# 1DX finally reviewed/rated by DxOMark



## rexbobcat (Oct 31, 2012)

For those interested, DxOMark posted the results of their tests for the 1DX yesterday.

It performed about how I expected, so, meh. 

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Pu...est-of-Canon-s-full-frame-sensors/Comparisons


----------



## DorkSterr (Oct 31, 2012)

82 hmm... I wonder how trustworthy DxOMark is, I really thought it was going to score in the high 80's. Even tho these numbers mean nothing in real world performance it would be nice to see newertech really out do the predecessor.


----------



## rexbobcat (Oct 31, 2012)

DorkSterr said:
			
		

> 82 hmm... I wonder how trustworthy DxOMark is, I really thought it was going to score in the high 80's. Even tho these numbers mean nothing in real world performance it would be nice to see newertech really out do the predecessor.



Yeah but if you notice the D800 has the an almost perfect (I assume it's on a 100 scale?) score and from what I've seen it's about on par with other professional cameras both Nikon and Canon, so I'm not really sure how DxO calculates the scores such as the D800 having 2-3 stops more DN than any other camera on the market.

There sensor stats might be correct but I think their 100 point rating seems a little bit misleading...


----------



## jaomul (Oct 31, 2012)

Canon users don't like DXOMark


----------



## Overread (Oct 31, 2012)

jaomul said:


> DXOMark don't like Canon users



I fixed the mistake 

*bunkers down in preparation for the hoards of frothing fans of both sides to come to war again*


----------



## KmH (Oct 31, 2012)

DorkSterr said:


> ....I wonder how trustworthy DxOMark is....


DxOMark uses industry-grade laboratory tools used under standard metrology lab controlled conditions, and industry standard testing protocols.

DxOMark - What is DxOMark?

DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side


----------



## dorian7 (Oct 31, 2012)

KmH said:


> DorkSterr said:
> 
> 
> > ....I wonder how trustworthy DxOMark is....
> ...



Holy crap, I didn't realize how bad my 5D Mark III sucks until now. I am going to sell all of my Canon stuff right now. There is simply no time to use ebay or craigslist so I must just pawn it and immediately buy a D800 or heck even the D7000 would be an upgrade for that matter... I finally understand why my photos suck... So obvious!

I should probably refund all of my wedding clients as well because I didn't realize how much I was depriving them of.


----------



## rexbobcat (Oct 31, 2012)

jaomul said:


> Canon users don't like DXOMark




I don't mind the individual scores but on certain cameras when it's like X camera has .5 stops better ISO range than Y camera so X gets an 80 or something and Y camera will get something like a 65. Not that it matters but I'm curious how they manage to average scores that are set on several different scales (bits, stops, etc...), or if they are grading on other factors unknown to us.

(And notice how all of my camera bodies are sub-par to mediocre in today's technological terms so it's not like every other Canon option is SOO disappointing since most other cameras in their current line would be an upgrade to anything I have now. Ha.)


----------



## jaomul (Oct 31, 2012)

My IDs mark 1 is way down their list but I think it has great image quality. I am biased but don't care for DXOMark figures


----------



## imagemaker46 (Oct 31, 2012)

True tests come from the field use by professional photographers.  I just bought a 5D mklll, could not justify paying $4000 more for the 1Dx.  I shoot sports and I like what I am seeing from the 5D.  I have 2 ID's and a 1D mkll and the 5D is a great camera.


----------



## fjrabon (Oct 31, 2012)

Essentially DxOMark tests objective sensor abilities, and their overall results are always heavily weighted towards pure sensor performance.  Pretty much everybody admits that Nikon/Sony has a sensor advantage over Canon at the moment.  Thus, Nikon kills Canon in DxOMark.  Nothing really to see here.


----------



## dorian7 (Oct 31, 2012)

Well Guys,

I just got back from the pawn shop and sold all my Canon gear. I immediately went to the store and got all my new Nikon gear including the D800. HOLY COW... If I knew how much better this was I would have never even thought about Canon....

Here is my side by side image comparison. SO MUCH SHARPER!!!!


----------



## panblue (Oct 31, 2012)

imagemaker46 said:


> True tests come from the field use by professional photographers.  I just bought a 5D mklll, could not justify paying $4000 more for the 1Dx.  I shoot sports and I like what I am seeing from the 5D.  I have 2 ID's and a 1D mkll and the 5D is a great camera.


 I agree and I find the relentless quest for 'more' somewhat daft. Pro cameras reached Pro standard a while back. Consumer digi reflex have reached a high enough standard too. The gadget nuts can obsess over the next/newest. As photographers lets just shoot !!


----------



## fjrabon (Oct 31, 2012)

Sure, some people overblow the difference between various bodies, but people were also saying the same things a 8 years ago that some people in this thread are.  That differences in camera body don't matter, that sensors are 'good enough', etc.  

Would anybody use a body from 2004 now?

Lots of incremental improvements add up over time to a huge difference.  

Can somebody who knows how to shoot go out with an original rebel and come back with great shots?  Of course.  Can somebody who knows how to shoot get more out of a modern camera than an original rebel?  Absolutely.  

Does the D800 blow the 1DX so far out of the water that it's not worth owning Canon?  No, I don't think anybody would even think about claiming that.  Does the Nikon D800 have a cearly superior sensor?  Yeah, if you claim otherwise you're just ignoring objective facts.  Is it such a difference that somebody who knows how to shoot can't get around it?  No, I don't think anybody would claim that either.  

Also, people should quit being so defensive when their camera gets outscored in objective tests.  Do I have the greatest body in the world?  Nah, not even close.  I'm still on crop frame.  Do I feel some need to try to marginalize or discredit objective tests because of that?  No.  The tests are good if you know how to interpret and what they do, or more importantly don't mean.  Making sort of silly sarcastic comments about 'oh, going to sell off all my canon gear you guys' kind of indicates a defensiveness.  If you really didn't think that DxOMark test results matered, you wouldn't get so defensive about it.  The 5DIII is a great camera.  You know that.  The D800 has a little bit better sensor, so what?  If you're a Canon guy (or gal), don't worry about it.  Do I give a crap that the 70-200 MkII f/2.8 L wipes the floor with the Nikkor f/2.8 VRII?  not really.  Sure, it'd be nice, but I dont feel a need to either freak out about the tests and get defensive about it.  Each side has their advantages.  Just accept it and don't begrudge the other brands objective advantages.


----------



## panblue (Oct 31, 2012)

fjrabon said:


> Would anybody use a body from 2004 now?



Well I would.. D2h (2003), D2x (2004), D200 (2005), S5 Pro (2006) but generally i have little interest in colour photography above ISO 800 or mono above ~3200...and i love _grainy_, 1970s/1980s looking B&W pressphotos ;-) some people have a specialist need for ultra high ISO purity or an asthetic impulse to shoot at night; i don't..


----------



## fjrabon (Oct 31, 2012)

panblue said:
			
		

> or an asthetic impulse to shoot at night; i don't..



Or it's some people's job to shoot at night.


----------



## Big Mike (Nov 1, 2012)

Off topic...but while I was working a booth at the Edmonton Photographic Trade Show last Sunday, I wondered over to the Canon booth and played with the 1Dx for a while.  Letting it rip at 12fps just makes me giggle.


----------

