Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: new DxOmark test results  (Read 14028 times)
david distefano
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 125


« on: March 24, 2012, 11:23:12 AM »
ReplyReply

today i went over to a nikon forum where they were discussing the latest results from dxomark testing that stated that the d800 surpassed the phase one iq 180 as king of the sensor hill. and as usual, to the followers of this forum, this will be the death of medium format photography because ff has now been shown to not only equal but surpass mf. i know given a choice of a ff d800 or a hasselblad cfv-50 or an iq 160 or an iq 180 it would be a no brainer, i would take any of the larger mf digital backs, then what i have, for my v system and arca-swiss 6x9. why is it so important when i read those ff forums that they want to see the death of medium format photography? i would like to see a 30x40 print by both the d800 and the iq 180. a print, the output we all strive for, should be the only test.
Logged
John E
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 88


« Reply #1 on: March 24, 2012, 12:22:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote: "why is it so important when i read those ff forums that they want to see the death of medium format photography?"

Well, I certainly can't speak for anyone at that forum, but I would imaging envy is at least partly involved. I mean, most amateurs/hobbyists can't afford MF equipment (digital, anyway). Course, I really don't understand the need to wish for the early demise of MF..sheesh, just enjoy the equipment you've got and make the most of it.

John
Logged
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4915



« Reply #2 on: March 24, 2012, 12:26:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Just ignore the tribal drumbeat found on some forums. There are a lot of self professed profits, most of them forecasting doom for some product that doesn't match their preferred conceptions.

The Nikon D800/E does put some new pressure on the low end of medium format, but there's still lots of life left in that baby.

Michael
Logged
EricWHiss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2439



WWW
« Reply #3 on: March 24, 2012, 12:27:16 PM »
ReplyReply

At this point all the new cameras are so good that the results depend more on the operators than anything else.  Well that and lenses.   The one thing that no one is going to question is that the new DSLR's are going to come out on top at ISO 400 and higher.
Logged

Authorized Rolleiflex Dealer:
Find product information, download user manuals, or purchase online - Rolleiflex USA
theguywitha645d
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 970


« Reply #4 on: March 24, 2012, 12:39:23 PM »
ReplyReply

It is funny how photography is not an art but a competitive forum where the one with the best stuff wins. But I guess that is a lot easier than having to make photographs that impress others...
Logged
KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1703



WWW
« Reply #5 on: March 24, 2012, 01:07:37 PM »
ReplyReply

It is funny how photography is not an art but a competitive forum where the one with the best stuff wins.

Hey, steady on, are you seriously saying that cameras have a purpose other than as testbeds for resolution and dynamic range?
Logged

theguywitha645d
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 970


« Reply #6 on: March 24, 2012, 01:13:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Hey, steady on, are you seriously saying that cameras have a purpose other than as testbeds for resolution and dynamic range?

Sorry, what was I saying? I alway fall into the trap of over thinking these things...
Logged
John R Smith
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1357


Still crazy, after all these years


« Reply #7 on: March 24, 2012, 01:17:49 PM »
ReplyReply

At this point all the new cameras are so good that the results depend more on the operators than anything else.  Well that and lenses.

Eric is spot-on correct. The current line-up of digital cameras, 35mm DSLRs and MF, is so competent that you could choose any one of these systems and make great photographs. There is no limitation in the equipment, only in your imagination and, of course, what you can afford. With my own system, it takes immaculate technique to anywhere near approach the limits of the sensor. And by the time you have managed that, you are way beyond what you could have achieved with the same format film in terms of resolution and freedom from grain.

No, the cameras are great. It's fun to debate pros and cons, and to be partisan about brands and lenses. We all did that in film days too. Ten years ago, digital photography was in its infancy, and a great deal of the gear was frankly crap. That's just not true anymore.

No need to agonise, just choose the system that resonates with you and fits your pocket. There are very few lemons out there.

John
Logged

Hasselblad 500 C/M, SWC and CFV-39 DB
and a case full of (very old) lenses and other bits
Michael LS
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 56


WWW
« Reply #8 on: March 24, 2012, 01:24:18 PM »
ReplyReply

At this point all the new cameras are so good that the results depend more on the operators than anything else.


Exactly. It's fun to discuss the technical end, and technical advances can open up more creative
possibilities. However, the challenge of making interesting photographs will always trump gear.

And DXO has only done sensor testing. Once glass goes on and real-world stuff begins, unless Nikon
has found a way to get around the laws of physics, a high-end MF image should still win the day.
Not that I want to dis a camera I will be shooting. I'm sure the D800 will produce a great image, but
thus far, I've never cared for debating the often-debated issue of full frame dslr vs MF quality,
because to my eyes it has never been questionable: I can tell a MF print at 100 yards, compared
to the same image printed from a dslr file. Of course, the dslr print will look !@#$% fantastic by itself,
when such comparisons are not available, and in doing personal work, they never are.

Obviously, if your also putting food on your table with your gear, your needs will be different, due to
the competitive aspects.

Aside from commerce, we all know photographers are a lot like audiophiles and wine lovers (ok, "oenophiles"!),
they are hyper-tuned aficionados and connoisseurs who love to pour over and enjoy the subtle yet complex
differences in the gear they use to enjoy their passions.
Logged

MrSmith
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 918



WWW
« Reply #9 on: March 24, 2012, 01:48:45 PM »
ReplyReply

i'm not a fan of amateur bickering/fanboyism but then i remember that without the millions of weekend warriors there would be no medium format digital/high end 35mm or the cost would double/triple without them. 
Logged
DeeJay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 250


« Reply #10 on: March 24, 2012, 02:52:52 PM »
ReplyReply

DxO is a pile of RUBBISH. A Nikon 800 is not even remotely in the same League as a Phase One IQ180, P65+ or even a IQ140 for that matter.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2012, 02:55:13 PM by DeeJay » Logged
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4915



« Reply #11 on: March 24, 2012, 04:04:42 PM »
ReplyReply

And you are basing both of these observations on what empirical or objective criteria?

Or is opinion and wishing something to be so enough?

Michael
Logged
jeremypayne
Guest
« Reply #12 on: March 24, 2012, 04:47:27 PM »
ReplyReply

DxO is a pile of RUBBISH. A Nikon 800 is not even remotely in the same League as a Phase One IQ180, P65+ or even a IQ140 for that matter.


You are right.   With Nikon, for about three thousand dollars you get a camera AND a sensor.

Not at all in the same league at all!  The 180 will cost you 40k and you'll still have to buy a camera!

Chill, dude ... The chicks will still dig your $50k camera ... It'll be ok. Cool
Logged
PdF
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 296



« Reply #13 on: March 24, 2012, 05:02:01 PM »
ReplyReply

<<With Nikon, for about three thousand dollars you get a camera AND a sensor.>>

AND a high-definition video camera...

PdF
Logged

PdF
ondebanks
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 833



« Reply #14 on: March 24, 2012, 05:21:35 PM »
ReplyReply

DxO is a pile of RUBBISH. A Nikon 800 is not even remotely in the same League as a Phase One IQ180, P65+ or even a IQ140 for that matter.


Dude, you can't just dismiss it without providing evidence to the contrary.

Remember, it's a benchmark of the sensor only.

The fact that none of the PhaseOne backs you mention can go past ISO 1600 (unbinned), or 120 seconds of exposure, should tell you something...they ain't perfect. In fact, to borrow your parlance, in those domains they're not even remotely in the same League as a Nikon (or Canon or Sony or ...). The difference is, I can state this because I'm citing facts provided by the manufacturers themselves.

What exactly don't you believe about the D800 results in DxOmark?

Ray

Logged
KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1703



WWW
« Reply #15 on: March 24, 2012, 05:22:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Chicks care about cameras?
Logged

jeremypayne
Guest
« Reply #16 on: March 24, 2012, 05:27:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Chicks care about cameras?

Shhhhh ... Don't tell him .... He's sensitive.
Logged
theguywitha645d
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 970


« Reply #17 on: March 24, 2012, 05:40:42 PM »
ReplyReply

DxO is a pile of RUBBISH. A Nikon 800 is not even remotely in the same League as a Phase One IQ180, P65+ or even a IQ140 for that matter.


Sorry, that is a silly comment. DxOmark measures sensor input/output response and is a valid measure of a sensor. The scores do not give any spatial quantification. If an engine is 1000 HP, does that mean the car goes fast or do you need more information like if it is in a sports car or a Hummer? To say these scores are meaningless is just the same mistake as thinking they mean everything.
Logged
jduncan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 301


« Reply #18 on: March 24, 2012, 06:30:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Just ignore the tribal drumbeat found on some forums. There are a lot of self professed profits, most of them forecasting doom for some product that doesn't match their preferred conceptions.

The Nikon D800/E does put some new pressure on the low end of medium format, but there's still lots of life left in that baby.

Michael

I believe is not just for low end medium format, but to medium format companies. I also believe that if they fail to see it then big trouble lies ahead.
The reason for that is resource deprivation.  They need to sell enough to support increasing development efforts. Right now dalsa also count with Canadian government support but I don't know for how long.

Nevertheless there is the niche theory, and possible Better Light  is a good example. Let's see if/how they react.
I want to stress that I agree that, as a device the D800/D800E just challenge the lower end of the MF range from Phase one and Hasselblad.

Best regards,

James
Logged

english is not my first language, an I know is shows
theguywitha645d
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 970


« Reply #19 on: March 24, 2012, 06:44:13 PM »
ReplyReply

But history has shown the statement not to be true. When 35mm sensors hit about 20MP, it did not seem to stop sales of the MFD backs/camera in that range. Nor did the companies seem really to suffer and you can still buy 22MP backs from Phase and Leaf and the sales are doing fine from what I hear. DSLR customers are not simply MFD customers with not enough money. In the silver age of photography, 35mm was not king because larger formats were simply more expensive. The DSLR/35mm customer is just a different animal. Just as the MFD/large format shooter was a different animal. Your mistake comes from thinking the choice is simply economic and based on matching the number of pixels. Art is not an economic problem.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad