FINALLY a good DxOMark rating system review

[Derrel]

Or the Leica M9 vs M Type 240 - there was a really interesting article about those two on Steve Huffs site, recently.

Yeah...I read that article. A Leicaphile waxing rhapsodic about the benefits of the Leica M9. I love this part of his review:

"There are times when the M9 freezes operationally and won’t take a shot. And I don’t just mean when the buffer is full. At times, I have missed important shots because the M9 simply refused to take the shot. Further, battery life is quite poor (300-400 shots), compared to the far improved M240 sensor. The M9 has an ISO limitation that stems from its CCD sensor. It’s only capable of being shot reliably through ISO 640 (or 800 if you are willing to live with lost dynamic range, muddier images). Compared to today’s sensors (think Sony, Fuji, Olympus, and Panasonic), this ISO limitation seems arcane. Compared to the M240, which offers clean ISO’s through 1600 and inconsistent but occasionally decent performance at ISO 3200, it seems old as well. Yet, at base ISO through ISO 400, the M9 offers something unique. It offers a lovely color palette. Images, particularly of people jump off the screen. Skin tones and rendering can take on a lifelike look, while the M240 occasionally presents skin tones in a waxy (CMOS) manner. You’d never see this on your cell phone or laptop monitor, but on a calibrated larger home monitor or large print, there’s a difference there that’s continued to be noticeable to me.

Ultimately, I came to accept the limitations of the Leica M9 to gain its benefits. The M9 turns on and is ready to shoot instantaneously. It’s silent shooting mode is cleverly implemented and useful when employed. It’s a lighter and airier camera and is less fatiguing to hold in the hand for prolonged shoots. It’s menus offer operational simplicity, which seems to echo the rangefinder way of seeing. It’s CCD rendering (yes, I believe that the CCD “look” is real…sorry to all of the naysayers) is awesome and increasingly unique in a world where CMOS sensors have taken over.

I believe that the Leica M9 continues to represent the pinnacle of Leica’s imaging achievement."

Nice camera!!! One that will not shoot reliably (OMFG!!!), uses a crappy, impotent battery, and which shoots only up to ISO 640 without looking like chit... yeahhhhhhhh....so "that" is what he thinks represents "the pinnacle of Leica's imaging achievement" ?? LMFAO!!!

 

[JTPhotography]

Im not debating I would not buy a Nikon I hate the feel of them and the way they handle winning phot of the year on here is nothing to shout about

I agree, you are not debating, you have to make good points to debate. If you don't like Nikon, then don't buy one.

Thanks for the insult, it is what ignorant fools do when they have nothing else to say.

What insult competitions meen nothing

Ever win one?

 

[gsgary]

Im not debating I would not buy a Nikon I hate the feel of them and the way they handle winning phot of the year on here is nothing to shout about

I agree, you are not debating, you have to make good points to debate. If you don't like Nikon, then don't buy one.

Thanks for the insult, it is what ignorant fools do when they have nothing else to say.

What insult competitions meen nothing

Ever win one?

Yes I used to win plenty don't bother entering anymore especially our club competitions if you don't shoot Natural history (wildlife) there is no point entering

 

[gsgary]

Or the Leica M9 vs M Type 240 - there was a really interesting article about those two on Steve Huffs site, recently.

Yeah...I read that article. A Leicaphile waxing rhapsodic about the benefits of the Leica M9. I love this part of his review:

"There are times when the M9 freezes operationally and won’t take a shot. And I don’t just mean when the buffer is full. At times, I have missed important shots because the M9 simply refused to take the shot. Further, battery life is quite poor (300-400 shots), compared to the far improved M240 sensor. The M9 has an ISO limitation that stems from its CCD sensor. It’s only capable of being shot reliably through ISO 640 (or 800 if you are willing to live with lost dynamic range, muddier images). Compared to today’s sensors (think Sony, Fuji, Olympus, and Panasonic), this ISO limitation seems arcane. Compared to the M240, which offers clean ISO’s through 1600 and inconsistent but occasionally decent performance at ISO 3200, it seems old as well. Yet, at base ISO through ISO 400, the M9 offers something unique. It offers a lovely color palette. Images, particularly of people jump off the screen. Skin tones and rendering can take on a lifelike look, while the M240 occasionally presents skin tones in a waxy (CMOS) manner. You’d never see this on your cell phone or laptop monitor, but on a calibrated larger home monitor or large print, there’s a difference there that’s continued to be noticeable to me.

Ultimately, I came to accept the limitations of the Leica M9 to gain its benefits. The M9 turns on and is ready to shoot instantaneously. It’s silent shooting mode is cleverly implemented and useful when employed. It’s a lighter and airier camera and is less fatiguing to hold in the hand for prolonged shoots. It’s menus offer operational simplicity, which seems to echo the rangefinder way of seeing. It’s CCD rendering (yes, I believe that the CCD “look” is real…sorry to all of the naysayers) is awesome and increasingly unique in a world where CMOS sensors have taken over.

I believe that the Leica M9 continues to represent the pinnacle of Leica’s imaging achievement."

Nice camera!!! One that will not shoot reliably (OMFG!!!), uses a crappy, impotent battery, and which shoots only up to ISO 640 without looking like chit... yeahhhhhhhh....so "that" is what he thinks represents "the pinnacle of Leica's imaging achievement" ?? LMFAO!!!

I would take an M9 over any camera on the market borrowed my friends M9P and loved the shots it produces and is perfect for most I shoot

 

[JTPhotography]

Im not debating I would not buy a Nikon I hate the feel of them and the way they handle winning phot of the year on here is nothing to shout about

I agree, you are not debating, you have to make good points to debate. If you don't like Nikon, then don't buy one.

Thanks for the insult, it is what ignorant fools do when they have nothing else to say.

What insult competitions meen nothing

Ever win one?

Yes I used to win plenty don't bother entering anymore especially our club competitions if you don't shoot Natural history (wildlife) there is no point entering

Right..............

 

[Derrel]

A Leica that locks up and will NOT FIRE? That's a disgrace to the brand's long heritage...great lenses, and great handling are nice, but when a big-time Leica fan says his Leica M9 camera refuses to shoot at times, and that he has lost important shots because the camera refused to take the shot? Wuuuut??????

Anyway, back to DxO Mark scores: one of the most-exciting new sensors is the medium format sensor found in the new Pentax 645Z, the 51.4-megapixel CMOS sensor that both Pentax, and Hasselblad, have put into new medium format offerings. this is the FIRST-EVER commercially offered CMOS sensor in a MF size camera, and the results of this sensor are extradordinarily good at higher ISO levels!

I saw the samples at The Luminous Landscape; the Pentax 645Z is incredible at the high ISO values; where CCD medium format sensors got really noisy at higher than ISO 400, this thing is pretty damned good in the ISO 12,800 category, and usable even higher, up to 51,200 with noise reduction.

Pentax 645Z First Impressions Review

It'll be interesting to see how well that sensor tests out under DxO Mark's rigorous, controlled testing regime.

 

[gsgary]

Most of the problem is it does not like certain cards get the right card and it is not a problem

 

[JTPhotography]

Im not debating I would not buy a Nikon I hate the feel of them and the way they handle winning phot of the year on here is nothing to shout about

I agree, you are not debating, you have to make good points to debate. If you don't like Nikon, then don't buy one.

Thanks for the insult, it is what ignorant fools do when they have nothing else to say.

What insult competitions meen nothing

By the way, can you link me to some of your photography, I am not seeing any on here. When someone talks crap I like to see their work.

 

[gsgary]

Im not debating I would not buy a Nikon I hate the feel of them and the way they handle winning phot of the year on here is nothing to shout about

I agree, you are not debating, you have to make good points to debate. If you don't like Nikon, then don't buy one.

Thanks for the insult, it is what ignorant fools do when they have nothing else to say.

What insult competitions meen nothing

By the way, can you link me to some of your photography, I am not seeing any on here. When someone talks crap I like to see their work.

There is loads of my b+w film work on here

 

[JTPhotography]

Im not debating I would not buy a Nikon I hate the feel of them and the way they handle winning phot of the year on here is nothing to shout about

I agree, you are not debating, you have to make good points to debate. If you don't like Nikon, then don't buy one.

Thanks for the insult, it is what ignorant fools do when they have nothing else to say.

What insult competitions meen nothing

By the way, can you link me to some of your photography, I am not seeing any on here. When someone talks crap I like to see their work.

There is loads of my b+w film work on here

So, is that a "no"?

 

[photoguy99]

It's like three clicks to gary's smugmug.

Click his name. Then "Profile Page" then scroll down to where it shows his home page, on the left side of the screen.

Gary's an ass, but people who drag out the 'oh, well, let's see your pictures so I can judge them as inferior to my own because, let's face it, there's just no way I am going to change my mind at this point' without being willing to do the slightest tiniest bit of work up front are pretty annoying too.

 

[gsgary]

Im not debating I would not buy a Nikon I hate the feel of them and the way they handle winning phot of the year on here is nothing to shout about

I agree, you are not debating, you have to make good points to debate. If you don't like Nikon, then don't buy one.

Thanks for the insult, it is what ignorant fools do when they have nothing else to say.

What insult competitions meen nothing

By the way, can you link me to some of your photography, I am not seeing any on here. When someone talks crap I like to see their work.

There is loads of my b+w film work on here

So, is that a "no"?

Sports Portfolio - gsgary

 

[photoguy99]

Cricket's not a sport. Don't be ridiculous.

 

[Derrel]

As far as the DxO Mark ratings go, TPF member AstroNikon has posted a chart with a whole bunch of Nikon camera sensor scores and data points, as well as a bunch of new Canon models added recently, at this URL: dxoMark Nikon ISO numbers | Photography Forum

I've owned a number of the cameras in that chart, and shot a few others that were borrowed. D70, D2x,D40,Canon 20D, Canon 5D, Nikon D3x...to me, the DxO Mark test results on all those cameras line up pretty well with my own, personal experience of how well those cameras performed. Again, the "overall score" DxO Mark assigns is not the measurement to look at. Instead, look at the Dynamic Range, and the LOSS of color fidelity, as the ISO levels go up from base ISO and into the higher ranges.

If you want to see a fabulous example of two cameras, one with a chitty sensor at elevated ISO levels, and then one with a good, solid sensor across the majority of the ISO range, compared the Nikon D2x against the Canon 5D "classic". I owned and shot these two cameras simultaneously, for six, and five years in a row!!!!

Canon EOS 5D versus Nikon D2X - Side by side camera comparison - DxOMark

Now, click on the Measurements tab, and then click on Dynamic Range. Here's what you'll see: The Canon 5D offers pretty much 11 EV of Dynamic Range at ISO 100,200,and 400. At ISO 800, the 5D drops to 10.56 EV. At 1600, that drops to 9.92 EV. At 3200, it is at 9.02 EV. In other words, a VERY FLAT, steady,even performer across the ENTIRE range! VERY good DR, from lowest to Highest ISO values. In practical terms, the Canon 5D classic sensor performs very close to the sensor in the original Nikon D3 model. It is a very good performer.

The Nikon D2x sensor? 10.91 EV at ISO 100, then almost a full stop drop to 9.82 at ISO 200, and at ISO 400, the Nikon is at 8.92 EV of DR, a FULL 2.00 EV below the 5D! And it only gets worse from there on up. In other words, the D2x sensor's dynamic range rapidly declines, in a steady decline at every ISO click above base. At ISO 3,200 the D2x has 6.04 EV of DR, where the Canon 5D still manages 9.02 EV. The D3x is a great camera body; the BODY and sub-systems are fabulous,even by today's standards. The wide-area AF system is more-advanced than the dumbed-down one used in any of the later Nikon models, with a 4-position AF area switch, two autofocusing modes C and S, and an uncanny ability to focus right out to the very edges of the APS-C frame. But the sensor is very poor above ISO 250. The camera in fact only goes up to 800 ISO natively; the 1600 and 3200 figures are unofficially supported "Hi-" values, and are not actually ISO-compliant, but part of the "expanded" ISO range.

DxO Mark's measurements coincide almost perfectly with what I learned over a combined 11 years' worth of use of two cameras. The graphs showing the drop-off in performance as ISO levels go up dovetail well with the cameras I have owned, and which I have compared pretty extensively.

 

[gsgary]

Cricket's not a sport. Don't be ridiculous.

What is it then, baseball was derived from cricket