Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="BackdoorArts" data-source="post: 372476" data-attributes="member: 9240">I'm trying to find the time to put together my initial thoughts on the D750, which for me would obviously include direct comparisons to the D610, but I just haven't had the time to shoot specific shots to back up the words.&nbsp; With that said I can say with great confidence that they do not have the same sensor.&nbsp; The level and quality of noise at high ISO's visible to the naked eye is evidence enough of that.&nbsp; The thing is, when you keep pushing the bar how much improvement should one expect when the old numbers were world class anyway?&nbsp; When you're looking at the DxOMark measurement for <a href="http://www.dxomark.com/About/In-depth-measurements/Measurements/ISO-sensitivity" target="_blank">ISO Sensitivity</a> do you know what the hell that is?!&nbsp; Of course you don't!!&nbsp; How they measure <a href="http://www.dxomark.com/About/In-depth-measurements/Measurements/Noise" target="_blank">Noise</a> and precisely what that means?!&nbsp; Hell no!!&nbsp; Well, I've given it to you, and I'm betting there aren't more than 3 or 4 people here who can explain to this person with a Minor in Math, in layman's terms, just what each of them means.&nbsp; And who would want to?!?!I'm not calling these measurements pointless, I'm just saying that they aren't the whole story by a long shot.&nbsp; If Nikon and Sony engineers are sitting in a lab trying to figure out how to get a 98 or higher on their next sensor then they're going about it all wrong - and thank God they're not.&nbsp; DxOMark scores are a measure of sensor capability, they are not a measure of image quality, but people seem to confuse the hell out of that.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="BackdoorArts, post: 372476, member: 9240"] I'm trying to find the time to put together my initial thoughts on the D750, which for me would obviously include direct comparisons to the D610, but I just haven't had the time to shoot specific shots to back up the words. With that said I can say with great confidence that [I]they do not have the same sensor[/I]. The level and quality of noise at high ISO's visible to the naked eye is evidence enough of that. The thing is, when you keep pushing the bar how much improvement should one expect when the old numbers were world class anyway? When you're looking at the DxOMark measurement for [URL="http://www.dxomark.com/About/In-depth-measurements/Measurements/ISO-sensitivity"]ISO Sensitivity[/URL] do you know what the hell that is?! Of course you don't!! How they measure [URL="http://www.dxomark.com/About/In-depth-measurements/Measurements/Noise"]Noise[/URL] and precisely what that means?! Hell no!! Well, I've given it to you, and I'm betting there aren't more than 3 or 4 people here who can explain to this person with a Minor in Math, in layman's terms, just what each of them means. And who would want to?!?! I'm not calling these measurements pointless, I'm just saying that they aren't the whole story by a long shot. If Nikon and Sony engineers are sitting in a lab trying to figure out how to get a 98 or higher on their next sensor then they're going about it all wrong - and thank God they're not. DxOMark scores are a measure of [I]sensor capability[/I], they are [U]not[/U] a measure of [I]image quality[/I], but people seem to confuse the hell out of that. [/QUOTE]

Verification