DxO Mark Test Results

O

ochong

Member
Local time
6:56 AM
Joined
Jan 25, 2011
Messages
42
View My Gallery
Use Compare to Go Head to Head with M9

Use Compare to Go Head to Head with M9

Interesting comparison.

If you look at the X100 ISO measurements, it looks like the X100 specs are consistently and significantly less that spec. I guess that not many here will be using an external meter when the whole idea is compact carry.
 
Last edited:
It's actually common that the stated ISO doesn't match the actual ISO.

However I think what's more interesting is that the X100 is very similar in all other measurements to the M9 (except Dynamic Range where the X100 is greater) even with the X100 being APS-C.

These #s of course hardly tell the whole picture...
 
ochong said:
It's actually common that the stated ISO doesn't match the actual ISO.

However I think what's more interesting is that the X100 is very similar in all other measurements to the M9 (except Dynamic Range where the X100 is greater) even with the X100 being APS-C.

These #s of course hardly tell the whole picture...
Click to expand...

I looked at a number of other more expensive cameras and the stated ISO seemed to track much more closely with measured. I'm sure that you can find examples to prove me wrong.
 
Had they told me before I bought the X100 that its DxOMark stats would be the same as the D90, I would have been even more excited that I was! These are GREAT test results for a camera of this size and price. And lets not forget the amazing optical viewfinder... where I can finally see around the outside of the 35mm framelines with my glasses on!! 🙂
 
bwcolor: If you're really curious take a look at the Canon 5Dmk2 & the Nikon D300s. I'm not trying to prove anything, just a suggestion if you are interested in seeing some cameras that do rate different than the actual. (just a disclaimer since i know this could be misinterpreted easily in the forum world)

GSNfan & Jamie Pillers: I agree it's probably the same sensor as the D90. What is strange though are how the ISO3200 & 6400 tested at. Either DxO made a mistake or maybe Fuji has chosen to digitally boost rather than take an analog reading because the quality is better that way - speculation though.
 
An interesting post by Andy Westlake on the dpreview forums in a thread about the DxO results:
Just remember, when considering this, that DxOmark's rather non-standard definition of ISO has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with JPEG comparisons, and can't be applied to them in any way whatsoever, and you should do just fine.
DxOMark's ISO definition tells you something of relatively academic interest about the white point of the raw file (remember it's a raw data comparison only). It's simply not directly related to how Fuji are defining ISO, which they specifically state to be by the ISO 12232:2006 Standard Output Sensitivity method.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom