Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: allegretto on November 22, 2013, 10:49:11 am
-
Is there some bad feelings there? Hard not to notice that DXO avoids Canon Lenses...
-
DXO rates Canon lenses. Maybe they don't rate ALL Canon lenses,fut they recently added the old (1993 design, still in production) 400mm f/5.6 L. The Canon bodies can't keep up with the Nikon D800 and the new Sony FF mirrorless numbers, merely due to markedly different pixel count. Relative ranking of third party lenses is similar between Canon and Nikon mounts. Scoring of lenses is in part a measure of sharpness and contrast, in part a ranking of aperture. It is hard to compare lenses using the score, because the aperture and the test chart data are not separated. Fine if you want to compare 50mm f/1.4 lenses, not so helpful for specialty lenses. My 400mm f/5.6 L "toy lens" is really quite sharp but scores low due to the f/5.6. Well, I am not hand-holding a DXO score to shoot a bird in flight, I am holding a 3# lens. .
-
DxoMark has test results for 2048 lenses/bodies combination in Canon EF mount (among which 1089 are Canon lenses) vs 1691 in F mount (among which 847 are Nikon lenses).
I feel some bad anti Nikon vibes here. ;)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Hi,
I would say stupidity and ignorance, too. Sorry for being harsh, but that is what I see.
DxO mark has tons of data. But some fanboys just look at the ratings and fail to find their favorite lens/camera combo in the top 10.
Best regards
Erik
DxoMark has test results for 2048 lenses/bodies combination in Canon EF mount (among which 1089 are Canon lenses) vs 1691 in F mount (among which 847 are Nikon lenses).
I feel some bad anti Nikon vibes here. ;)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I use the micro nikkor 200 4.0 a lot and like it very much.
When I study the DxO list I see that the 200 2.0 is rated as the best.
I have never tested this lens. Does anyone know how that lens performs
at closer distances like 2-4 meters?
-
Oh gee, no "bad vibes" here. Hell, I don't know enough to really say, I'm trying to learn.
Don't wish to seem a fanboi either Eric. Sorry it appears as such. I was just reading about the Otus and figured I'd get one but could not find it rated. Thus the comments
I'll go back to lurking... it's safer.... ;)
DxoMark has test results for 2048 lenses/bodies combination in Canon EF mount (among which 1089 are Canon lenses) vs 1691 in F mount (among which 847 are Nikon lenses).
I feel some bad anti Nikon vibes here. ;)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Canon lenses don't score highly on the tests because, since they are lens-body combinations, no Canon sensor can match the resolution and low-ISO image quality of Nikon or Sony sensors.
This should change with the A7r - since it is possible to mount Canon, Nikon and other lenses onto the same body, it then becomes possible to compare lenses on a common sensor.
-
Hi,
Sorry for my comment! I would suggest that you ignore the ratings and look at the data.
Ouch! They have not tested the Canon version yet! Wait a couple of days, and try again!
Best regards
Erik
Oh gee, no "bad vibes" here. Hell, I don't know enough to really say, I'm trying to learn.
Don't wish to seem a fanboi either Eric. Sorry it appears as such. I was just reading about the Otus and figured I'd get one but could not find it rated. Thus the comments
I'll go back to lurking... it's safer.... ;)
-
The 200 f/2 is my "Head-shot" lens.
It's really great close in and wide open.
-
DxO Mark has now tested the Canon version of the Otus.
http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Carl-Zeiss-Distagon-T-Otus-1-4-55-ZE-Canon-mount-lens-review-Peerless-Prime
Cheers,
Bernard
-
At the risk of chumming fanboy waters, it's interesting that their test results show it performing better on the 6D than the 5DMkIII.
-
At the risk of chumming fanboy waters, it's interesting that their test results show it performing better on the 6D than the 5DMkIII.
It fact, it doesn't.
This is probably within rounding errors, but the Otus on the 5DIII gets a slightly higher mark than it does on the 6D.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
At the risk of chumming fanboy waters, it's interesting that their test results show it performing better on the 6D than the 5DMkIII.
If anyone is obsessing over that kind of numerical difference of outcome in what must be a small "n" in a protocol then they have deeper issues.
-
Weird. I could have sworn the first time I looked that the DxOMark for the 6D, it was 39. Probably my failing eyes, which means my personal DxOMark must be a 5 or 6 or something