New dSLR sensor rating website

[RJM]

Discovered this dxomark (http://www.dxomark.com/) site yesterday. Not really camera reviews, but a scientific ranking of overall sensor performance. Interesting results.

cheers,
Rick

[greg g]

Rick,
Great heads-up on a good reference site. It will be interesting to see if they keep updating the site with the addition of new models each month or year. Thanks again!
Greg

[Robert L Jarvis]

That is mind boggling. The Canon 40D is rated higher than the 50D!!! The old 400D is rated higher than many later models or supposedly better performers! The top spot is taken by Nikon model--- look and see!!!

I wonder how they actually decide the ratings as I cannot see but there again I am no technical expert.

[ostling41]

The DXOmark insight tab makes the startling claim that higher pixel density compensates for noise. http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Insights/More-pixels-offsets-noise! As a self-acknowledge test-reading nut, I think this website is the best in the business.

[Robert / Seattle]

Very revealing. Glad I waited for a full frame Nikon before switching from film to digital format.

Could not be happier with my Nikon D3 and D700 cameras.

[citrinella]

Discovered this dxomark (http://www.dxomark.com/) site yesterday. Not really camera reviews, but a scientific ranking of overall sensor performance. Interesting results.

cheers,
Rick

Yes, but they are really rating for general photography. Look at the noise section, where they derive a "normalized signal to noise ratio". The standardization they apply is not really what we _normally_ do in bird photography. When discussing comparison between a 350d and a full frame, they "change the lens" to get the same image on the sensor. In most cases a bird photographer would be using the longest lens possible whichever body. And then would crop, and the crops would be different. So, not quite what their tests examine, and the differences between cameras are often so small it would make a difference.

So, this is a good guide, a _very_ good guide because it attempts to apply science to the actual way people use their gear. However, because we bird photographers are strange people doing strange things with our pictures :-) it needs to be interpreted with a lot of thought.

I wish they would add a couple of things :
an indication of variation between different example of one particular sensor;
an indication of how large a difference between sensors is needed for each measure to see a difference in practice. Many differences are small - do they mean anything ?

Mike.

[JGobeil]

IMO, this is a good reference tool but it is far from evaluating the complete effectiveness or overall quality of a camera. It evaluates the sensor - that's it.

When taking a picture, the whole camera is used - ergonomics, IS, in-camera processing, lens, etc. Then the most important ingredient must be added: the photographer ! Finally, the picture quality should be optimized by the post-treatment. This is a lot more than just the raw capture !!!

Pixel peeping is very nice but is is far from being the most important ingredient in a camera as far as I am concerned. Also, don't forget that small differences in those evaluation numbers are not significant and can't be seen by the human eye.