+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 47
  1. #1
    Senior Member
    sonicbuffalo's Avatar

    DXO Mark - Should They Be Trusted?

    Check out this article.....don't always trust what one site says.

    read here



    › See More: DXO Mark - Should They Be Trusted?
    Thanks/Like rocketman122 Thanks/liked this post
     
    Chris
    FLICKR -

    Sony A7 Full Frame Mirrorless / Sony Zeiss 16-35 mm - 4.0/Sony Zeiss 55-1.8/Sony 28-70 mm/Sony 70-200 mm - 4.0
    Nikon D500(Grace Slick) /18-140/
    Tamron 150-600




  2. #2
    Senior Member
    mikew's Avatar

    Re: DXO Mark - Should They Be Trusted?

    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.
    Thanks/Like sonicbuffalo, TedG954 Thanks/liked this post
     
    Mike

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/7239177@N07/

    Nikon Z50,16-50MM,50-250MM
    Nikon V2,10-30MM,30-110MM FT1 Adapter

    Panasonic G80, 12-60mm, 60mm macro, Leica 100-400
    mm











  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Horoscope Fish's Avatar

    Re: DXO Mark - Should They Be Trusted?

    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!"
    Thanks/Like FredKingston, Wolfeye, Tom Grove Thanks/liked this post
    Disagree sonicbuffalo disagreed
     
    ~ Paul
    ....
    ....
    Primary Kit :: D850, Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 G2, Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 G2, Sigma 135mm f/1.8 Art, Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art,
    Godox Flashes & Triggers, Manfrotto X055PROB, 3-Legged Thing Airhed II... All Stuffed into a Manfrotto Pro Backpack 50
    ....
    ....
    ● ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ๑۩۩๑ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ●

  4. #4
    Senior Member

    Re: DXO Mark - Should They Be Trusted?

    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.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Horoscope Fish's Avatar

    Re: DXO Mark - Should They Be Trusted?

    Quote Originally Posted by Its Just Me View Post
    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.
    Yup... Pretty much.
    .....
    DXO Mark - Should They Be Trusted?-spockfascinating.jpg
    ~ Paul
    ....
    ....
    Primary Kit :: D850, Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 G2, Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 G2, Sigma 135mm f/1.8 Art, Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art,
    Godox Flashes & Triggers, Manfrotto X055PROB, 3-Legged Thing Airhed II... All Stuffed into a Manfrotto Pro Backpack 50
    ....
    ....
    ● ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ๑۩۩๑ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ●

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    rocketman122's Avatar

    Re: DXO Mark - Should They Be Trusted?

    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.
    Thanks/Like sonicbuffalo Thanks/liked this post
     

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    J-see's Avatar

    Re: DXO Mark - Should They Be Trusted?

    I trust the pure data they provide. Their translation of that into "scores" I could care less about.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    rocketman122's Avatar

    Re: DXO Mark - Should They Be Trusted?

    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 by rocketman122; 04-26-2015 at 03:34 PM.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    J-see's Avatar

    Re: DXO Mark - Should They Be Trusted?

    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.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    rocketman122's Avatar

    Re: DXO Mark - Should They Be Trusted?

    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 by rocketman122; 04-26-2015 at 03:47 PM.
    Thanks/Like fotojack Thanks/liked this post
     





Quick Reply Quick Reply

If you are already a member, please login above before posting.

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •