# NIkon Advocate Thom Hogan lambasts DXOmark scores.



## hermichut (Nov 11, 2014)

It's always interesting to see what the enemy really thinks and Thom Hogan's articles about Nikon/ Canon and the industry in general are to my taste some of the most insightful I've read. Anyway , his article on dxomark is well worth a read.

http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/do-you-believe-in-dxomark.html

hermichut.


----------



## Maximilian (Nov 11, 2014)

Thanks for sharing! I found this paragraph very interesting:

"_ It’s interesting to note that DxO seems to be playing a lot of angles. First, they are presenting themselves as impartial, numeric oriented testers (e.g. the scores). Second, they are presenting themselves as reviewers (e.g. "If Canon could only address performance at base and low ISO, the EOS 7D Mk II would make a thoroughly convincing all-round choice, but in this category the Sony A77 II looks to be the more compelling option."). Third, they sell their test equipment and software test suites to camera companies (Nikon, for instance, but I don’t believe Canon is one of their clients). Fourth, they present themselves as the best demosaic option, better than the camera makers’ options (e.g., DxO Optics Pro). They have some clear conflicts of interests that are not easily resolved. So be careful of just gobbling up their “results” as absolutes. _"

*So be careful of just gobbling up their “results” as absolutes*.
So true! :


----------



## V8Beast (Nov 11, 2014)

I don't think he's lambasting DXO. He's merely pointing out the obvious in a very articulate manner 

DXO's individual test metrics are as useful as their overall sensor score is useless ;D Why they can't disclose how they weigh their individual test metrics against each other to arrive at a final overall sensor rating continues to be the biggest mystery in the land of pixel-peeping and measurebating  

In the meantime, the rioting over sensor scores ensues.


----------



## hermichut (Nov 11, 2014)

V8Beast said:


> I don't think he's lambasting DXO. He's merely pointing out the obvious in a very articulate manner



I meant that he was lambasting the overall DXO score , but I'll admit that "lambast" is possible overly strong click bait.... OMG what have I become  ??


----------



## Maui5150 (Nov 11, 2014)

V8Beast said:


> I don't think he's lambasting DXO. He's merely pointing out the obvious in a very articulate manner
> 
> DXO's individual test metrics are as useful as their overall sensor score is useless ;D Why they can't disclose how they weight their individual test metrics against each other to arrive at a final overall sensor rating continues to be the biggest mystery in the land of pixel-peeping and measurebating
> 
> In the meantime, the rioting over sensor scores ensues.



They somewhat do. It is clear that they weight DR far over noise / ISO. 

You could create a camera that has DR of 14 for Portrait, 14 for Landscape and ISO score of 320 (Pretty much sucks in even moderate light, horrible in low light) and then another that had DR of 13 Portrait, 12.7 landscape and ISO of 1600 (Low light monster ) 

Where they also likely fall down is in how they gather DR. They have their own testing methodologies, but any bias or weight in how they calculate this is then further amplified. 

What is funny is how useless DXOmarks are. Especially when you look at the build up to the 7D MK II, everyone was so concerned on low light, low light, sensor size, low light. 

Sensor size has no real roll in DXO - they will "rank" a 12 MP in the same as a 36 MP, etc, which obviously a score of 80 is quite different, as well as the least ranked criteria is Noise and ISO where to many that is one of their chief concerns. 

Another factor that I do not see is the faithfulness of colors. I have shot next to a Nikon shooter in the same light, same set up and pretty much similar lens, and always liked how Canon shoots skin tones over Nikon. Just a preference, but something to me that matters more than whether one gets 12.8 DR and another 12.6


----------



## 2n10 (Nov 11, 2014)

While Thom does not lambast DXO mark I do believe he points them out for what they are. A business trying to do a thriving business without looking so. If they were to eliminate the overall score and not make suggestions on equipment they would raise their stock for some but would loose with others. If Canon is not a client for their testing programs then they are most likely to paint their other clients in a better light to not lose them.


----------



## DominoDude (Nov 11, 2014)

Using DxO scores seem to work best when comparing various generations or models from the *same brand*. Any bias towards certain manufacturers, or odd weighting of measurements, only rear their ugly heads when doing comparisons between brands.

Remember the days when some brands of graphic cards had hard coded routines to give them better performance numbers in certain tests commonly used by magazines and such? Is it possible that some camera makers have found out how DxO weighs their numbers and are cooking up the best brew to get a better ranking?

Sincerely,
/Far Fetchd


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Nov 11, 2014)

Maui5150 said:


> I have shot next to a Nikon shooter in the same light, same set up and pretty much similar lens, and always liked how Canon shoots skin tones over Nikon.



Were you chimping the Jpegs on the LCD or did you take the raw files from both systems and process them identically?


----------



## Maui5150 (Nov 11, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> Maui5150 said:
> 
> 
> > I have shot next to a Nikon shooter in the same light, same set up and pretty much similar lens, and always liked how Canon shoots skin tones over Nikon.
> ...



Raw files. This was part of a Shootout / seminar which included a later review of images, etc - so these were all raw, unprocessed images / Photoshop


----------



## Jon_D (Nov 11, 2014)

one thing is sure.. you don´t even need DXO to see that sony has the best sensors.


----------



## Monchoon (Nov 11, 2014)

Jon_D said:


> one thing is sure.. you don´t even need DXO to see that sony has the best sensors.



And the best lens selection, and the best autofocus system, and ....


----------



## c.d.embrey (Nov 11, 2014)

DXO is for gearheads. Lots of discussion on the fora, but Pros don't pay much (any) attention.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Nov 11, 2014)

Jon_D said:


> one thing is sure.. you don´t even need DXO to see that sony has the best sensors.



They probably have, but that is of little interest to me.
A little while back I got the chance to play with the Nikon D800e and the D4 along with 2 examples of the Nikon 500 F4 ED VR AF-S lens.
Sorry they may have the best (Sony) sensors (and the much touted Nikon processors) but the cameras performance (the D800e was of little use due to the light) and the lenses performance just made me glad I bought Canon. They were pretty peeved when they tried my Canon setup.
Sony sensors are probably the best around at the moment but they are not necessarily put in the best cameras and do not have access to the best lenses (certainly in the case of long fast lenses).
So Sony's (better) sensors are of little value to me, especially in Sony cameras!


----------



## Etienne (Nov 11, 2014)

johnf3f said:


> Jon_D said:
> 
> 
> > one thing is sure.. you don´t even need DXO to see that sony has the best sensors.
> ...



Agree ... Lenses and, to some degree, ergonomics keeps me with Canon. Skin tones too. I love my Canon lenses, and I only have a few non-Canon: Tokina 11-16 f2.8, 50-135 f2.8, and a Bower 85 1.4 cine. Camera bodies will come and go, but lenses will be around for the longhaul


----------



## meywd (Nov 11, 2014)

Jon_D said:


> one thing is sure.. you don´t even need DXO to see that sony has the best sensors.



in low ISO....


----------

