Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Which are helpful data from dxomark?

Expand Messages
  • peterzheng_real
    Which are helpful data from dxomark? We noticed a droll score between K5 and 645d came from dxomark website, you are unexpectedly seeing both sides have been
    Message 1 of 9 , Nov 8, 2010
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Which are helpful data from dxomark?

      We noticed a droll score between K5 and 645d came from dxomark website, you are unexpectedly seeing both sides have been put a same score "82". This score "82" is lacking values.

      ---- The ISO-SNR
      if you want to know the ISO-SNR performance, then you ought to read its ISO-SNR curve graph, like this:
      http://dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/Compare-sensors/(appareil1)/439%7C0/(appareil2)/676%7C0/(appareil3)/615%7C0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Nikon/(brand2)/Pentax/(brand3)/Pentax

      under the SNR 18% window, you ought to notice over there is 'Print' and 'Screen' as the two curves. Our barycenter ought to pay attention to the ISO 100, ISO 200, like SNR in ISO 100 or 200, and DR in ISO 100 or 200, as well as sharpness (non-sharpening) in ISO 100 or 200, and not a children game -- only noticing the high ISO.

      The ISO-SNR in 'Print' with the range ISO 400 - 1600, the K5 is just slightly better than D90. However, ISO-SNR in 'Screen', the range ISO 200 - 1600, dxomark curve shows the D90 was still a little better -- an old camera.

      The K7 is very poor, or even it was worse than K20d.
      http://dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/Compare-sensors/(appareil1)/212%7C0/(appareil2)/213%7C0/(appareil3)/615%7C0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Pentax/(brand2)/Pentax/(brand3)/Pentax

      under the dxomark Overview window, there is some knowable (usable) data, like 'Low-Light ISO', 'Dynamic range' (needs to notice a related ISO), Color depth, but their 'Overall Score' lacks the value.

      ---- The DR-ISO
      In the DR, the ISO 200 - 1600, K5 is a little better level than d90, regardless of being a 'Print' or 'Screen'. The K7 is truly the poorest level.

      The dxomark data is also lacking the more content to evaluate the IQ in a camera, like resolution, sharpness (non-sharpening), etc ..., nor provides any the testing data about the operability of camera.

      ---- The lens with camera
      In the test sensor, dxomark did not take a JPEG image and a default setting of camera, that is a convincing way.

      I have noticed the dxomark data in the test lens, let me trying to compare several cameras to be through a certain lens, here might find the dissimilar sharpness between several cameras.

      However, I have to notice that dxomark to the test lens is an imprecise data. Sorry, under the dxomark lens data, I am impossible to compare several cameras.

      Resolution on the Nikkor 50mm f1.8D:
      Nikon D3x 61 lp/mm
      Nikon D3s 52 lp/mm
      Nikon d700 49 lp/mm
      Nikon d300s 45 lp/mm
      Nikon d90 43 lp/mm
      http://dxomark.com/index.php/en/Lens-with-Camera/All-tested-lenses/Nikon/AF-Nikkor-50mm-f-1.8D

      Resolution on the Nikkor 50mm f1.4D
      Nikon D3x 58 lp/mm
      Nikon d3s 49 lp/mm
      Nikon d700 47 lp/mm
      Nikon d300s 48 lp/mm
      Nikon d90 47 lp/mm
      http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Lens-with-Camera/All-tested-lenses/Nikon/AF-Nikkor-50mm-f-1.4D

      Resolution on the Nikkor 50mm f1.4G
      d3x 60 lp/mm
      d3s 51 lp/mm
      d700 48 lp/mm
      d300s 47 lp/mm
      d90 45 lp/mm
      http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Lens-with-Camera/All-tested-lenses/Nikon/AF-S-Nikkor-50mm-f-1.4G

      Resolution on the Nikkor 85mm f1.4D
      d3x 66 lp/mm
      d3s 54 lp/mm
      d700 50 lp/mm
      d300s 52 lp/mm
      d90 50 lp/mm
      http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Lens-with-Camera/All-tested-lenses/Nikon/AF-Nikkor-85mm-f-1.4D

      Maybe you have already seen the question by the above data.
      DxO and dxomark are from France, over there is just the Brandy better.

      In the test lens webpage, their 'Lens Peak Score' is also a droll score, does not have value. a same lens Nikkor 50mm f1.4D, they put out a 'Score' like this:
      d90 -- 'Lens Peak Score 31' @ f/5.6,
      d300s -- 'Lens Peak Score 33' @ f/2.8,
      d5000 -- 'Lens Peak Score 31' @ f/2.8,
      http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Lens-with-Camera/All-tested-lenses/Nikon/AF-Nikkor-50mm-f-1.4D

      * d90 and d5000 lack the AF micro-adjust.
      Lenses and AF-eror
      http://optyczne.pl/66.10-Test_obiektywu-Nikon_Nikkor_AF_50_mm_f_1.8D_Autofokus.html
      http://optyczne.pl/102.10-Test_obiektywu-Nikon_Nikkor_AF_50_mm_f_1.4D_Autofokus.html
      http://optyczne.pl/159.10-Test_obiektywu-Nikon_Nikkor_AF-S_50_mm_f_1.4G_Autofokus.html
      http://lenstip.com/219.10-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_AF_50_mm_f_1.8D_Autofocus.html
      http://lenstip.com/162.10-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_AF-S_50_mm_f_1.4G_Autofocus.html
    • peterzheng_real
      We are usual to need the data like this: ISO 100/SNR ? dB/DR ? EV/Color depth ? bits/Resolution ? lp/Sharpness ? ISO 200/SNR ? dB/DR ? EV/Color depth ?
      Message 2 of 9 , Nov 8, 2010
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        We are usual to need the data like this:

        ISO 100/SNR ? dB/DR ? EV/Color depth ? bits/Resolution ? lp/Sharpness ?
        ISO 200/SNR ? dB/DR ? EV/Color depth ? bits/Resolution ? lp/Sharpness ?
        ......
        ISO 1600/SNR ? dB/DR ? EV/Color depth ? bits/Resolution ?lp/Sharpness ?
        ......

        if need, here adds other items. The above ISO is actual value (measured), but not a nominal value (in manufacturer).

        For the related IQ, I hope also to seen the resolution and sharpness (non-sharpening, non-JPEG image, non a default setting of camera).

        Providing a SNR but the ISO is undefined, to be delusory you. Similarly the DR value you are also to need knowing a related ISO, maybe you want to know under the diverse ISO, how many DR is here?
      • libros@comcast.net
        ... From: peterzheng_real To: ricehigh pentax Sent: Monday, November 8, 2010 5:26:13 AM
        Message 3 of 9 , Nov 8, 2010
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment

          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "peterzheng_real" <ymzheng_qing@...>
          To: "ricehigh pentax" <ricehigh_pentax@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Monday, November 8, 2010 5:26:13 AM
          Subject: [ricehigh_pentax] Which are helpful data from dxomark?

           

          Which are helpful data from dxomark?

          We noticed a droll score between K5 and 645d came from dxomark website, you are unexpectedly seeing both sides have been put a same score "82". This score "82" is lacking values.

          ---- The ISO-SNR
          if you want to know the ISO-SNR performance, then you ought to read its ISO-SNR curve graph, like this:
          http://dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/Compare-sensors/(appareil1)/439%7C0/(appareil2)/676%7C0/(appareil3)/615%7C0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Nikon/(brand2)/Pentax/(brand3)/Pentax

          under the SNR 18% window, you ought to notice over there is 'Print' and 'Screen' as the two curves. Our barycenter ought to pay attention to the ISO 100, ISO 200, like SNR in ISO 100 or 200, and DR in ISO 100 or 200, as well as sharpness (non-sharpening) in ISO 100 or 200, and not a children game -- only noticing the high ISO.

          The ISO-SNR in 'Print' with the range ISO 400 - 1600, the K5 is just slightly better than D90. However, ISO-SNR in 'Screen', the range ISO 200 - 1600, dxomark curve shows the D90 was still a little better -- an old camera.

          The K7 is very poor, or even it was worse than K20d.
          http://dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/Compare-sensors/(appareil1)/212%7C0/(appareil2)/213%7C0/(appareil3)/615%7C0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Pentax/(brand2)/Pentax/(brand3)/Pentax

          under the dxomark Overview window, there is some knowable (usable) data, like 'Low-Light ISO', 'Dynamic range' (needs to notice a related ISO), Color depth, but their 'Overall Score' lacks the value.

          ---- The DR-ISO
          In the DR, the ISO 200 - 1600, K5 is a little better level than d90, regardless of being a 'Print' or 'Screen'. The K7 is truly the poorest level.

          The dxomark data is also lacking the more content to evaluate the IQ in a camera, like resolution, sharpness (non-sharpening), etc ..., nor provides any the testing data about the operability of camera.

          ---- The lens with camera
          In the test sensor, dxomark did not take a JPEG image and a default setting of camera, that is a convincing way.

          I have noticed the dxomark data in the test lens, let me trying to compare several cameras to be through a certain lens, here might find the dissimilar sharpness between several cameras.

          However, I have to notice that dxomark to the test lens is an imprecise data. Sorry, under the dxomark lens data, I am impossible to compare several cameras.

          Resolution on the Nikkor 50mm f1.8D:
          Nikon D3x 61 lp/mm
          Nikon D3s 52 lp/mm
          Nikon d700 49 lp/mm
          Nikon d300s 45 lp/mm
          Nikon d90 43 lp/mm
          http://dxomark.com/index.php/en/Lens-with-Camera/All-tested-lenses/Nikon/AF-Nikkor-50mm-f-1.8D

          Resolution on the Nikkor 50mm f1.4D
          Nikon D3x 58 lp/mm
          Nikon d3s 49 lp/mm
          Nikon d700 47 lp/mm
          Nikon d300s 48 lp/mm
          Nikon d90 47 lp/mm
          http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Lens-with-Camera/All-tested-lenses/Nikon/AF-Nikkor-50mm-f-1.4D

          Resolution on the Nikkor 50mm f1.4G
          d3x 60 lp/mm
          d3s 51 lp/mm
          d700 48 lp/mm
          d300s 47 lp/mm
          d90 45 lp/mm
          http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Lens-with-Camera/All-tested-lenses/Nikon/AF-S-Nikkor-50mm-f-1.4G

          Resolution on the Nikkor 85mm f1.4D
          d3x 66 lp/mm
          d3s 54 lp/mm
          d700 50 lp/mm
          d300s 52 lp/mm
          d90 50 lp/mm
          http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Lens-with-Camera/All-tested-lenses/Nikon/AF-Nikkor-85mm-f-1.4D

          Maybe you have already seen the question by the above data.
          DxO and dxomark are from France, over there is just the Brandy better.

          In the test lens webpage, their 'Lens Peak Score' is also a droll score, does not have value. a same lens Nikkor 50mm f1.4D, they put out a 'Score' like this:
          d90 -- 'Lens Peak Score 31' @ f/5.6,
          d300s -- 'Lens Peak Score 33' @ f/2.8,
          d5000 -- 'Lens Peak Score 31' @ f/2.8,
          http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Lens-with-Camera/All-tested-lenses/Nikon/AF-Nikkor-50mm-f-1.4D

          * d90 and d5000 lack the AF micro-adjust.
          Lenses and AF-eror
          http://optyczne.pl/66.10-Test_obiektywu-Nikon_Nikkor_AF_50_mm_f_1.8D_Autofokus.html
          http://optyczne.pl/102.10-Test_obiektywu-Nikon_Nikkor_AF_50_mm_f_1.4D_Autofokus.html
          http://optyczne.pl/159.10-Test_obiektywu-Nikon_Nikkor_AF-S_50_mm_f_1.4G_Autofokus.html
          http://lenstip.com/219.10-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_AF_50_mm_f_1.8D_Autofocus.html
          http://lenstip.com/162.10-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_AF-S_50_mm_f_1.4G_Autofocus.html

        • libros@comcast.net
          I think something smells at dxo! thanks for your excellent work,as usual you found a rat in the apple barrel I would love to find another source of info,that
          Message 4 of 9 , Nov 8, 2010
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment

            I think something smells at dxo!

            thanks for your excellent work,as usual you found a rat in the apple barrel

            I would love to find another source of info,that is  to say other then dxo!

            I would very interested and appreciative, if you could be so kind to evaluate ad compare the k5 vs the Sony a55

            and Nikon d7ooo, an honest review would be marvelous and very helpful

            Thank you

            PS keep up the great work

             


            ----- Original Message -----
            From: libros@...
            To: "ricehigh pentax" <ricehigh_pentax@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Monday, November 8, 2010 12:41:29 PM
            Subject: Re: [ricehigh_pentax] Which are helpful data from dxomark?

             


            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "peterzheng_real" <ymzheng_qing@...>
            To: "ricehigh pentax" <ricehigh_pentax@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Monday, November 8, 2010 5:26:13 AM
            Subject: [ricehigh_pentax] Which are helpful data from dxomark?

             

            Which are helpful data from dxomark?

            We noticed a droll score between K5 and 645d came from dxomark website, you are unexpectedly seeing both sides have been put a same score "82". This score "82" is lacking values.

            ---- The ISO-SNR
            if you want to know the ISO-SNR performance, then you ought to read its ISO-SNR curve graph, like this:
            http://dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/Compare-sensors/(appareil1)/439%7C0/(appareil2)/676%7C0/(appareil3)/615%7C0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Nikon/(brand2)/Pentax/(brand3)/Pentax

            under the SNR 18% window, you ought to notice over there is 'Print' and 'Screen' as the two curves. Our barycenter ought to pay attention to the ISO 100, ISO 200, like SNR in ISO 100 or 200, and DR in ISO 100 or 200, as well as sharpness (non-sharpening) in ISO 100 or 200, and not a children game -- only noticing the high ISO.

            The ISO-SNR in 'Print' with the range ISO 400 - 1600, the K5 is just slightly better than D90. However, ISO-SNR in 'Screen', the range ISO 200 - 1600, dxomark curve shows the D90 was still a little better -- an old camera.

            The K7 is very poor, or even it was worse than K20d.
            http://dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/Compare-sensors/(appareil1)/212%7C0/(appareil2)/213%7C0/(appareil3)/615%7C0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Pentax/(brand2)/Pentax/(brand3)/Pentax

            under the dxomark Overview window, there is some knowable (usable) data, like 'Low-Light ISO', 'Dynamic range' (needs to notice a related ISO), Color depth, but their 'Overall Score' lacks the value.

            ---- The DR-ISO
            In the DR, the ISO 200 - 1600, K5 is a little better level than d90, regardless of being a 'Print' or 'Screen'. The K7 is truly the poorest level.

            The dxomark data is also lacking the more content to evaluate the IQ in a camera, like resolution, sharpness (non-sharpening), etc ..., nor provides any the testing data about the operability of camera.

            ---- The lens with camera
            In the test sensor, dxomark did not take a JPEG image and a default setting of camera, that is a convincing way.

            I have noticed the dxomark data in the test lens, let me trying to compare several cameras to be through a certain lens, here might find the dissimilar sharpness between several cameras.

            However, I have to notice that dxomark to the test lens is an imprecise data. Sorry, under the dxomark lens data, I am impossible to compare several cameras.

            Resolution on the Nikkor 50mm f1.8D:
            Nikon D3x 61 lp/mm
            Nikon D3s 52 lp/mm
            Nikon d700 49 lp/mm
            Nikon d300s 45 lp/mm
            Nikon d90 43 lp/mm
            http://dxomark.com/index.php/en/Lens-with-Camera/All-tested-lenses/Nikon/AF-Nikkor-50mm-f-1.8D

            Resolution on the Nikkor 50mm f1.4D
            Nikon D3x 58 lp/mm
            Nikon d3s 49 lp/mm
            Nikon d700 47 lp/mm
            Nikon d300s 48 lp/mm
            Nikon d90 47 lp/mm
            http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Lens-with-Camera/All-tested-lenses/Nikon/AF-Nikkor-50mm-f-1.4D

            Resolution on the Nikkor 50mm f1.4G
            d3x 60 lp/mm
            d3s 51 lp/mm
            d700 48 lp/mm
            d300s 47 lp/mm
            d90 45 lp/mm
            http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Lens-with-Camera/All-tested-lenses/Nikon/AF-S-Nikkor-50mm-f-1.4G

            Resolution on the Nikkor 85mm f1.4D
            d3x 66 lp/mm
            d3s 54 lp/mm
            d700 50 lp/mm
            d300s 52 lp/mm
            d90 50 lp/mm
            http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Lens-with-Camera/All-tested-lenses/Nikon/AF-Nikkor-85mm-f-1.4D

            Maybe you have already seen the question by the above data.
            DxO and dxomark are from France, over there is just the Brandy better.

            In the test lens webpage, their 'Lens Peak Score' is also a droll score, does not have value. a same lens Nikkor 50mm f1.4D, they put out a 'Score' like this:
            d90 -- 'Lens Peak Score 31' @ f/5.6,
            d300s -- 'Lens Peak Score 33' @ f/2.8,
            d5000 -- 'Lens Peak Score 31' @ f/2.8,
            http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Lens-with-Camera/All-tested-lenses/Nikon/AF-Nikkor-50mm-f-1.4D

            * d90 and d5000 lack the AF micro-adjust.
            Lenses and AF-eror
            http://optyczne.pl/66.10-Test_obiektywu-Nikon_Nikkor_AF_50_mm_f_1.8D_Autofokus.html
            http://optyczne.pl/102.10-Test_obiektywu-Nikon_Nikkor_AF_50_mm_f_1.4D_Autofokus.html
            http://optyczne.pl/159.10-Test_obiektywu-Nikon_Nikkor_AF-S_50_mm_f_1.4G_Autofokus.html
            http://lenstip.com/219.10-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_AF_50_mm_f_1.8D_Autofocus.html
            http://lenstip.com/162.10-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_AF-S_50_mm_f_1.4G_Autofocus.html

          • peterzheng_real
            ... libros, ... Usually, I shall not select the a55, my reason: 1. a fixed translucence mirror can only play down in the IQ, 2. In a55 (or a33), the
            Message 5 of 9 , Nov 10, 2010
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              libros@... wrote:

              > I would very interested and appreciative, if you could be so kind to evaluate ad compare the k5 vs the Sony a55 and Nikon d7ooo, an honest review would be marvelous and very helpful

              -----------------------------------------------------------------

              libros,

              ---- about the Sony a55
              Usually, I shall not select the a55, my reason:
              1. a fixed translucence mirror can only play down in the IQ,
              2. In a55 (or a33), the translucence mirror to be unallowed with a cleansing, which is the resinous mirror and easy to get scratch.
              3. an OVF is still an instrument needed, about the EVF is another manner would be better, and not an OVF disappeared.

              In the SLR camera, the mirror to be unallowed with a cleansing, (limited to allow with a blowy pump), luckily the mirror is only with the preview function in here, (or adds a manual focus), and not the imaging side. Therefore, the mirror met of a few dust would be hurtless on the imaging.

              However, in a55 or a33, a fixed translucence mirror is in the imaging path, a few dust in the mirror will hurt the imaging. The mirror is inapplicable cleansing, if you did not want to destroy a mirror.

              Also, the mirror is absolutely avoided to kiss of the alcohol solvent, the focusing-screen is also case.

              Q: ミラーの材質はガラスなのですか?
              A (Sony 児玉): ガラスではありませã‚"。特殊光学フィルムですね。
              Q: what material is the semi-transparent mirror?
              A (Sony): the special optical film. it was not glass.
              http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/interview/20101025_398999.html
              http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/img/dcw/docs/398/999/html/09.jpg.html

              And, the a55's mirror is also showing another problem:
              The A55's mirror is locked in the down position when shooting. It is sprung, however so that it can be moved out of the way for sensor cleaning.
              We have found however that after manually unlocking the A55's mirror we can persuade it to sit slightly outside of its clip - i.e. at a slightly less acute angle to the sensor than it should be. This causes severe image ghosting but is otherwise impossible to detect.
              http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonyslta55/page4.asp

              the years ago, the Olympus E-10 and E-20 are using the prism to split the light coming through the lens to provide a TTL view through the eyepiece. A pair of prisms split the image, the lens is synchronously projecting into the OVF and sensor, no mirror flip. This is higher the cost and weight (a pair of orthogonal prisms), but it would not get easily the scratch, which a pair of orthogonal prisms could be the optical-glass. (Historically, Canon had once used the resinous pentaprism, and not a hollow pentamirror.)
              http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/OlympusE20/Images/e20cutthrough.jpg
              http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse10/images/e10cutaway.gif

              if you want to buy a Sony camera, would rather you selected an a580. I am willing to see another successor to replace the a700.

              ---- about the EVF
              I want to see like this, (a HDMI input port is needed):
              http://www.fareastgizmos.com/other_stuff/brother_develops_an_eyeglassshaped_retinal_scanning_display.php

              Redrockmicro has a micro-EVF, but that is bigger and its price is slightly high. Of course, it is for the movie camera industry, which has been welcomed. All the movie equipment are overpriced:
              http://store.redrockmicro.com/EVF

              ---- The d7000 and K5
              I am praising to select the d7000, especially you have not the Pentax lenses.

              1. For the integrated performance, the Pentax k5 is difficult to face a worthy opponent d7000. (the first ought to notice the metering system became the largest difference, the AF system is secondly the difference. And, the spot metering is able to link the AF active point, that is a high-class function in Nikon.)
              2. Pentax equipment are now overpriced came from the Hoya policy.
              3. the Pentax's future is undefined, Hoya has the long-term layout did not include the camera produce, Hoya is always wanted to resell Pentax imaging.

              If the k5 pricing to fall down less than 1000 USD, and you were having the Pentax lenses, then you may consider to buy a k5. The k5 is a lower value than the d7000.
            • libros@comcast.net
              Thank you your a  fine gentleman and your full of knowledge I ve all so found several complaints of the a55  over heating this is terrible news for me a I
              Message 6 of 9 , Nov 11, 2010
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment

                Thank you your a  fine gentleman and your full of knowledge

                I've all so found several complaints of the a55  over heating

                 

                this is terrible news for me a I have a need of a view finder  equipped camera to use for movies  and take excellent stills as well   the LCD is totally use less!!!!! on the ski slops or a outside sporting events

                in the Colorado mountains
                what are your feeling about the Panasonic gh2?  I have never cared for 4/3 cameras----

                but I am willing to check one out  what is your expert opinion

                thanks for you most welcome help

                 

                - Original Message -----
                From: "peterzheng_real" <ymzheng_qing@...>
                To: "ricehigh pentax" <ricehigh_pentax@yahoogroups.com>
                Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 12:50:34 AM
                Subject: [ricehigh_pentax] Re: Which are helpful data from dxomark?

                 

                libros@... wrote:

                > I would very interested and appreciative, if you could be so kind to evaluate ad compare the k5 vs the Sony a55 and Nikon d7ooo, an honest review would be marvelous and very helpful

                ----------------------------------------------------------

                libros,

                ---- about the Sony a55
                Usually, I shall not select the a55, my reason:
                1. a fixed translucence mirror can only play down in the IQ,
                2. In a55 (or a33), the translucence mirror to be unallowed with a cleansing, which is the resinous mirror and easy to get scratch.
                3. an OVF is still an instrument needed, about the EVF is another manner would be better, and not an OVF disappeared.

                In the SLR camera, the mirror to be unallowed with a cleansing, (limited to allow with a blowy pump), luckily the mirror is only with the preview function in here, (or adds a manual focus), and not the imaging side. Therefore, the mirror met of a few dust would be hurtless on the imaging.

                However, in a55 or a33, a fixed translucence mirror is in the imaging path, a few dust in the mirror will hurt the imaging. The mirror is inapplicable cleansing, if you did not want to destroy a mirror.

                Also, the mirror is absolutely avoided to kiss of the alcohol solvent, the focusing-screen is also case.

                Q: ミラー��質�ガラス�����?
                A (Sony å…�玉): ガラスã�§ã�¯ã�‚ã‚Šã�¾ã�›ã‚"。特殊光学フィルムã�§ã�™ã�­ã€‚
                Q: what material is the semi-transparent mirror?
                A (Sony): the special optical film. it was not glass.
                http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/interview/20101025_398999.html
                http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/img/dcw/docs/398/999/html/09.jpg.html

                And, the a55's mirror is also showing another problem:
                The A55's mirror is locked in the down position when shooting. It is sprung, however so that it can be moved out of the way for sensor cleaning.
                We have found however that after manually unlocking the A55's mirror we can persuade it to sit slightly outside of its clip - i.e. at a slightly less acute angle to the sensor than it should be. This causes severe image ghosting but is otherwise impossible to detect.
                http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonyslta55/page4.asp

                the years ago, the Olympus E-10 and E-20 are using the prism to split the light coming through the lens to provide a TTL view through the eyepiece. A pair of prisms split the image, the lens is synchronously projecting into the OVF and sensor, no mirror flip. This is higher the cost and weight (a pair of orthogonal prisms), but it would not get easily the scratch, which a pair of orthogonal prisms could be the optical-glass. (Historically, Canon had once used the resinous pentaprism, and not a hollow pentamirror.)
                http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/OlympusE20/Images/e20cutthrough.jpg
                http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse10/images/e10cutaway.gif

                if you want to buy a Sony camera, would rather you selected an a580. I am willing to see another successor to replace the a700.

                ---- about the EVF
                I want to see like this, (a HDMI input port is needed):
                http://www.fareastgizmos.com/other_stuff/brother_develops_an_eyeglassshaped_retinal_scanning_display.php

                Redrockmicro has a micro-EVF, but that is bigger and its price is slightly high. Of course, it is for the movie camera industry, which has been welcomed. All the movie equipment are overpriced:
                http://store.redrockmicro.com/EVF

                ---- The d7000 and K5
                I am praising to select the d7000, especially you have not the Pentax lenses.

                1. For the integrated performance, the Pentax k5 is difficult to face a worthy opponent d7000. (the first ought to notice the metering system became the largest difference, the AF system is secondly the difference. And, the spot metering is able to link the AF active point, that is a high-class function in Nikon.)
                2. Pentax equipment are now overpriced came from the Hoya policy.
                3. the Pentax's future is undefined, Hoya has the long-term layout did not include the camera produce, Hoya is always wanted to resell Pentax imaging.

                If the k5 pricing to fall down less than 1000 USD, and you were having the Pentax lenses, then you may consider to buy a k5. The k5 is a lower value than the d7000.

              • libros@comcast.net
                One more issue   you analysis is very  correct!  Pentax  is VERY over priced Pentax has a poor resale value in the USA--Its my feeling the  k5 should
                Message 7 of 9 , Nov 11, 2010
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment

                  One more issue   you analysis is very  correct!  Pentax  is VERY over priced

                  Pentax has a poor resale value in the USA--Its my feeling the  k5 should sell at a 8oo dollar price point for the body

                  the Nikon D7000 is a better camera and priced better and  has a very good resale value

                  Pentax repair center is not top end and  Sony gets a bad  repair review by many owners

                  Have you any info on Panasonic repairs centers?

                  I want to make it very clear I love the KX I purchased for my wife,and have a soft spot in my heart for  pentax

                  But I could care less about Hoya

                   

                   

                   

                   

                  ---- Original Message -----
                  From: "peterzheng_real" <ymzheng_qing@...>
                  To: "ricehigh pentax" <ricehigh_pentax@yahoogroups.com>
                  Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 12:50:34 AM
                  Subject: [ricehigh_pentax] Re: Which are helpful data from dxomark?

                   

                  libros@... wrote:

                  > I would very interested and appreciative, if you could be so kind to evaluate ad compare the k5 vs the Sony a55 and Nikon d7ooo, an honest review would be marvelous and very helpful

                  ----------------------------------------------------------

                  libros,

                  ---- about the Sony a55
                  Usually, I shall not select the a55, my reason:
                  1. a fixed translucence mirror can only play down in the IQ,
                  2. In a55 (or a33), the translucence mirror to be unallowed with a cleansing, which is the resinous mirror and easy to get scratch.
                  3. an OVF is still an instrument needed, about the EVF is another manner would be better, and not an OVF disappeared.

                  In the SLR camera, the mirror to be unallowed with a cleansing, (limited to allow with a blowy pump), luckily the mirror is only with the preview function in here, (or adds a manual focus), and not the imaging side. Therefore, the mirror met of a few dust would be hurtless on the imaging.

                  However, in a55 or a33, a fixed translucence mirror is in the imaging path, a few dust in the mirror will hurt the imaging. The mirror is inapplicable cleansing, if you did not want to destroy a mirror.

                  Also, the mirror is absolutely avoided to kiss of the alcohol solvent, the focusing-screen is also case.

                  Q: ミラー��質�ガラス�����?
                  A (Sony å…�玉): ガラスã�§ã�¯ã�‚ã‚Šã�¾ã�›ã‚"。特殊光学フィルムã�§ã�™ã�­ã€‚
                  Q: what material is the semi-transparent mirror?
                  A (Sony): the special optical film. it was not glass.
                  http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/interview/20101025_398999.html
                  http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/img/dcw/docs/398/999/html/09.jpg.html

                  And, the a55's mirror is also showing another problem:
                  The A55's mirror is locked in the down position when shooting. It is sprung, however so that it can be moved out of the way for sensor cleaning.
                  We have found however that after manually unlocking the A55's mirror we can persuade it to sit slightly outside of its clip - i.e. at a slightly less acute angle to the sensor than it should be. This causes severe image ghosting but is otherwise impossible to detect.
                  http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonyslta55/page4.asp

                  the years ago, the Olympus E-10 and E-20 are using the prism to split the light coming through the lens to provide a TTL view through the eyepiece. A pair of prisms split the image, the lens is synchronously projecting into the OVF and sensor, no mirror flip. This is higher the cost and weight (a pair of orthogonal prisms), but it would not get easily the scratch, which a pair of orthogonal prisms could be the optical-glass. (Historically, Canon had once used the resinous pentaprism, and not a hollow pentamirror.)
                  http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/OlympusE20/Images/e20cutthrough.jpg
                  http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse10/images/e10cutaway.gif

                  if you want to buy a Sony camera, would rather you selected an a580. I am willing to see another successor to replace the a700.

                  ---- about the EVF
                  I want to see like this, (a HDMI input port is needed):
                  http://www.fareastgizmos.com/other_stuff/brother_develops_an_eyeglassshaped_retinal_scanning_display.php

                  Redrockmicro has a micro-EVF, but that is bigger and its price is slightly high. Of course, it is for the movie camera industry, which has been welcomed. All the movie equipment are overpriced:
                  http://store.redrockmicro.com/EVF

                  ---- The d7000 and K5
                  I am praising to select the d7000, especially you have not the Pentax lenses.

                  1. For the integrated performance, the Pentax k5 is difficult to face a worthy opponent d7000. (the first ought to notice the metering system became the largest difference, the AF system is secondly the difference. And, the spot metering is able to link the AF active point, that is a high-class function in Nikon.)
                  2. Pentax equipment are now overpriced came from the Hoya policy.
                  3. the Pentax's future is undefined, Hoya has the long-term layout did not include the camera produce, Hoya is always wanted to resell Pentax imaging.

                  If the k5 pricing to fall down less than 1000 USD, and you were having the Pentax lenses, then you may consider to buy a k5. The k5 is a lower value than the d7000.

                • peterzheng_real
                  I am the lacking interest at a 43 system, while its price is close to the APS-c system, which a larger sensor is a better thing. And, in the Nikon system, you
                  Message 8 of 9 , Nov 15, 2010
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I am the lacking interest at a 43 system, while its price is close to the APS-c system, which a larger sensor is a better thing. And, in the Nikon system, you can select the FX lenses although could you be having the APS-c camera, but you can get ready future to use the FX system.

                    of course, you could take a 43 system to be as a secondary equipment.

                    Regards
                  • peterzheng_real
                    about the dxomark test data, I have additional ideas. Rice said: I think a real-world DR test is still required to find out the truth. So, let s wait for
                    Message 9 of 9 , Nov 15, 2010
                    View Source
                    • 0 Attachment
                      about the dxomark test data, I have additional ideas.

                      Rice said:
                      "I think a real-world DR test is still required to find out the truth. So, let's wait for DPR's result, as I believe their DR test is closer to real-life and should be more meaningful".

                      Yes. We have already seen the dxomark test data -- about the DR.
                      However, the dxomark always does not tell us -- how many +EV is in the DR's top! (the highlight range). Therefore, dxomark's DR data is a lame.

                      of course, the DPR data is also having lacuna. For example, RAW-DR is slightly the rough data compared to its JPEG-DR-data. The NR has turned on or turned off? did not directly mark with a ISO value to the DR data, and lacked the ISO-DR data. Moreover, the DPR sometimes cuts their own RAW-DR content, you unable to always find other cameras that RAW-DR is like Nikon D3s to have more been showed. The Nikon D300s RAW-DR was no data from the DPR camera review, looks the test and review like cutting corners.

                      In the RAW-Sensor-DR, if we wanted authentically to know about the RAW-Sensor performance, and not a software's noise reduction performance, providing the uniform datum line to obtain comparable data between cameras, which the NR must turn off, all the sharpening adjustments turn off, (like LightRoom's sharpening adjustments were having several items), as well as other adjustments turn off or 'zero'.

                      After a naked RAW-Sensor-DR data, then the DPR's 'ACR best DR' is another available data.

                      The DR-EV curve graph is absolutely required, it is actually the more value.
                      http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond3s/page20.asp
                      http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond3s/page19.asp

                      In the RAW-Sensor-DR data, a list is also needed, like this (JPEG/ISO Sensitivity and Dynamic Range):
                      http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond3s/page19.asp

                      We have already known that the upper DR is more difficult task than the shadow range. Looks a red flower not dazzling, but is easy to get higher over-exposure -- the upper DR is more limited.

                      In the shadow range, when the NR has turned on or turned off, would obviously change the shadow's DR result.

                      dxomark written:
                      Dynamic range is defined as the ratio between the highest and lowest gray luminance a sensor can capture. However, the lowest gray luminance makes sense only if it is not drowned by noise, thus this lower boundary is defined as the gray luminance for which the SNR is larger than (1). The dynamic range is a ratio of gray luminance; it has no defined unit per se, but it can be expressed in Ev, or f-stops.
                      http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Learn-more/Understanding-DxOMark-Database/Measurements/Noise
                      http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Learn-more/Understanding-DxOMark-Database/DxOMark-testing-protocols/Noise-dynamic-range

                      Sounds like very scientific way. However, dxomark's DR data is unable to make us distinguish the EV value in upper DR or the shadow range. And then, a droll score gets showing over there.

                      (The above posted unfinished, to be continued)
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.