we're supposed to ignore DXOMark, despite the fact they they publish their methodology?
I wouldn't ignore DXOMark one bit. They have a specific methodology that gives you some useful information.
However, their approach also leaves out several critical components of the process a real-world photographer uses in the course of making a real-world image. A great example would be the impact of using raw processing software which was developed in-house by the same company that makes the hardware and firmware and the central goal of which is to squeeze every bit of data out of the raw file and present it in the most photographically pleasing way possible.
The best method continues to be (for those who are both interested and financially able to consider MF) to go shoot pictures
with each system in a variety of situations that you would actually shoot for your work/pleasure and then see what you're able to get out of the files. Learning enough about each system to get the most out each (where to place exposure, what software to convert the files with which settings etc) is a not-small part of this and a dealer can help in this regard.
Here's a hint though: I've never
once heard one of our customers complain the files they got from the digital back were less
pliable/flexible than the files from their dSLR. Never.
[font="Arial"]Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up
RSS Feed: SubscribeBuy Capture One at 10% offPersonal Work