Michael, have I missed your 5D3 review?

[Keith Reeder]

if the task the Canon team had was to compensate for the lower sensor technology they have at the moment, they did a great job.

I don't believe for a second that this is a motivation for Canon.

I suspect that Canon has simply decided (and they'd be right) that for the vast majority of its potential customer base, the 5D Mk III's sensor is absolutely fine (and if, say, you're a low light shooter - better than fine); and that the tiny niche requirement for "amazing" low ISO DR is something that Canon currently has no overt interest in putting effort into catering for, given the probable low return on its investment.

[torger]

In the long run it is a problem for Canon if the talk in the photo community goes like "Nikon has the better sensors, and Canon lags behind". Even if it does not really matter much for the vast majority of users, beginning photographers may chose Nikon as their brand to invest in because of this reason.

I think that selling all you Canon gear and go buy Nikon D800 is not so common scenario, it is probably more common than someone chooses an entry-level Nikon DSLR instead of a Canon because of the general impression that Nikon is the brand with the best image quality. And once you are in a brand it is a high threshold to change.

So yes, I think it indeed can be a good return of investment to get high points at DxOMark, even if it provides little value for practical use.

[Hans Kruse]

Why? Canon users like yourself like the conclusion and will happily proceed buying an excellent camera and never know the D800 would have been even better.

How would people "know"?

You are putting words into my mouth I didn't say I liked the conclusion, but said that the conclusion pretty much agreed with my own assessment so far and I also said that if I reviewed the two cameras side by side for my own photography the conclusion might be different. And for many the D800 may not be better actually the contrary, but for some and especially for those who need the low ISO DR capability of the camera beyond what Canon already provides , the  D800 would be a better camera and given that lenses were not against such a conclusion in the actual case.

On the second question, the answer is simple. If the screwing is serious enough it will get out. There is always somebody who don't like such and will tell it to the outside world one way or the other. But there are many  conspiracy believers and they will always be with us. Some conspiracies are worse than others, but the in this case there really is no reason to believe Amazon would have to do anything. I'm fully confident that the reviews were discussed inside of Dpreview and it was the consensus between the reviewers that made it into the published review. There is no track record as far as I can see to favor one camera or brand over the other although I have seen many posts say so. You don't become the worlds largest review site without a good level of quality and consistency.

[BernardLanguillier]

But there are many  conspiracy believers and they will always be with us. Some conspiracies are worse than others, but the in this case there really is no reason to believe Amazon would have to do anything.

I just gave you a very plausible one. You do agree that they would benefit directly from having more photographers select the 5DIII now instead of waiting month to buy a D800, right? This is an obvious business fact. More money faster.

There are investment avenues that are much more profitable than DPreview as a direct revenue stream, so the only logical conclusion is that Amazon invested in DPreview because they saw some value in indirect revenue streams. This is no conspiracy theory, this is business ABC.

The only thing that is unsure is whether they connected the dots on purpose or not. But the result of their 5DIII mark is clearly going to be more revenue for Amazon.

We know that many physical stores do tend to push to their customers the products maximizing their revenue within certain constraints starting with customer satisfaction (and we know 5DIII users will be satisfied because it is a good camera). I don't see any reason why Amazon would not be seeking to do the same thing.

Cheers,
Bernard

[BJL]

The SLR market has recently been entered by copycat par excellence, Samsung. Who may be quite busy right now, merrily reverse-engineering the D800 sensor. Do they matter? Yes, just ask Sony’s TV division, or Apple.
From what I read on these forums, I understand that Sony’s sensortech differs considerably from Canon’s. They will certainly have protected it with various patents.

The core difference in sensor technology is that the Sony EXMOR CMOS sensors use column-parallel analog to digital conversion. That core strategy is not at all exclusive to Sony and was not invented by Sony: the earliest patents I have seen are from Stanford University and Kodak in the late 1900’s. In particular, Samsung was the first company to commercially deploy column-parallel ADC, in a video camera sensor, and a lot of the recent research papers on that technology have Korean authors, which is a hint! (Most of the rest have Japanese authors.) Panasonic also uses column-parallel ADC in the sensor of the GH2, which it is now offering for sale.
EDIT:
Details on that Panasonic sensor at
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=66881.0
and
http://www.semicon.panasonic.co.jp/en/catalog/cat/pdf/T12013CE.pdf
END EDIT

On the other hand, Sony seems to have the best implemention of the column-parallel ADC idea so far, or at least the Samsung senors in its NX cameras seem behind Sony's in performance and Panasonic uses 12-bit ADC whereas Sony/Nikon sensors now offer 14-bit. So there is probably a lot more to making a "state of the art" sensor than just the basic idea of column-parallel ADC ... But Canon is not even doing that.

[Hans Kruse]

I just gave you a very plausible one. You do agree that they would benefit directly from having more photographers select the 5DIII now instead of waiting month to buy a D800, right? This is an obvious business fact. More money faster.

There are investment avenues that are much more profitable than DPreview as a direct revenue stream, so the only logical conclusion is that Amazon invested in DPreview because they saw some value in indirect revenue streams. This is no conspiracy theory, this is business ABC.

The only thing that is unsure is whether they connected the dots on purpose or not. But the result of their 5DIII mark is clearly going to be more revenue for Amazon.

We know that many physical stores do tend to push to their customers the products maximizing their revenue within certain constraints starting with customer satisfaction (and we know 5DIII users will be satisfied because it is a good camera). I don't see any reason why Amazon would not be seeking to do the same thing.

No you didn't give me a very plausible one. Deliberately scewing reviews is plain silly and makes no business sense. And there is no evidence or even indication they did so in the given review or other reviews on Dpreview. If you think this is not correct find me some examples and why you think the conclusions were not the opinions and results from the reviewers.

This has nothing to do with marketing and pushing the channels for high(er) margin products. Every sales person learns that.

[BernardLanguillier]

No you didn't give me a very plausible one. Deliberately scewing reviews is plain silly and makes no business sense. And there is no evidence or even indication they did so in the given review or other reviews on Dpreview. If you think this is not correct find me some examples and why you think the conclusions were not the opinions and results from the reviewers.

This has nothing to do with marketing and pushing the channels for high(er) margin products. Every sales person learns that.

Now you are putting words in my mouth. Who said "screwing reviews"?

Besides, you are not answering any of the statements made in the quote. This therefore stops to be a conversation.  

My final question will be, does it make sense to rate identically 2 cameras when one is superior in most aspects of image quality (raw, jpg, video at all but super high ISOs) without having any significant drawback besides 2 fps less? The answer should be pretty obvious. Again, no impact for me, just common sense.

Cheers,
Bernard

[BJL]

... if the task the Canon team had was to compensate for the lower sensor technology they have at the moment, they did a great job.

That is about the most balanced assessment I have seen in this bun fight!

I am actually changing my mind, and now think that there would be a place for a new 24MP 36x24mm sensor using the latest refinement of Sony/Nikon technology, if just for the sake of offering higher frame rates while still having as much resolution as most photographers need (even most professional photographers, according to LKaven) and solidly beating all competition in handling scenes of high subject brightness range. (The DPReview reviews do seem to support the claim of greater dynamic range, which interests some of us far more than extreme pixel counts.)

P.S. that 24MP, or 6000x4000 would also be a perfect match for producing 2K video by using pixel addition ( no decimation), basically using one 3x3 block from the sensor to produce each full color video pixel. If aliasing could be adequately controlled.

[Hans Kruse]

Now you are putting words in my mouth. Who said "screwing reviews"?

Besides, you are not answering any of the statements made in the quote. This therefore stops to be a conversation.  

My final question will be, does it make sense to rate identically 2 cameras when one is superior in most aspects of image quality without having any significant drawback besides 2 fps less? The answer should be pretty obvious. Again, no impact for me, just common sense.

I didn't say screwing reviews, I said scewing (maybe the spelling is incorrect). What I intended to say is that I don't see any deliberate bending of facts to support a biased conclusion.

I did answer your questions and if you stop the conversation, fine with me since I find your reasons for a conspiracy rather naive.

Your common sense is not shared by all and not with the reviewers and many others. If you want to continue the conspiracy theory you need more (=real) meat on the bones

[ihv]

As it currently stands, Canon has (in the world of 135):
1. not the highest MP camera
2. not the highest DR camera
3. not the best high ISO camera (for the time being I'd not count on a camera with an unknown release date, there has been no evidence either for speculation, particularily high ISO raw-s)

Canon is supposed to have soon:
1. the fastest performing camera (12fps, AF)
2. the best high ISO camera ?

What seems to be interesting is that the 1Dx is, mostly being a sports camera, also the new 1Ds.
The 5D2 successor, supposedly a good candidate for a high MP camera, was not that either.

Is anyone seriously thinking Canon thinks they need no high MP camera with its IQ characteristics? There is generally no need for such a camera? There is nothing missing in the Canon lineup?

This disparity means for one thing that if Canon had used its current sensor technology in a sensor of about 36MP or more in 35mm format (pixels about 7D sized or a bit bigger), its performace at low to moderate ISO speeds would have shown a distinct disadvantage compared to what Canon could easily predict was coming from Nikon and Sony.

[BernardLanguillier]

I didn't say screwing reviews, I said scewing (maybe the spelling is incorrect). What I intended to say is that I don't see any deliberate bending of facts to support a biased conclusion.

Just to set things straight, I have never written that DPreview had bended the facts, only that their conclusion doesn't seem to be deriving logically from them.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Hans Kruse]

Just to set things straight, I have never written that DPreview had bended the facts, only that their conclusion doesn't seem to be deriving logically from them.

The reference to Amazon owning Dpreview gave a pretty good indication that you felt that Dpreview had made a cooked up conclusion to support the sales on Amazon. You even said it was very plausible that the conclusion on the 5D mkIII review was cooked. What else was that supposed to mean?

Have you read the review? If yes, what is it that doesn't fall logically into the conclusion?

[BernardLanguillier]

The reference to Amazon owning Dpreview gave a pretty good indication that you felt that Dpreview had made a cooked up conclusion to support the sales on Amazon. You even said it was very plausible that the conclusion on the 5D mkIII review was cooked. What else was that supposed to mean?

Have you read the review? If yes, what is it that doesn't fall logically into the conclusion?

What I wrote can be re-read, feel free to over-simplify as much as you like, those are your statements.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Hans Kruse]

What I wrote can be re-read, feel free to over-simplify as much as you like, those are your statements.

I don't think I'm over simplifiying the simple fact that you indicated that the ownership of Dpreview by Amazon made their reviews very likely cooked to meet the sales requirements of Amazon. Isn't that what you basically wrote? If not please tell what you meant to say, as I may have completely misunderstood your point about Amazon.

Euh... let me think of just one obvious business reason...

You have one camera at 3,000 US$ with high demand and zero stock...
You have another camera at 3,500 US$ with lower demand and some stock...

Which camera would you want your customers to buy?  Grin

Besides, you have many other possible reasons, including the desire to remain "credible" for the users of both brands,...

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

I didn't say screwing reviews, I said scewing (maybe the spelling is incorrect)...

Ah, so close (yet so far away ! Just one letter: skewing.

[Hans Kruse]

Ah, so close (yet so far away ! Just one letter: skewing.

Thanks, the slip of a keyboard

[achrisproduction]

Both the E800E and 5D Mark III are out of stock in Hong Kong.

[uaiomex]

And coincidentally the 5D3 matched the same 82 percent rating. How convenient. Sorry, I don't buy it. It even looks childish. If 100% true to the results, well, bad luck for DPR.
Bernard speculations are just that but his original argument makes a lot of sense. I do too think that somehow Amazon had something to do with the result. Maybe this even happened without knowing it. Maybe somebody is just trying to keep a job or trying to please the boss, don't know.
Eduardo

Have you read the review? If yes, what is it that doesn't fall logically into the conclusion?

[Hans Kruse]

And coincidentally the 5D3 matched the same 82 percent rating. How convenient. Sorry, I don't buy it. It even looks childish. If 100% true to the results, well, bad luck for DPR.
Bernard speculations are just that but his original argument makes a lot of sense. I do too think that somehow Amazon had something to do with the result. Maybe this even happened without knowing it. Maybe somebody is just trying to keep a job or trying to please the boss, don't know.

Rather than rant about the overall rating which is a number made up from the individual scores by some formula (like the DxOMARK also is), you should really take a look at the details of the review. It is pretty silly to believe that buyers of cameras in this price range are bought by people who don't even evaluate the details and how many would buy such a camera without a history of cameras before and lens systems? The first time buyers in this class are not that many I think. I believe most of the sales will be from people who already own a Canon camera with lenses that happen to have a Canon lens mount. A (much) smaller amount will come from people switching systems.

If you can buy into the logic above, then do you really think a rating on Dpreview slightly higher or lower (compared to the D800) would make a difference in the sales? The chance that somebody switches system rather than upgrading I would believe is in the 1-5% band and could go both ways. Just from my own connections very few have switched systems over the years as soon as they had bought into a system. I have seen a few switching to Canon from Nikon and back again. I don't remember any who have switched from Canon to Nikon and only one who switched from Canon to Sony. That is out of many hundreds of photographers. I have seen a number of who have switched to either Canon or Nikon from other systems.

If we didn't have the constraints of proprietary lens mounts, I think the situation would be much different. When you buy into a camera system you buy into a photographic ecosystem which makes it much harder to switch. It's of a similar reason why Apple have such strong business about iPhones and iPads. Switching is not that easy.

So even if you and Bernard were right about the reasons for cooking the ratings, it you think about it, it would make very little sense compared to the harm if such methods were leaked to the photographic community. These speculations and rumors are not new (a couple years ago some Canon users felt that Dpreview favored Nikon over Canon), but never has there been any facts to support that.

Again, of you agree that most buyers already are in the Canon system from lower end cameras, then wouldn't it make a lot more sense to look at the ratings of lesser cameras in reviews?

[heinrichvoelkel]

Sorry Hans, I have seen whole press photo agencies switching to Nikon when the original D3 came out. And I'm talking about major European agencies. The provide the photographers with the complete gear and as they cover everything, sports as well, we are talking about getting rid of tons of gear up to 600mm lenses. And buying new stuff.