# 650D Results on DxOMark



## bow26 (Oct 8, 2012)

Hi CR Community,

I have been lingering around this forum for some time now, but have not really posted much. Today, I found that DxOMark released their testings for the 650D. However, they showed that the 650D falls short in every way when compared with its competition. So what do you guys think? Personally, I don't view sensor measurement all that seriously, it is how you use the camera and performance in the real world that matters most.

Thanks.

Link: http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/CANON-EOS-650D-Strictly-Status-Quo/Comparisons


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 8, 2012)

Ahhhh, welcome and thanks. The fire definitely needs another log. 



bow26 said:


> So what do you guys think?



I understand their scores for what they are, and more importantly, what they are not. So...I don't care.


----------



## davidpeter (Oct 8, 2012)

The DR is worse than the 500D, which is a surprise. But in every other aspects, the sensor is almost the same as the 7D, which is quite good.

However, Nikon still beats us in sensor performance. The new line next year should perform much better to reason a new body over my old 1D mkIII...


----------



## ChrisP (Oct 8, 2012)

Although I'm not a potential 650D user, I still care about its performance because it shows a trend in Canon’s dslr development. It shows a company which have fallen so much behind recently, and apparently doesn’t do much to catch up. Choosing to go backwards in dynamic range from 600D to 650D is just a mystery to me.

I ‘m still heavily invested into the Canon dslr system, but one may worry if Canon’s “laissez faire” attitude to sensor technology , may devaluate second hand values of Canon lenses and other equipment.


----------



## kirillica (Oct 8, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> I understand their scores for what they are, and more importantly, what they are not. So...I don't care.


+1


----------



## mystic_theory (Oct 8, 2012)

I already knew that the 650D sensor was the same of the 7D and all the (many) younger siblings, so I'm not surprised at all, disappointed I already was. Since I want to stay with crop sensor cameras (lighter and cheaper equipment, and I don't need professional grade photos), and I needed another camera, I got myself a "new" 550D for 290 GBP, which has the same sensor performance of the 650D (and consequently of all the Canon crop lineup).

As long as Canon doesn't make some decent crop camera they won't get another dime from me: I'll just keep buying used/refurbished Canon cameras, until Nikon's get better enough than Canon's to compensate for their inferior lenses: at that point I'll just jump on the Nikon band wagon. 8)


----------



## compupix (Oct 8, 2012)

*Re: DxOMark Canon 650D “same old, same old”*



> DxOMark: CANON EOS 650D: Strictly Status Quo


http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/CANON-EOS-650D-Strictly-Status-Quo


> [T]he 650D uses the same 18 Mpix APS-C CMOS sensor that Canon has used in this line since 2008.





> Canon is outclassed by both Sony in terms of sensor technology, particularly where color depth and dynamic range are concerned. So the Canon EOS 650D’s strong points must be found elsewhere. ... Canon chose to focus its efforts on designing a camera with such ergonomic improvements as a capacitated touchscreen display and an innovative, quick, quiet, and powerful hybridized autofocus. In video mode, the autofocus operates continuously and takes full advantage of the emerging new line of lenses equipped with Stepping Motor (STM) technology.





> [T]he line that marks the gap between Canon sensor performance and those of Nikon and Sony is becoming more pronounced, particularly for dynamic range and color depth ... And in fact, the excellent test scores of the Nikon D600’s 24 Mpix full-frame digital reflex make us all the more eager to test the Canon EOS 6D’s 20 Mpix full-format sensor. For the EOS 650D’s sensor, however, even its hybridized autofocus cannot deflect the conclusion drawn from our DxOMark test results: “same old, same old.”


Canon, Nikon, & Minolta used to trade patents. I wonder if Sony doesn't play that game or if Canon just doesn't have anything worthwhile to trade.
--
Thanks,
Drew


----------



## heptagon (Oct 8, 2012)

Well someone needs to wake up Canon before they be gone.


----------



## robbymack (Oct 8, 2012)

Oh no someone has pointed out the consumer grade canon camera is just that...that's it I'm selling my gear and going to Nikon


----------



## dtaylor (Oct 9, 2012)

DxO probably ranks it higher than a Hasselblad medium format back, so...what are you complaining about? ;D

DxO - the Mark of the Clueless.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Oct 9, 2012)

I would guess that a lot of the target market for the 650D are going to use incamera jpegs rather than RAWS.

For the remainder who shoot RAW, I'm sure they are confident enough with DPP or ACR to squeeze the best images out of the RAW data.

In practise, unprocessed RAWs have little relevance. DXO mark seems like reviewing a car with the gearbox removed.

I know there are some on here who love to take photographs of charts, I personally don't.

I also have a bag of lenses which I don't wish to change, so I'll stick with canon. My current cameras serve me well. I understand RAW and how to get the best from them. I have about 3x the resolution I really need.

No rush to switch or change.


----------



## friedmud (Oct 9, 2012)

Just got a text from my friend: he's going to buy my 7D. Sold my 70-200 f/L IS last weekend to a different friend.

I now have enough to pick up a D600 body. The rest of my gear will hopefully be sold by the end of next week to finance my Nikon 24-70 f/2.8G.

I can't be the only one....


----------



## meli (Oct 9, 2012)

Yes because DXO is the problem, not that Canon is processor-wise stagnant for more than half a decade.

I mean DXO is for the clueless, no matter that their aps-c sensors are bottom leaders and actually getting outclassed by 4/3 cams, they're still better than any cameraphone out there.


----------



## dtaylor (Oct 9, 2012)

meli said:


> Yes because DXO is the problem, not that Canon is processor-wise stagnant for more than half a decade.



Yes, a company whose testing methodology places APS-C cameras ahead of medium format digital backs is a problem. Have you ever compared prints from the two? 



> I mean DXO is for the clueless, no matter that their aps-c sensors are bottom leaders and actually getting outclassed by 4/3 cams, they're still better than any cameraphone out there.



Outclassed by 4/3 cams :

Yes, it appears DxO is for the clueless.


----------



## EchoLocation (Oct 9, 2012)

robbymack said:


> Oh no someone has pointed out the consumer grade canon camera is just that...that's it I'm selling my gear and going to Nikon


Did you notice that the Nikon D3200 scored an 81(the same as a 5DIII at roughly 4x times it's cost)?
650D scored a 62, in the realm of Samsung, Lumix, etc
While I don't take these sensor tests as the end all be all, I do think they give a decent idea of DR, ISO range, and overall sensor performance.
If Canon fans choose to say things like "our sensors are good enough" or "DXO is BS", that's fine... but at some point people should open their eyes to the fact that Nikon has basically dominated Canon for the past few releases.
I recently sold my 5DC and 24-105 and bought a D700 and 24-70. The image quality is significantly better, the bokeh better, low light is 3x better, and the AF is literally night and day, not to mention the overall user experience(after becoming accustomed to the change,) is much better, it is absolutely incomparable. The AF alone has tripled my keeper rate, and i've switched from center focus, recompose to 3D 51pt AF.
I hesitated and waited and waited, wanting Canon to give me a reason not to change. But after switching, I can clearly see that the D700 is an insanely good camera, way better than the 5DC(i'd guess the 5DII as well) and with an AF that outperforms almost any camera one can buy today.
If you're happy with Canon that's great, but for the rest of the world, it's pretty obvious Nikon is killing them.


----------



## elflord (Oct 9, 2012)

Hahaha ... nothing like hard cold numbers to shine some light on the emporers new clothes.



dtaylor said:


> Yes, a company whose testing methodology places APS-C cameras ahead of medium format digital backs is a problem. Have you ever compared prints from the two?



What about prints at ISO 3200 ? 

This is a simple case of the limitations of using a single number. Modern APS-C DSLRs are better at high ISO than medium format backs which don't go above ISO 1600 and are optimised for ISO 100 or lower.

But the medium format backs crush APS-C cameras on all measurements except high ISO performance. Anyway, this is all a bit of a red herring and a bit of a slimy attempt at ad-hominem -- going after the source with a shoddy half baked attempt at ridicule, instead of attempting to address the substance (that Canon's sensors haven't really improved a great deal)



> Outclassed by 4/3 cams :
> 
> Yes, it appears DxO is for the clueless.



APS-C sensors are not that much larger than micro 4/3, based on sensor size alone you'd expect about 1/2 a stop difference in performance. So it's not terribly surprising that cutting edge micro 4/3 sensors (e.g. Oly OM-D which uses a Sony sensor) are better performers than the laggards (e.g. Canon)


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 9, 2012)

EchoLocation said:


> ... but at some point people should open their eyes to the fact that Nikon has basically dominated Canon for the past few releases.
> ...but for the rest of the world, it's pretty obvious Nikon is killing them.



Dominating and killing them how, exactly? By losing dSLR market share to Canon for several years? By consistently selling fewer dSLRs and lenses than Canon, year after year, for the past several years?

Canon sells _cameras_, not sensors, and they sell more of them than Nikon.


----------



## heptagon (Oct 9, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> EchoLocation said:
> 
> 
> > ... but at some point people should open their eyes to the fact that Nikon has basically dominated Canon for the past few releases.
> ...



Where do you actually pull these numbers from?


----------



## PeterJ (Oct 9, 2012)

"Nikon and Canon are as good as each other"

-- © 2006-2012 KenRockwell.com


----------



## birtembuk (Oct 9, 2012)

dtaylor said:


> Outclassed by 4/3 cams :
> 
> Yes, it appears DxO is for the clueless.



Right ! And how about all these data from cam-phones they have accumulated over the years? They said that the producers did not want the data published for now. Tell me, there couldn't be anything fishy, could it?


----------



## Ivan Muller (Oct 9, 2012)

...the problem i have with 'jumping ship' so to speak is that who can afford that luxury ??...so imo nikon makes better sensors now, and the d800 and d800e are probably at the top of the heap...does that make my 5d2 bad ? no I dont think so, it just means that there are better cameras out there now...how much better though? One cannot quantify it...Canon also makes a superb 24ts lens, I just got one, it also makes a pancake, I also just got one, sure the new nikons look great, but so do the Sony's...so what to do? buy a whole new system everytime the competition comes out with something better? just doesn't make sense to me...so for now I am spending my money on lenses, the ones I have always wanted...buying any new camera now is not going to change my photography or put money in my bank...a new lens like the shift will, but not any new camera...so one day when the new megapixel canon comes or maybe the 5dIV then I will reconsider but for now I just cannot see how any of the latest 'male jewelery' offerings out there can replace what I have got...its simply good enough...not the best but 'good enough'...not one of my clients have ever complained about image quality or focus...yes perhaps my vision but that's not any camera's fault..personally I feel all the brands are good enough now to produce top class results, what a great time to be a photographer! Some of my work can be seen here at...http://www.ivanmuller.co.za/blog


----------



## dtaylor (Oct 9, 2012)

EchoLocation said:


> Did you notice that the Nikon D3200 scored an 81(the same as a 5DIII at roughly 4x times it's cost)?



Did you notice that the D3200 scored an 81, 3 points higher than a *Hasselblad H3DII 50*?

Do you know how *stupid* DxOMark looks for this? Do you know how *stupid* they look claiming the D3200 has better overall IQ and better DR?

Do you know how *stupid* people look when they cite DxOMark scores given the above?

You're telling me to trust a testing company that tests a Honda Civic and a Corvette ZR-1 and reports that the Civic is faster with more HP. Please...



> While I don't take these sensor tests as the end all be all, I do think they give a decent idea of DR, ISO range, and overall sensor performance.



Say that after you've compared 24x36" prints from the D3200 and H3DII.



> but at some point people should open their eyes to the fact that Nikon has basically dominated Canon for the past few releases.



Apparently they dominate $40,000 medium format systems as well :



> I recently sold my 5DC and 24-105 and bought a D700 and 24-70. The image quality is significantly better, the bokeh better, low light is 3x better, and the AF is literally night and day, not to mention the overall user experience(after becoming accustomed to the change,) is much better, it is absolutely incomparable.



You're seriously comparing a 2005 camera to a 2008 one, and an f/4 lens to an f/2.8 lens? (High ISO is about 1 stop better, btw.)



> If you're happy with Canon that's great, but for the rest of the world, it's pretty obvious Nikon is killing them.



I wish Canon would introduce a 50 MP FF body for $1,000 with 20 stops of DR and perfectly clean ISO 25,600 images. Not so much because I would enjoy that camera, but because it would send the Nikon trolls back to their forums


----------



## Maui5150 (Oct 9, 2012)

ankorwatt said:


> For myself, I'll take DxO's essentially objective and quantitative results over random individuals' perception of reality any day.
> 
> -- show signature --



Really.

So if you had a choice between 3 camera... The Nikon D3X, the Nikon D4 and the Nikon D600 which is the best camera of the lot?

According the DxOMark, the D600 is the best camera out of the lot.

Funny, but I would gather that if I selected 1000 Professional Photographers who shot Nikon and asked them to rank their choices, I am confident that very few would rank the D600 as the top camera of the lot. 

A test may be quantitative, but that does not necessarily mean it is accurate or relevant.


----------



## Canon-F1 (Oct 9, 2012)

Maui5150 said:


> ankorwatt said:
> 
> 
> > For myself, I'll take DxO's essentially objective and quantitative results over random individuals' perception of reality any day.
> ...



well you don´t get what the DXOmark is about.
the best SENSOR.. not the best camera.


not that im saying the DXOmark makes sense to me in real life all the time.
especially when i look at the medium format cameras.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 9, 2012)

heptagon said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > EchoLocation said:
> ...



I'm basing my conclusions on DxOMark's Market Share Score. The score is accurately measured, then normalized to the area of an average dSLR production factory floor, and the normalization results in Canon annual earnings that exceed the GDP of Japan. While DxOMark's Overall and Landscape Sensor Scores are based on flawed analytical methods, their Market Share Score is fine, because it shows Canon is better.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 9, 2012)

heptagon said:


> Where do you actually pull these numbers from?



Oh wait, you wanted an answer that has actual real-world meaning, and not a DxOMark Score?  

See this linked thread for the data (and supporting links).



ankorwatt said:


> For myself, I'll take DxO's essentially objective and quantitative results over random individuals' perception of reality any day.



And yet, here you give us your random perception of reality:



ankorwatt said:


> Nikon, Sony are increasing their shares while Canon goes back.



And real reality shows a different picture than _your_ reality. See the linked thread above for the numbers.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Oct 9, 2012)

@dtaylor


> You're telling me to trust a testing company that tests a Honda Civic and a Corvette ZR-1 and reports that the Civic is faster with more HP. Please...



I would take a honda civic over a corvette anyday. In fact strike that. I'd take the Corvette and sell it and buy two honda Civics.

Here in Europe we like cars that can go round corners. 

Give me a nice British B-road with a Honda Civic Type-R and a corvette, and see which car is 'faster'.

Of course on a race track with long straights there is no competition.

It's not all about HP or MP.

@ankorwatt


> For myself, I'll take DxO's essentially objective and quantitative results over random individuals' perception of reality any day.



This could get really heavy. How do you know any of this isn't just a cats dream? 

For myself, I'm quite happy with what I'm using. I'm glad you are happy with what you perceive works well for you. Great when it all works out like that, isn't it?


----------



## dtaylor (Oct 9, 2012)

paul13walnut5 said:


> @dtaylor
> 
> 
> > You're telling me to trust a testing company that tests a Honda Civic and a Corvette ZR-1 and reports that the Civic is faster with more HP. Please...
> ...



If you think a Civic can out corner a ZR-1, you're on some really good drugs man ;D


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Oct 9, 2012)

Try a twisty british b road. Hairpins. Blind summits. Corvette Rwd. That kind of power. FWD Civic type R hands down. Redline. 2nd & third. Also try the uk prices. Try uk fuel prices. 

That and I just dont like American cars. Sorry folks.

I suppose the camera analogy would be different cameras for different jobs. The Corvette may be a 1d mkIV and the civic more like an EOS M with pancake. But each have their strengths and weaknesses.

Much like HP means very little on its own, so does DXO...


----------



## dtaylor (Oct 9, 2012)

paul13walnut5 said:


> Try a twisty british b road. Hairpins. Blind summits. Corvette Rwd. That kind of power. FWD Civic type R hands down.



Someone who knows how to drive the Corvette and manage its power...which isn't that hard with traction control on...will smoke the Civic. I don't care what the course is. The difference in skid pad rating is huge. The difference in braking is huge. The difference in the ability to accelerate out of corner braking is huge.

"I didn't know how much power I had and slammed the car into the mountain" is not the same as "the Civic can beat the Corvette."

But you've blown the analogy completely out of proportion. DxO is telling you the Civic has more HP and is faster on a straight course. Do you believe them?


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Oct 9, 2012)

No. But i dont rate dxo anyway. Neither the civic or corvette will get very far without a gear box. Thats essentially what analysing a raw file is. Its not real world. Its nothing like the end result. And I'm all about the end result.


----------



## krjc (Oct 9, 2012)

dtaylor said:


> paul13walnut5 said:
> 
> 
> > @dtaylor
> ...



Have to agree with dtaylor on this one. ZR-1 against a Civic, any Civic that is mass produced it wont even be close. I agree with most of paul13walnut5 comments but he didn't pick the right comparison here. lol


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Oct 9, 2012)

I would still rather have the civic anyway. Fuel economy. Jd power survey. Resale value. And i just dont like american cars. Or muscle cars. My girlfriend came with me to the dealers when I bought my last car, she had a colour in mind, I had an mpg in mind. So I'm probably the wrong person to talk about cars with.


----------

