, its supporters like to tell those skeptical of DXOMark “prove they’re wrong”. There are two people on youtube famous for this reply. To which you must state that DXOMark testing quanta and algorithm’s are secret, therefore proving a negative is impossible and a logical fallacy. This very same position is no different than any who profess Angels are real, and ask you to “prove they don’t exist”. This is a fallacy since proving a negative is a logical fallacy.
The DXOMark ISO TESTING is a benchmark of their own creation as set to a certain noise threshold of dynamic range and color. RAW ISO data scoring ignoring Jpeg noise, SNR, and video ISO performances.
DXOMark scores the flagship Canon 1DX ($6800) with a rating of 83. Whereas the entry level Nikon D3300 ($500) scores a 82 !!! This is absolutely 100% INSANE & IMPOSSIBLE. There are also 14 other Nikon cameras that score higher than Canon’s flagship 1DX
DXOMark does NOT provide any photographic data or examples, or empirical PROOF OF ANY KIND AT ANY TIME OF ANY VARIETY to substantiate its claims. Of those people who support DXOMark’s absurd conclusion and protest “prove it (that DXOMark is wrong)”…, remind them of the fact that those who make the claim MUST FIRST PRESENT THE EVIDENCE, not the person or persons who protest and contest the CLAIM of the former. This is a fallacy!
ÖNERİLEN YAZILAR
YORUMLAR