DXO Mark - Should They Be Trusted?

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
Possibly some truth,some sour grapes and the attention hitting idea of knocking the establishment,any one that buys on the recommendation of one site has more money than sense anyway.
 

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
From the article: "...they list the ISO on the D810 as being up to 51,200…which is well, a lie. It’s expandable up to 51,200, but it’s only NATIVE to 12,800." I'm not sure how it's a lie to say the D810 has an ISO of up to 51,200 when the D810's maximum ISO is 51,200. Frankly, this guy sounds like a whiny little b--ch moaning because those big ol' meanies at DXO didn't fall all over themselves praising his new toy.

To wit: "This is a simple… OPEN YOUR EYES. I took the time to see that for nearly half the cost you get what is in my opinion a better camera." OMG. Just... Shut. Up. Did you seriously just say, "open your eye's" and put it in all caps? This whole "article" is nothing but tantrum-speak for, "My camera is just so freaking awesome! Why can't everyone [DXOMark] see just how awesome it is??!! If you can't see just how awesome it is, there's something wrong with you!"
 

Its Just Me

Senior Member
I am surprised that different people can read the same article and come away with such completely different meanings.

I took the message as "Do you own home work and trust no one site."

Fish took it as a whiney bitch little fanboy crying to mommy.

Mike, more or less, tends to agree with Fish.

Fascinating. :confused:
 

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
I am surprised that different people can read the same article and come away with such completely different meanings.

I took the message as "Do you own home work and trust no one site."

Fish took it as a whiney bitch little fanboy crying to mommy.

Mike, more or less, tends to agree with Fish.

Fascinating. :confused:

Yup... Pretty much.
.....
spockfascinating.jpg
 

rocketman122

Senior Member
Nice article. I dont believe lanier when he says he never visited the site. Thats quite bullshet. But i dont trust anything that comes from dxomark and imo are payed under the table to up scores for gear. I dont go by numbers at all. I dont trust many reviewers and their persobal opinions. I simply want to see untouched raw files. I dont cate to hear anythibg from tge reviewer, truthfully. I will tell the reviewer what i think about the lens when ill see the full rez untouched raw file. Nothing else matters because today there is interest in mind and peoples wallets in mind.
 

rocketman122

Senior Member
Not a single digit. Lanier is 1000% correct with his article. And hes being pc with his words. Ihes beibg gentle with his words. I dont round off corners.
 
Last edited:

J-see

Senior Member
If I don't have data to go upon, buying will become a lottery.

What's reliable besides data? Opinions? If you ask me how cold it is, I'll say very cold while my neighbour thinks it's chilly. So, how cold is it? Only the thermometer will tell you.

It's the same with lenses or cams. Can anyone tell me how sharp a lens is, or how many color variations a cam has at ISO 200? None of us can answer that in an objective manner. That's when numbers come in handy and what DxO provides is very easily double-checked.

They can score any way they like since that's a combinations of subjective valuations but their measurements have to be correct else they can close down and go sell old socks.
 

rocketman122

Senior Member
You are absolutely correct. What u interpret will be different thab what i interpret. Numbers are too geekiness for photography. Theres a lot of small finer thibgs to measure than numbers. Theres small aesthetics numbers dorsnt show.

Im saying i dont trust anyones word. No one. They all have their wallets in mind. All i care is to see the images.
Show me the pictures u took so i can assess it with my own eyes. Numbers wont tell me anything it doesnt translate to an image. And besides dxomark are liars imo. Nikon is a client and pay dxomark. Not possible the canon cameras place so low on the charts. Thats quite nonsense.

Relaize the dumb trend of the "real world testibg" theyve been releasibg. What? Before it wasn't the real world? Its all a market of people wanting u to click their sponsored links so they make some money

Notice rockwell never says anything bad about any gear today? Why? Because its in his wallets interest to psych u up to buy and potentially use his links so he can cash in. And all the reviewers are the same. There is no review today that isnt done for profit. Dxomark included
 
Last edited:

J-see

Senior Member
No disagreement there; numbers don't tell everything but they at least reveal something. And that's where we can start before making a decision.

The reason Canon is that low is because the parameters DxO uses to "score" are those Canon doesn't score as high at. In most cases their dynamic range is quite a bit lower which will result into a significant drop in points. If that's a fair we could debate about.

But in the end, scores are nothing but headlines in the newspaper. The real information is in the text that follows. The problem is that most skip reading that part.
 

rocketman122

Senior Member
no disagreement there; numbers don't tell everything but they at least reveal something. And that's where we can start before making a decision.

The reason canon is that low is because the parameters dxo uses to "score" are those canon doesn't score as high at. In most cases their dynamic range is quite a bit lower which will result into a significant drop in points. If that's a fair we could debate about.

but in the end, scores are nothing but headlines in the newspaper. The real information is in the text that follows. The problem is that most skip reading that part.

nice!
 

WayneF

Senior Member
It is not a helpful article, just some guy ranting about stuff he doesn't quite know. We should beware of what we see on the internet, including this article. I do wonder about DxO myself, but this article is not the answer. For example, he is amazed Nikon and Sony rank so close, and does not seem to know Nikon uses Sony sensors.
 

rocketman122

Senior Member
It is not a helpful article, just some guy ranting about stuff he doesn't quite know. We should beware of what we see on the internet, including this article. I do wonder about DxO myself, but this article is not the answer. For example, he is amazed Nikon and Sony rank so close, and does not seem to know Nikon uses Sony sensors.

actually he mentioned it

I compared the Nikon D810 to the Sony A7r. First thing you’ll notice is the specs on the sensor performance are virtually identical. That’s no coincidence…Sony makes the sensor for the D810.
 

Bourbon Neat

Senior Member
In answer to the thread question, imo is no, their slanted reviews cannot. DXO does have some good factual numbers that can benefit a shopping consumer though.

As to the article, imo, it is worth the read. That fella did not act viscerally and flame the DXO outfit. He did state his opinion very well and his logic was apparent.

As others have stated, trust no one and think for yourself. User reviews have been helpful to me when considering a purchase of any kind.
 

sonicbuffalo_RIP

Senior Member
I do go and read DXO Mark at times. I also read a lot of other websites, and watch a bunch of you tube videos, and reviews. I agree with what Jason Lanier says in this article. He's not saying to throw out everything they say, but just be careful to check out what you read from them _and EVERY other website_ out there. He just happened to show some descrepancies that to him were obvious.
 

wornish

Senior Member
Seems to be all about the sensor and not take into account the whole system. What about the glass, or the auto focus and tracking, there is a big difference. DXO don't look at that.
You need to decide what you are looking for before deciding.
 

carguy

Senior Member
DXO is just one resource/tool one should look at. It is like buying a car on just what you see on the Carfax report - hardly an end-all source of data
 

J-see

Senior Member
Seems to be all about the sensor and not take into account the whole system. What about the glass, or the auto focus and tracking, there is a big difference. DXO don't look at that.
You need to decide what you are looking for before deciding.

Actually:

DxOMark is the trusted industry standard for camera and lens image quality measurements and ratings. For years we’ve been recognized for providing the most rigorous hardware testing, using industry-grade laboratory tools in our analysis, and for establishing the most comprehensive reference database using our thousands of camera and lens test results.

That's all they test. They don't care about looks, focus, buffer etc. It's purely about IQ. So the article dude complaining about video performance simply doesn't get what DxO does.
 
Last edited:
Top