A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Finally got to the point where no new camera holds my interest(waiting for specific offering)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old December 24th 18, 12:25 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,161
Default Finally got to the point where no new camera holds my interest(waiting for specific offering)

On 12/23/2018 5:47 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

dxo scores have less to do with the capabilities of the camera and more
to do with how much a particular company paid dxo.

Is there any evidence to support that claim?

yes.


What is it other than rumour or gossip?


it's neither of those.


Than please share your source.

--
PeterN
  #12  
Old December 24th 18, 12:41 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Bill W
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,692
Default Finally got to the point where no new camera holds my interest (waiting for specific offering)

This is no smoking gun, or even a clear accusation, but it does point
out a problem:

https://www.androidauthority.com/dxo...lesome-805633/



On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 18:25:23 -0500, PeterN
wrote:

On 12/23/2018 5:47 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

dxo scores have less to do with the capabilities of the camera and more
to do with how much a particular company paid dxo.

Is there any evidence to support that claim?

yes.

What is it other than rumour or gossip?


it's neither of those.


Than please share your source.

  #13  
Old December 24th 18, 12:48 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Finally got to the point where no new camera holds my interest (waiting for specific offering)

In article , PeterN
wrote:

dxo scores have less to do with the capabilities of the camera and more
to do with how much a particular company paid dxo.

Is there any evidence to support that claim?

yes.

What is it other than rumour or gossip?


it's neither of those.


Than please share your source.


sources.

here's one (of many):
https://www.androidpolice.com/2016/0...-stop-letting-
dxomark-decide-whose-smartphone-camera-is-best-opinion/
DxO Labs is first and foremost a consultancy. Their business model is
based upon being paid to conduct analysis and optimization of imaging
system performance by the companies that make those systems. DxO is
not an independent journalistic entity or trade organization - it is
a for-profit software consultancy for camera makers. Their product is
called DxO Analyzer, and licensees of this suite can opt to purchase
"installation, training and consulting services."
....
...Products that have received versus not received consultancy and
tuning from DxO Labs are not identified, and so it is impossible to
know which camera has likely been tuned to maximize its score under
the test conditions versus which tends to do well without having
specifically been adapted to DxO's parameters.

This also gives DxO Labs the power to silently "shame" the companies
that choose not to license its software or services.

also, their 'tests' claim what is physically impossible, making them
untrustworthy and their scale is whatever they want it to be, with
newer cameras scoring higher and higher.
  #14  
Old December 24th 18, 09:44 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default Finally got to the point where no new camera holds my interest (waiting for specific offering)

On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 15:41:19 -0800, Bill W
wrote:

On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 18:25:23 -0500, PeterN
wrote:

On 12/23/2018 5:47 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

dxo scores have less to do with the capabilities of the camera and more
to do with how much a particular company paid dxo.

Is there any evidence to support that claim?

yes.

What is it other than rumour or gossip?

it's neither of those.


Than please share your source.


This is no smoking gun, or even a clear accusation, but it does point
out a problem:

https://www.androidauthority.com/dxo...lesome-805633/

The article has nothing but suspicion of bias and general inuendo. But
note that it also says:

"There’s no reason to believe DxOMark is in anyway rigging results —
after-all the company’s business model depends on its reputation
and its results tend to roughly fit with the broader consensus on
camera hardware."

I suspect that nospam's views are coloured by suspicion of bias and
general innuendo. That and the fact that I doubt he has quite got his
head around the fact the DxO's results are not just tests of a lens
but _tests_of_a_lens_on_a_specific_camera_. The test results are
dependent on not just the qualities of the lens but also the qualities
of the camera. I think it might hhave been Neil who touched on this
quite recently.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #15  
Old December 24th 18, 09:45 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default Finally got to the point where no new camera holds my interest (waiting for specific offering)

On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 18:48:39 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , PeterN
wrote:

dxo scores have less to do with the capabilities of the camera and more
to do with how much a particular company paid dxo.

Is there any evidence to support that claim?

yes.

What is it other than rumour or gossip?

it's neither of those.


Than please share your source.


sources.

here's one (of many):
https://www.androidpolice.com/2016/0...-stop-letting-
dxomark-decide-whose-smartphone-camera-is-best-opinion/
DxO Labs is first and foremost a consultancy. Their business model is
based upon being paid to conduct analysis and optimization of imaging
system performance by the companies that make those systems. DxO is
not an independent journalistic entity or trade organization - it is
a for-profit software consultancy for camera makers. Their product is
called DxO Analyzer, and licensees of this suite can opt to purchase
"installation, training and consulting services."
...
...Products that have received versus not received consultancy and
tuning from DxO Labs are not identified, and so it is impossible to
know which camera has likely been tuned to maximize its score under
the test conditions versus which tends to do well without having
specifically been adapted to DxO's parameters.

This also gives DxO Labs the power to silently "shame" the companies
that choose not to license its software or services.

also, their 'tests' claim what is physically impossible, making them
untrustworthy and their scale is whatever they want it to be, with
newer cameras scoring higher and higher.


Suspicion and innuendo. That's not evidence.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #16  
Old December 24th 18, 10:24 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Alfred Molon[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,591
Default Finally got to the point where no new camera holds my interest (waiting for specific offering)

Would have to dig it out, but a while ago on DxOMark there was a chart
claiming that ISO 64 and ISO 200 on the Olympus E-M1 Mark II in fact are
the same ISOs.
But the exposure time at ISO 64 is three times the exposure time at ISO
200, so clearly what DxOMark post is nonsense.
--
Alfred Molon

Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
https://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
https://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site
  #17  
Old December 24th 18, 10:40 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
RJH
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 228
Default Finally got to the point where no new camera holds my interest(waiting for specific offering)

On 23/12/2018 23:48, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:

dxo scores have less to do with the capabilities of the camera and more
to do with how much a particular company paid dxo.

Is there any evidence to support that claim?

yes.

What is it other than rumour or gossip?

it's neither of those.


Than please share your source.


sources.

here's one (of many):
https://www.androidpolice.com/2016/0...-stop-letting-
dxomark-decide-whose-smartphone-camera-is-best-opinion/
DxO Labs is first and foremost a consultancy. Their business model is
based upon being paid to conduct analysis and optimization of imaging
system performance by the companies that make those systems. DxO is
not an independent journalistic entity or trade organization - it is
a for-profit software consultancy for camera makers. Their product is
called DxO Analyzer, and licensees of this suite can opt to purchase
"installation, training and consulting services."
...
...Products that have received versus not received consultancy and
tuning from DxO Labs are not identified, and so it is impossible to
know which camera has likely been tuned to maximize its score under
the test conditions versus which tends to do well without having
specifically been adapted to DxO's parameters.

This also gives DxO Labs the power to silently "shame" the companies
that choose not to license its software or services.


That's not unlike the charge that all climate science is bogus because
the scientists have, at the very least, beards and egos to stroke. Not
to mention research grants, tenure, etc. Just sounds like conspiracy
theory without evidence . . .

also, their 'tests' claim what is physically impossible, making them
untrustworthy


Yes, that's a problem, so much so I'm surprised they get any reader,
much less advertisers and 'consultancies'.

and their scale is whatever they want it to be, with
newer cameras scoring higher and higher.


I suppose so long as they explain the context and reasoning, that can be
OK, just less useful.


--
Cheers, Rob
  #18  
Old December 24th 18, 11:04 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Finally got to the point where no new camera holds my interest (waiting for specific offering)

In article , Alfred
Molon wrote:

Would have to dig it out, but a while ago on DxOMark there was a chart
claiming that ISO 64 and ISO 200 on the Olympus E-M1 Mark II in fact are
the same ISOs.
But the exposure time at ISO 64 is three times the exposure time at ISO
200, so clearly what DxOMark post is nonsense.


yep.
  #19  
Old December 24th 18, 11:04 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Finally got to the point where no new camera holds my interest (waiting for specific offering)

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


This is no smoking gun, or even a clear accusation, but it does point
out a problem:

https://www.androidauthority.com/dxo...lesome-805633/

The article has nothing but suspicion of bias and general inuendo.


false. it's quite clear that dxo is *not* objective and can be bought.

But
note that it also says:

"There¹s no reason to believe DxOMark is in anyway rigging results ‹
after-all the company¹s business model depends on its reputation
and its results tend to roughly fit with the broader consensus on
camera hardware."


that's nothing more than cya, and also factually false.

their results are often not physically possible, therefore *cannot* fit
with 'the broader consensus', and renders *everything* they do to be
completely worthless.

I suspect that nospam's views are coloured by suspicion of bias and
general innuendo. That and the fact that I doubt he has quite got his
head around the fact the DxO's results are not just tests of a lens
but _tests_of_a_lens_on_a_specific_camera_. The test results are
dependent on not just the qualities of the lens but also the qualities
of the camera. I think it might hhave been Neil who touched on this
quite recently.


that is irrelevant.
  #20  
Old December 24th 18, 11:04 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Finally got to the point where no new camera holds my interest (waiting for specific offering)

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


here's one (of many):
https://www.androidpolice.com/2016/0...-stop-letting-
dxomark-decide-whose-smartphone-camera-is-best-opinion/
DxO Labs is first and foremost a consultancy. Their business model is
based upon being paid to conduct analysis and optimization of imaging
system performance by the companies that make those systems. DxO is
not an independent journalistic entity or trade organization - it is
a for-profit software consultancy for camera makers. Their product is
called DxO Analyzer, and licensees of this suite can opt to purchase
"installation, training and consulting services."
...
...Products that have received versus not received consultancy and
tuning from DxO Labs are not identified, and so it is impossible to
know which camera has likely been tuned to maximize its score under
the test conditions versus which tends to do well without having
specifically been adapted to DxO's parameters.

This also gives DxO Labs the power to silently "shame" the companies
that choose not to license its software or services.

also, their 'tests' claim what is physically impossible, making them
untrustworthy and their scale is whatever they want it to be, with
newer cameras scoring higher and higher.


Suspicion and innuendo. That's not evidence.


the evidence is quite clear that they cannot be trusted *at* *all*.

their 'tests' claim what is physically not possible. that alone makes
them a scam.

here's mo
https://www.androidcentral.com/editors-desk-dxomark-worthless
DxOMark controversy is back in the news this week, but the problem
with the mobile camera rating system isn't as simple as manufacturers
'buying' inflated scores.
....
Comment threads suggest something untoward has happened as a result
of OnePlus's recently-announced partnership with DxO

a *partnership* between a camera manufacturer and the company who is
supposedly testing it is very clearly a *huge* problem.

Like a wily student preparing for a standardized test, manufacturers
who partner with DxO, and get access to its hardware and software,
can tune their image processing to ace the firm's synthetic tests
(within the limits of the hardware, of course). As a result, their
review scores are higher when DxO eventually publishes them ‹ because
they've had access to the testing hardware all along. Manufacturers
who don't partner with DxO are at an automatic disadvantage in terms
of their score, even though real-world, outside-of-the-lab image
quality might not be substantially worse. When that happens, as it is
bound to, consumers who put faith in comparisons between scores from
partners and non-partners are potentially misled.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Finally got to the point where no new camera holds my interest (waiting for specific offering) Alfred Molon[_4_] Digital Photography 2 December 24th 18 03:37 PM
Please, tell me Zeiss's offering to the camera world won't be areskinned SONY!! Neil[_9_] Digital Photography 1 August 27th 18 01:00 PM
Need a camera with specific features: Gary Smiley Digital Photography 1 May 22nd 06 02:31 AM
Canon Offering $600+ Rebate on Digital Camera Equipment (3x Rebate Offers) Mark Digital Photography 6 November 4th 04 11:27 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.