Цитата:от: Romanenko Dmitri
Сходите на DXO и посмотрите графики и сравните с другими графиками других камер. А все сэмплы - это камерный jpeg - чего от него ждать. Вот интересно равы наконец увидеть и самому сконвертировать
DxO использует не совсем корректную методику. поэтому вываливают странные результаты. подробнее - читайте в статье Назима, он на пальцах показывает что не всем графикам можно верить и почему
http://photographylife.com/nikon-df-vs-nikon-d4-iso-performance
[quot]DxOMark ranked the Df at 3279, while the D4 scored 2965 before – a close to 10% delta in numbers. Does it mean that the Df is 10% better than the D4? No, those numbers represent ISO, similar to your camera ISO. So a score of 3279 is actually only around 1/10 of a stop better – a very insignificant difference. But why are DxOMarks’s numbers different across cameras, even if their sensors are the same? In this case, one might argue that the Df should have the same score as the D4, just like the D610 that should have the same score as the D600 (DxOMark ranked the D610 worse than the D600). Well, there are a number of factors involved in computing these scores. First of all, DxOMark down-samples / resizes images from cameras to around 8 Megapixels of resolution, as explained in this article. This alone creates a problem, because noise levels look different when software resizing algorithms are involved. Second, there might be differences in lighting, focus, white balance and other camera settings that might make one camera appear better or worse. Third, there are manufacturing / sample variances that also can potentially impact the results. DxOMark cannot account for those differences, so it just reports a different score. In my opinion, DxOMark’s scoring system is quite confusing and sometimes even misleading. [/quot]
Все о нем говорят и говорят, а я ни разу его и не видел
