Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AC016" data-source="post: 445689" data-attributes="member: 9619">A camera is a very personal choice and all factors should be considered, not just IQ.&nbsp; I look at DXO every once in a while, but really don't take any stock in their numbers.&nbsp; Seeing that the majority of people who take photos these days end up posting them to a website somewhere, is IQ that important?&nbsp; One needs to think about deployment before thinking a score of 82 over 79 is going to make a world of difference.&nbsp; Let's not forget the monitors that we use today are far behind in regards to displaying the full resolution of our pixel packed sensors.&nbsp; &quot;The highest resolution display now – a 5K iMac – will only show about 14M pixels at any one time&quot; - Ming Thein. It's fine and dandy to know what a sensor &quot;scores&quot; against another, but the differences are so negligible most of the times, we would not be able to appreciate the difference of 2 between two sensor scores.&nbsp; To an extent, i think DXO is playing on our incessant need for just a bit more &quot;speed &amp; feed&quot; when it comes to equipment, just as the camera companies are themselves.&nbsp; We are also wanting that much more and when we get it, we start all over with that want by wanting tomorrow, now.&nbsp; I am sure DXO is useful to some people; but if anyone is going to make a purchase based on a DXO mark alone, they really should not be buying cameras.&nbsp; Most sensors today are very good, as are the cameras that they sit in.&nbsp; I think you would be hard pressed to find a camera today that produces really crappy photos IQ wise.&nbsp; On the other hand, is it not about the photographer who is supposed to make good photos?&nbsp; IQ is only part of the equation.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AC016, post: 445689, member: 9619"] A camera is a very personal choice and all factors should be considered, not just IQ. I look at DXO every once in a while, but really don't take any stock in their numbers. Seeing that the majority of people who take photos these days end up posting them to a website somewhere, is IQ that important? One needs to think about deployment before thinking a score of 82 over 79 is going to make a world of difference. Let's not forget the monitors that we use today are far behind in regards to displaying the full resolution of our pixel packed sensors. "[COLOR=#555555][FONT=ff-meta-web-pro-1]The highest resolution display now – a 5K iMac – will only show about 14M pixels at any one time" - Ming Thein. [/FONT][/COLOR]It's fine and dandy to know what a sensor "scores" against another, but the differences are so negligible most of the times, we would not be able to appreciate the difference of 2 between two sensor scores. To an extent, i think DXO is playing on our incessant need for just a bit more "speed & feed" when it comes to equipment, just as the camera companies are themselves. We are also wanting that much more and when we get it, we start all over with that want by wanting tomorrow, now. I am sure DXO is useful to some people; but if anyone is going to make a purchase based on a DXO mark alone, they really should not be buying cameras. Most sensors today are very good, as are the cameras that they sit in. I think you would be hard pressed to find a camera today that produces really crappy photos IQ wise. On the other hand, is it not about the photographer who is supposed to make good photos? IQ is only part of the equation. [/QUOTE]

Verification